Womenstake, NWLC's Blog

Millions of parents and children will have a cheerful change from their usual routines today, on Take Our Daughters and Sons to Work Day. It’s a day when children bring a bit more energy to offices around the country with their laughter and little voices. And it’s a day when children get a glimpse of their possible futures. The day is designed to encourage children to think about what work they might like to do when they grow up and about how to get there, and show them that, if they try hard in school, they can become what they want to be.

Take Our Sons and Daughters to Work Day is a special day each year when parents can help their children take one step further on a path to success in school, work, and life. But children’s progress on that path also depends on their experiences all the other days of the year, starting from their earliest years. Children’s futures depend on their daily experiences, which include their experiences in early care and education—experiences that influence children’s growth and learning and readiness for school.

When applying to college several years ago, I was privileged to be able to consider women’s colleges without being concerned that my gender identity would present any problem in the application process. This is because I am cisgender – a term used for people who have a gender identity that “matches” the sex they were assigned at birth. For transgender applicants like Calliope Wong, things were more complicated.

Calliope, who identifies as a transgender woman, applied with high hopes to Smith College, a women’s college in Massachusetts. Her application was returned to her, unreviewed, with a letter from the admissions office that because her federal financial aid paperwork indicated her sex as male, they could not accept her application.

When I think about Calliope, I also think about how much we need the Student Non-Discrimination Act (SNDA), a bill that was reintroduced today in the House of Representatives.

On Tuesday, in Genesis Healthcare Corp v. Symczyk, the Supreme Court struck a blow to collective actions under the Fair Labors Standards Act (“FLSA”). In a 5-4 decision, the Court held that courts lack jurisdiction to hear collective action cases if the named plaintiff’s (or plaintiffs’) own claims are “moot.” Under the FLSA, collective actions are similar to class actions in that they allow plaintiffs to sue on behalf other unnamed, but similarly situated, individuals, but collective actions do not require many of the stringent limitations imposed on class actions (such as numerosity or typicality of claims). The Supreme Court’s decision means that if the named plaintiff no longer has a “personal stake” in the case and no other individuals have yet joined the case, no relief is available to the group and the case must end, even though the named plaintiff’s complaint sought damages for a group and not solely for herself.