>The law forbids discrimination when it comes to any aspect of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, layoff, training, fringe benefits, and any other term or condition of employment.
IANAL, but I don't think this changes the legality of the discrimination against male independent contractors, because the riders are employing them.
My understanding is that women-only gyms typically operate as 501(c)7 nonprofit private clubs, which are allowed to discriminate. It would be effectively impossible to rework that structure into a ride-sharing app.
>, but I don't think this changes the legality of the discrimination against male independent contractors, because the riders are employing them.
Riders don't create a official "W-2 employee" relationship with a Uber driver as defined by the Internal Revenue Service. So the discrimination laws you're thinking of don't apply to riders.
It's the same legal status for Uber to offer a gender option just like the existing childcare platforms to find babysitters or medical provider directories to find doctors. Both the babysitter and doctor platforms are legally allowed to let customers filter on gender. Parents want to specify female-only for babysitters because they're afraid that males are more likely to be pedophiles.
>Reading up on "bona fide occupational qualification" and thought this might be helpful, as there is a Wikipedia page on it:
Yes, and notice that the page you cited refers back to the actual text of the Federal laws:
>In employment discrimination law in the United States, both Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act contain a BFOQ defense.
>The law forbids discrimination when it comes to any aspect of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, layoff, training, fringe benefits, and any other term or condition of employment.
https://www.eeoc.gov/sex-based-discrimination