Subscribe (Free) to
Daily or Weekly Newsletters
Post a Job

Featured Jobs

Relationship Manager for Defined Benefit/Cash Balance Plans MM

Daybright Financial
(Remote)

Daybright Financial logo

Combo Retirement Plan Administrator

Strongpoint Partners
(Remote)

Strongpoint Partners logo

Retirement Plan Onboarding Specialist

Compass
(Remote / Stratham NH / Hybrid)

Compass logo

Senior Client Service Specialist

EPIC RPS
(Remote / Norwich NY)

EPIC RPS logo

Relationship Manager for Defined Contributions KP

Daybright Financial
(Remote)

Daybright Financial logo

Plan Manager

Automotive Industries Trust Funds
(Dublin CA / Hybrid)

Automotive Industries Trust Funds logo

Internal Sales Consultant

Pentegra
(Remote / Putnam Valley NY)

Pentegra logo

Distribution Reviewer

Nova 401(k) Associates
(Remote)

Nova 401(k) Associates logo

Actuary

The Pension Source
(Remote / Stuart FL / Abilene TX / Nashville TN)

The Pension Source logo

Consulting Actuary

Strongpoint Partners
(Remote)

Strongpoint Partners logo

Retirement Plan Processor

BPAS
(Utica NY)

BPAS logo

Mergers & Acquisition Specialist

Compass
(Remote / Stratham NH / Hybrid)

Compass logo

Attorney - ERISA, Benefits, & PRT

Securian Financial Group
(Remote / Saint Paul MN / Hybrid)

Securian Financial Group logo

Census Coordinator

BPAS
(Utica NY)

BPAS logo

Regional Sales Director

Independent Retirement
(Remote)

Independent Retirement logo

Relationship Manager

Compass
(Remote / Stratham NH / Hybrid)

Compass logo

View More Employee Benefits Jobs

Free Newsletters

“BenefitsLink continues to be the most valuable resource we have at the firm.”

-- An attorney subscriber

Mobile app icon
LinkedIn icon     Twitter icon     Facebook icon

Eleventh Circuit: Plan's Gender-Affirming Surgery Exclusion Does Not Violate Title VII (PDF)
Thomson Reuters / EBIA Link to more items from this source
Sept. 22, 2025

"Relying on the Supreme Court's Skrmetti decision, the court reasoned that the exclusion did not violate Title VII because the plan denied coverage of a 'sex change operation' for anyone, regardless of biological sex. Further, the court held that the exclusion did not discriminate on the basis of transgender status because, like the state law challenged in Skrmetti, it was a 'classification based on medical use.' " [Lange v. Houston County, Georgia, No. 22-13626 (11th Cir. Sep. 9, 2025)]  MORE >>

Please click here to report this link if it is broken (for example, if you see a "404 File Not Found" error message after you click on the linked news item's title).
An important word about authorship: BenefitsLink® created this link to the news item, but we are not the news item's author (unless expressly shown above).