MGMT 302
Prof. Jordi Comas
Bucknell University
18 Dec. 2014
Supporting LGBT Employees
The Importance of LGBT Supportive Policies in the Workplace
White Paper by Carolina Elizalde
Elizalde 2
Executive Summary
An Open Letter to Employers:
Dear Employer,
I strongly urge you implement LGBT supportive policies beyond what is required by law in your
workplace. LGBT supportive policies not only support LGBT workers but also support more
productive business as LGBT supportive policies in the workplace have been shown to improve
turnover rates, productivity, and profits, among many other things. A workplace with a lack of
LGBT supportive policies risks silence not only can instill fear in LGBT employees to be open in
the workplace, but can also prevent employers from understanding the problems that LGBT
employees face in the workplace.
Better emotional support for LGBT employees is important to you, the employer, because
positive business outcomes can stem from LGBT supportive policies; these supportive policies
lead LGBT employees to greater job commitment and job satisfaction, improved relationships
within the workplace, and better health overall. LGBT employees that work for companies that
have LGBT supportive policies are less likely to face discrimination, and are more likely to be
comfortable with being open. Openness decreases stress of LGBT employees, and reduced stress
facilitates employees to live up to their potentials. Additionally, a lack of LGBT supportive
policies can deter talent and put your company at risk to competition, as LGBT applicants with
high skill sets will likely favor a work environment that is supportive.
The importance of LGBT supportive policies might not be clear to employers, as the LGBT
community is generally considered to be a visible minority—that is, employers often do not
know who their LGBT employees are because a lack of LGBT supportive policies keeps LGBT
employees silent, thus perpetuating a cycle in which employers are unaware of the needs of their
employees. LGBT employees can feel silenced by heterosexist environments and this silence
prevents LGBT employees to speak up about changes that they would like to see in the
workplace. Supportive policies would help LGBT employees to feel more supported, thus feeling
more comfortable in voicing their concerns about being an LGBT employee; these voiced
concerns will help to create a more comfortable work environment for LGBT employees.
As it is estimated that about 9 million Americans identify as LGBT, I strongly urge you to
implement LGBT policies before an issue arises, as it is very likely that you have several LGBT
employees who would benefit from your support. In turn, LGBT employees that are supported
will have greater job satisfaction, ultimately benefitting your business, company, or organization.
Sincerely,
Carolina Elizalde
Elizalde 3
Table of Contents
Overview....................................................................................................................................................... 4
The LGBT Employee’s Dilemma ................................................................................................................... 5
The Invisible Minority ............................................................................................................................... 6
The Detriment of Silence .......................................................................................................................... 6
LGBT Protection ............................................................................................................................................ 7
Current Protection Laws ........................................................................................................................... 7
Employment Non-Discrimination Act ....................................................................................................... 9
Solutions ..................................................................................................................................................... 10
Beyond ENDA .......................................................................................................................................... 10
Starbucks as an Example—Addressing the Shareholder ........................................................................ 11
Proposed Policy Components ................................................................................................................. 12
Benefits of Supportive Policies .................................................................................................................. 13
Benefits to Business ................................................................................................................................ 13
Benefits to Society .................................................................................................................................. 14
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................. 14
Works Cited ................................................................................................................................................ 15
Elizalde 4
Overview
Every day, millions of Americans go to work fearing that they could lose their jobs
because of their gender identity or sexual orientation. In this paper, I will discuss the importance
of LGBT rights and protection in the workplace.
There is a need for LGBT-supportive policies in the workplace as there are multiple
important benefits. These policies would provide basic protections against workplace
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity—currently, only twenty-one
states and the District of Columbia have passed laws prohibiting employment discrimination
based on sexual orientation, and 18 states and D.C. also prohibit discrimination based on gender
identity. Nationwide implementation of LGBT supportive policies in the workplace would be
beneficial to businesses because it improves turnover rate and productivity. Basic employment
protection for all LGBT Americans would help to end the culture of silence that effectively
prevents organizations where this culture is found from achieving their goals of being fully
inclusive workplaces.
This issue is not new to our time—and solutions should not be put off any longer.
Although the likely future passing of the Employment Non-Discrimination act would provide
basic workplace protection rights to LGBT employees, the time to act is now, as LGBT
employees have gone far too long without basic protection simply because of who they love or
who they are. Additionally, implementation of LGBT supportive policies before ENDA is passed
or policies that surpass the minimum protection factors that ENDA would require would likely
lead to increased sentiments of support among LGBT employees, who would feel that they are
truly accepted. The United States needs the economy to be as strong as it can possibly be, so why
risk wasting that potential by denying 9 million Americans basic protection and consequently
hindering the potential of these workers via a lack of support?
Elizalde 5
The LGBT Employee’s Dilemma
LGBT employees are often overlooked, as their minority statuses are not usually evident
until said employees are open about identifying in the LGBT spectrum. With a lack of supportive
policies, LGBT employees have no solid grounds to feel secure in their jobs and thus tend to be
silent. Though a lack of official policies does not necessarily indicate that a business, company,
or organization would not be supportive to LGBT employees, it certainly does not indicate that
said entity is supportive. A large part of co-worker relationships stems from co-workers sharing
details about their lives outside of the workplace. Fear that sharing this information could
jeopardize their jobs, LGBT employees may avoid conversations with co-workers about their
personal lives, minimizing the basis for co-worker relationships to form. When LGBT employees
feel secure in their jobs, they may be more open to their co-workers, thus forming closer
relationships in the workplace; though the workplace should primarily be a place for business,
we as humans are generally more productive when our needs are met, and self-esteem and a
sense of belonging are widely recognized human psychological needs.
Figure 1: Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (Source: 21st Century Tech)
Elizalde 6
The Invisible Minority
As LGBT employees’ identities are not known until the LGBT employee openly
identifies as such, the LGBT community is often considered to be an invisible minority.
However, invisibility is not an excuse to be denied rights; LGBT employees still exist.
“Discrimination based on sexual orientation has been referred to as the last acceptable prejudice
and creates tremendous problems for individuals and the organizations in which they work.
Being forced to remain closeted, living with the fear of being terminated, and lack of partner
benefits are just a few of the concerns unique to GLBT employees. Supportive human resource
management practices that encourage openness and reject discriminatory practices, however, can
make a difference. For example, researchers have found that GLBT employees who were “out”
(had publicly disclosed their sexual orientation) at work had higher affective commitment and
job satisfaction and viewed top management as being more supportive” (Bell, Özbilgin,
Beauregard, Sürgevil).
The Detriment of Silence
Silence among the LGBT community in the workplace is detrimental not only because an
employee’s happiness in the workplace and thus productivity levels are lower than the potential,
but also because the concerns of LGBT employees are not voiced, thus preventing further
understanding of the support that the LGBT employee needs. “In some national contexts the
absence of legal protection and the relative lack of organizational equality policies (particularly
in small organizations) and trade union support exacerbate the climate of silence” (Priola, Lasio,
De Simone, Serri). Work culture that pressures LGBT employees to be silent—whether this
pressure is intentional or not—pressures LGBT employees to keep their identities a secret.
Secrets hinder communication and assert controls—many LGBT employees go to the workplace
Elizalde 7
every day with a fear that not staying closeted may result in termination; thus, many employees
remain silent.
LGBT Protection
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act stems from the Equality Act of 1974, which
was to ban “discrimination against gay and lesbian individuals, unmarried persons, and women
in employment, housing, and public accommodations such as restaurants, hotels, museums,
libraries, and retail stores”, but did not include transgender people (Hunt). The Equality Act of
1974 never garnered enough support to make it to the house. In 1994, the Employment NonDiscrimination Act was introduced, which “would have made it illegal to discriminate against
employees in all aspects of employment based on a person’s actual or perceived sexual
orientation”, and gender identity was added to the act in 2007 (Hunt). Both the house and the
senate have had hearings on ENDA, but it has not been prioritized in Congress, especially given
the current conservative makeup.
Current Protection Laws
ENDA was approved by the Senate on November 7, 2013, by a bipartisan vote of 64-32
(Human Rights Campaign). In order for ENDA to become a law, it needs to be approved by the
House. What does this mean for LGBT employees? Currently, LGBT employees are at risk for
job discrimination based on sexual orientation in 29 states and based on gender identity in 34
states.
Elizalde 8
Figure 2: Statewide Employment Laws and Policies (Source: Human Rights Campaign)
Elizalde 9
Though looking at the map above and seeing how many states lack LGBT supportive
protection laws is discouraging, the map does not necessarily need to reflect what employers are
implementing in their companies. I urge you, the employer, to consider implementing LGBT
supportive policies as soon as possible as opposed to waiting for laws to require you to do so. If
we accept the current LGBT employment laws as the only way to protect LGBT employees, we
may be denying LGBT employees protection for a long time. I predict that ENDA will pass with
due time, however, implementing LGBT supportive policies before it is required by law not only
demonstrates a genuine commitment to protecting all employees, but also reduces the risk of
LGBT employees not meeting their full potential because of work dissatisfaction—when a
business, company, or organization fosters an environment that psychologically prevents some
employees from reaching their full potential, as previously mentioned, reduces the overall
potential of the business, company, or organization.
Employment Non-Discrimination Act
As mentioned, I believe that ENDA will eventually become a law. Therefore, let us
explore ENDA in further detail. The Human Rights Campaign does an excellent job of
explaining ENDA section by section entitled “Section by Section Employment NonDiscrimination Act”, which I highly recommend should be read in its original form. Some of the
most important sections include definitions of key terms, what discrimination is prohibited under
the act, a prohibition of retaliation, broad exemption for religious organizations, exemptions to
the Armed Forces, and enforcement. “The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (“ENDA”)
would prohibit employers of fifteen (15) or more persons, including government employers,
employment agencies and labor organizations, from discriminating in employment or
employment opportunities on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender
Elizalde 10
identity. Employment opportunities include hiring, firing, compensation and other terms,
conditions, or privileges of employment or union membership” (Human Rights Campaign).
Solutions
Obviously, the passing of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act would be a useful
contribution to the implementation of LGBT supportive policies in the workplace. However,
LGBT employees simply cannot and should not have to wait any longer for the House to make a
vote on this law. To begin to support LGBT employees, I suggest that employers look to the
aforementioned “Section by Section Employment Non-Discrimination Act” explanation released
by the Human Rights Campaign for a start. Additionally, ENDA does not explicitly outlaw
harassment toward LGBT co-workers among employees, which would certainly contribute to the
silence and perpetuated fear and thus low job satisfaction among LGBT employees. Policies that
are truly LGBT supportive should include all company practices.
Beyond ENDA
In 2012, Chick-Fil-A CEO and President Dan Cathy released a statement that he believed
in the biblical definition of a family. “Chick-fil-A, in the meantime, issued a statement stressing
that “its employees abide by a service tradition to ‘treat every person with honor, dignity and
respect—regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender.’” Some
commentators also noted that “the company [was] not facing allegations that it discriminates
against gay customers or employees.” Critics, however, pointed to company support through its
philanthropic arm of organizations that lobby against gay marriage” (Selznick 580). This is an
example of how a policy that is truly LGBT supportive should include all company practices—
ENDA would provide basic protection to LGBT employees, but it would not prevent companies
Elizalde 11
like Chick-Fil-A from giving financial support to organizations that in fact ultimately work to
counter these protections and basic human rights.
So, while a company might have a policy that claims to treat everybody with respect
regardless of diversity status, a company that additionally donates money to organizations that
counter LGBT protection is not truly supportive. For a business, company, or organization to
have true LGBT supportive policies, it is imperative that said entity embraces LGBT support to
the core, and beyond the minimum requirement.
Starbucks as an Example—Addressing the Shareholder
Some businesses, companies, or organizations may want to implement LGBT supportive
policies, but this process may be stunted if there is a fear that shareholders may not be on board.
Starbucks provides a good example for why employers should consider moving past that fear.
“In 2012, a number of well-known companies and their CEOs publicly expressed views about
same-sex marriage. In January, Starbucks announced that same-sex marriage “is core to who we
are and what we value as a company.” With this statement, management put the company on the
firing line as its position was unpopular in many parts of the country where it did business…[the
CEO] urged the dissenters to recognize that shareholder value had increased since the decision”
(Selznick 576, 578). So, while the fear that some shareholders might dissent is legitimate,
employers should move past this as this change in policy may actually attract a larger
shareholder audience than before. Employers who wish to have true LGBT supportive policies
should take note of Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz’s commitment. To dissenting shareholders,
he says, “If you feel, respectfully, that you can get a higher return than the 38% you got last year,
it’s a free country. You can sell your shares in Starbucks and buy shares in another company.
Thank you very much” (Allen).
Elizalde 12
Proposed Policy Components
In addition to what ENDA provides, I suggest that employers consider implementing the
following in the workplace to support LGBT employees:

Develop basic protective workplace policy

Facilitate the creation of an LGBT group within the workplace

Having a presence of a visible LGBT staff member in a senior position

Actively challenging homophobia in the workplace
 Implementation of a medium for a voice mechanism that gives LGBT employees a way
to express individual satisfaction without the fear of termination.
The following table displays suggestions for lifting the silence that many LGBT employees
experience in the workplace:
Figure 3: Implementing Voice Mechanisms (Source: Bell, Özbilgin, Beauregard, Sürgevil).
Elizalde 13
Benefits of Supportive Policies
Besides the benefits that LGBT supportive policies would provide to LGBT employees,
LGBT supportive policies can benefit business overall as well as help to lift the silence among
LGBT employees, thus facilitating further future research and benefitting societal progress.
Benefits to Business
Dissenting shareholders may argue that LGBT supportive policies may jeopardize
shareholder value. However, it should be noted that dissent toward LGBT supportive policies
tend to die down rather quickly—thus demonstrating a that the benefit to LGBT employees is
more significant than the potential of brief dissent. “While the initial outcry of company critics in
these cases seems to be intense and potentially damaging, most protests and negative perceptions
seem to fade quickly in the minds of most consumers and have minimal impact on businesses
bottom lines and share prices”(Boyter 14).
The corporate bottom line can benefit from LGBT policies in the following ways:
Improved recruitment and retention of talented employees
New ideas and innovations generated by drawing on a workforce with a wide range of
characteristics and experiences
Attracting and better serving a diverse customer base
Increasing employee productivity
Securing business with public sector clients that require employment nondiscrimination
or domestic partner benefits policies
Boosting morale and employee relations by responding favorably to requests from
employees or unions
(Mallory, Durso, Badgett, Kastanis).
Elizalde 14
Benefits to Society
As previously mentioned, LGBT employees are often a silent community. LGBT
supportive policies may help to give voice to this silence, which would not only be beneficial to
the LGBT employees who have felt suffocated by secrecy, but also beneficial to society as a
whole in terms of understanding LGBT employees in the workplace.
“Most studies on diversity and discrimination in the workplace have focused on ‘visible’
minorities such as gender or race, often neglecting the experiences of invisible minorities such as
lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) workers” (Priola, Lasio, De Simone, Serri).
Conclusion
In conclusion, it is strongly suggested that employers implement LGBT supportive
policies beyond what is required by law in the workplace. As explained in this paper, LGBT
supportive policies improve overall job satisfaction and thus productivity. It is suggested that
employers who may believe that these subjects do not apply to their workplaces consider that the
LGBT community is often invisible and silent. It is likely that most workplaces have LGBT
employees who would benefit from a more concrete support policy—in turn, these LGBT
employees that are supported will consequently have greater job satisfaction, ultimately
benefitting a business, company, or organization.
Elizalde 15
Works Cited
Allen, Frederick E. "Howard Schultz to Anti-Gay-Marriage Starbucks Shareholder: 'You Can Sell
Your Shares'" Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 22 Mar. 2013.
Bell, Myrtle P., Mustafa F. Özbilgin, T. Alexandra Beauregard, and Olca Sürgevil. "Voice, Silence,
and Diversity in 21st Century Organizations: Strategies for Inclusion of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual,
and Transgender Employees." Human Resource Management 50.1 (2011): 131-46.
Boyter, Justin. "An Analysis of Consumer Response to Businesses’ Expression of Beliefs." University
of Tennessee Honors Thesis Projects (2012): 1-34.
Human Rights Campaign. "Employment Non-Discrimination Act." Human Rights Campaign. N.p., 18
Dec. 2014.
Hunt, Jerome. "It's Time to Pass This Law." A History of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
Center for American Progress, 19 July 2011.
Mallory, Christy, Laura E. Durso, Angeliki Kastanis, and M.V. Lee Badgett. "The Business Impact of
LGBT-Supportive Workplace Policies." The Williams Instititue (2013): 1-38.
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. N.d. 21st Century Tech. By Len Rosen.
Priola, Vincenza, Diego Lasio, Silvia De Simone, and Francesco Serri. "The Sound of Silence.
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Discrimination in ‘Inclusive Organizations’." British
Journal of Management (2014): 488-502.
Selznick, Loren F. "WALKING THE EXECUTIVE SPEECH TIGHTROPE: FROM STARBUCKS
TO CHICK-FIL-A." Oklahoma Law Review 65.4 (2013): 1-32.