HR's harassment row

Protection for LGBT employees

A new court case in Pennsylvania has called into question the responsibility that HR departments have to protect their employees from sexual discrimination harassment.

The news that a Pennsylvanian employee, who admitted to having "effeminate mannerisms," had been severely harassed by his co-workers broke yesterday. What makes this case stand out is that when the man threatened to sue he was promptly terminated by his firm "for a lack of work." In court, he subsequently charged sex discrimination based on gender stereotyping, religious discrimination and retaliation.

According to reports on the case, the victim had worked at the firm for several years before he was "outed" when a co-worker left a "man seeking man" personal ad and a note on his machine. From then, between 1997 and 2004, the man's co-workers increased their harassment of him dramatically.

The victim claims that co-workers subjected him to notes from purported Christians telling him that he would go to hell because of his sexual orientation, nasty comments about "faggots," graffiti on the men's room walls, a pink tiara on his machine, and name-calling such as "Rosebud" and "Princess."

Despite complaining to managements, all that happened was a paint job to the men's room. Management claimed to not know who was harassing the victim, and were therefore unable to intervene.

Protection

Immediately, the story stinks. Regardless of whether the company in question is a tiny firm on the outskirts of Pennsylvania or a global conglomerate, management has to admit they have a bigger responsibility to protect their employees than just getting the painters and decorators in to do a once over on the men's washroom.

For the victim, by 2004, he'd had enough and was considering suing. He asked four co-workers to testify for him. Instead, they reported him to management. The victim then complained about what he saw as an ever-increasing workload, coupled with lower pay than what comparable workers earned.

After a meeting to air his concerns, the victim was fired. Now the charges that have now been brought against the firm related to sexual discrimination are to be played out in court.

Fortunately, the case in Pennsylvania isn't indicative of the state of workplaces across the US. According to Fortune's list of the 100 Best Companies to Work For 2009, 77 companies out the 100 featured on the list cover both gay-friendly policies and offer gay-friendly benefits, such as offering healthcare coverage to employees' same-sex partners.

But while the Fortune findings suggest good news for company awareness of employee protection, the case in Pennsylvania shows a darker side to business's understanding of their responsibilities to employees.

The fight is far from over, but as gay activists continue to lobby Corporate America for increased regulation to protect LGBT employees, the interim advice for HR managers at SMEs is to take Corporate America's lead and adopt codes of conduct that require employees to treat one another with respect, regardless of what is either legal or otherwise.

Related Articles

The Power of Equality | Don't Just Do It

Like this article? Get the RSS feed: