How Organisations LGBT-Supportive Policies Impact Discrimination and Shape LGBT Employees Workplace Experience

How organisations LGBT-supportive policies impact discrimination and shape LGBT employees workplace experience

In the not-so-distant past, discrimination based on sexual orientation was synonymous with professional barring. In the America of the 50’s, LGBT people could not be employed as “a government secretary, a mail carrier, a manager or even an FBI agent” (Galas 1996, as cited in Bauer & Kleiner, 2001, p. 27). In addition, employees could also be fired simply based on being (openly or not) homosexual.

Today’s world is changing. Over the last few decades and after a series of events initiated by the Stonewall riots in 1969, a global cultural shift towards LGBT people occurred. This transformation also affected LGBT people and their work environment. For instance, when people are asked if LGBT people should have the same rights in terms of job opportunities as the non-LGBT, those saying “yes” rose from 56% in 1977 to 93% in 2019 (Gallup, Inc., 2021).

Therefore, from an organisation perspective, the inclusiveness of LGBT workers needed to be addressed. One answer has been the creation and implementation of LGBT-supportive policies in the workplace. In 1999, 52% of Fortune 500 companies had implemented some sort of LGBT policies. This figure jumped to 91% in 2013 (Human Rights Foundations, 2013 as cited in Plater, 2017). These days, many companies over the world have embraced LGBT-supportive policies. Even if some countries and organisations are more advanced than others, it is crucial to point out that this is a global phenomenon.

With the above in mind, the first section of this essay will illustrate that workplace discrimination is still a widespread phenomenon among LGBT workers. Secondly, the impact of organisations’ LGBT-supportive policies will be examined. The essay will be concluded by looking at implementations of LGBT-supportive policies within some organisations.

LGBT Discriminations in Workplace

Although societies and organisations are (more) accepting of homosexuality, LGBT employees remain subject to a higher discrimination rate at work than their heterosexual counterparts. Discrimination against LGBT people can be classified under three types: stereotype, gender discrimination and sexual harassment (Guiffre et al., 2008 as cited in Lloren & Parini, 2017). That being said, discrimination is complex and can take multiple forms. For this essay, only some types of discrimination will be illustrated, but they are certainly not limited to the ones detailed below.

As for stereotype discrimination, Steffens et al. (2019) found for example that gay men were considered less masculine than heterosexual men. Put differently, gay men may be discriminated against and may not be hired because they are not considered masculine enough for the position (in the mining sector etc…). Similar stereotypes discriminate against lesbians and transgender workers.

GLB people experience workplace discrimination leading to "termination, ostracism, diminished mobility, and violence" at work (Buddel, 2011, p. 133)

Research from Beatty and Kirby (2006, as cited in Buddel, 2011) shows that in the United States, between 25% to 66% of GLB people experience workplace discrimination leading to "termination, ostracism, diminished mobility, and violence" at work (Buddel, 2011, p. 133). Furthermore, 44% of gay men and lesbians and 41% of bisexual people have reported being victims of discrimination in the workplace over a period of 5 years when only 14% of heterosexuals did (Buddel, 2011).

In the United States, harassment of LGBT employees is one of the most frequently reported types of discrimination (Sears & Mallory, 2014). They can take multiple forms such as name-calling, jokes, as well as bullying or mistreating LBGT people due to their sexual orientation. According to the Stonewall survey (LGBTQ+ facts and figures, 2021, "At work" section), “18% of LGBT staff have been targeted with negative comments or conduct from colleagues”

To avoid or reduce the impact of these distressing situations, LBGT workers sometimes are “closet” which refers to an “‘individual’s having to make life-shaping decisions to pass’ as heterosexual” (Seidman 2002, as cited in Rumens & Kerfoot, 2009, p. 764). Some employees choose to not disclose their sexual orientation with co-workers (Martinez, 1993) and organisations because they fear retaliation or rejections (Griffith & Hebl, 2002).

Discrimination against LGBT employees has repercussions on their performance as well as the organisation’s. On the one hand, discrimination in the workplace affects LBGT employees’ productivity (Sears & Mallory, 2014). Indeed, Kwon and Hugelshofer (2010, as cited in Plater, 2017) explain that LGBT people are prevented from excelling in their position, because of a discriminative workplace. They are reported to be less satisfied with their job, they are more likely to quit and are more absent from the office (Sears & Mallory, 2014). On the other hand, workplace discrimination affects the overall LGBT workers’ well-being. It translates but is not limited to, frustration, fear, difficulty to concentrate, self-censorship and anxiety (Colgan et al., 2007; Bauer & Kleiner, 2001). ?

LGBT employees still face discrimination in the workplace. This has consequences for LGBT workers as well as for companies. Yet, organisations have opportunities to change this by implementing LGBT-supportive policies.

Impact of LGBT-supportive policies on LBGT employees and organisations

Many organisations already have implemented or have started to implement LGBT-supportive policies. Even though LGBT-supportive policies can take different forms from one organisation to another, they have a similar impact on companies and employees. In fact, Badgett et al. (2013, as cited in Lloren & Parini, 2017, p. 291) demonstrated “a positive relationship between LGBT-supportive policies and individual- and organizational-level business outcomes”.

First, LGBT-supportive policies are a leading part of the effort to combat discrimination against LGBT employees and the acknowledgment of gay people. LGBT-supportive policies have an educational function in the workplace and provide all employees with a better understanding of different sexual orientations. Furthermore, Plater, (2017, p. 36) says that “they teach [employees] proper workplace behaviours with regards to LGBT employees”. In addition, having a formal LGBT document that mentions “sexual orientation” tends to further reduce discrimination at work. Overall, organisations with supportive policies “report less job discrimination, more favourable co-workers’ reactions and fairer treatment from boss or supervisor” as demonstrated by Griffith and Hebl (2002, p. 1196).

The outcomes of LGBT-supportive policies are not only limited to reducing discrimination. They have beneficial effects on LGBT employees, especially their well-being and psychological health. LGBT employees who received support from their organisation are reported to have better job satisfaction and a higher job commitment (Lloren & Parini, 2017). In addition, according to Griffith and Hebl (2002, p1196) employees “feel happier and less stressed in the workplace”. Finally, those policies help LGBT employees to be more “out” at work. This is positively correlated with a “greater organizational commitment, career satisfaction, career encouragement” (Buddel, 2011, p. 138) as well as higher levels of job and affective commitment (McFadden, 2015).?

One of the other advantages of supportive LGBT policies is found in the companies’ attractiveness for hiring new employees. In the Out Now survey (Human Resources, 2008), 62% of respondents said that policies in place were a determining factor in choosing an organisation when deciding where to work. Thus, by implementing LGBT-supportive initiatives, organisations can approach new talents that were inaccessible before (McFadden, 2015). Additionally, Huffman et al. (2008, as cited in McFadden, 2015) found that anti-discrimination policies in organisations improve LGBT job satisfaction and result in less anxiety than employees working for companies with no policies. Research literature has also highlighted that a supportive workplace and LGBT-supportive policies improve employees’ well-being, happiness, and confidence (Rumens & Kerfoot, 2009). Furthermore, LGBT employees are reported to be more engaged and stay longer when their company has implemented diversity policies (Human Resources, 2008). In other words, greater LGBT diversity policies are linked to lower turnover, better human resources management and greater talent acquisition.

While beneficial at all levels for LGBT employees, these supportive policies are also favourable for organisations. They have a business-related impact on the performance of the companies that implement them. LGBT-supportive policies make LGBT employees feel better and valued at work (Plater, 2017). They are more committed so as result there is an increase in productivity (McFadden, 2015) which directly affects profitability for companies. The research conducted by Pichler et al. (2017) confirms the above by providing evidence that LGBT policies increase the productivity and profitability of an organisation that has implemented them.

Examples of organisations LGBT-supportive policies

It is now necessary to explore how companies are showing that culture and acceptance have favourably shaped their workplace towards LGBT employees. To demonstrate an LGBT-supportive workplace, companies need to have formal policies outlining their positions and what is expected. I will provide three examples of companies that I know have LGBT-supportive policies.

First, companies’ policies need to make clear that any form of discrimination would not be accepted. Costco Wholesale (Sample Equal Employment Opportunity Policies, n.d.) has fully embraced this with an “equal opportunity” section in its employee agreement. The document explains that “employees should be able to enjoy a work environment free from all forms of unlawful employment discrimination” (Costco Wholesale Corp., 2013, p. 12). The company also explains that decisions regarding recruitment, training, promotion, etc. will be taken without discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity or expression. Finally, Costco Wholesale will take any appropriate corrective action in case of a policy breach and encourage employees to speak up.

When employees are required to wear uniforms, some companies have voluntarily chosen to revisit their dress code to be as inclusive as possible. For instance, the uniform policy distributed to SIXT Australia employees starts with a note about “diversity”. In this section, the company acknowledges and recognises that not all employees are the same and some may identify themselves as non-binary. As a result, employees are welcome to select which outfit they prefer and to mix them (tops and bottoms) to match their own identity.

The last example is from NRMA Motoring. As part of its diversity and inclusion policies, the company edits and distributes a guide for “LGBT workplace allies”. An ally is a person who does not identify itself as part of the LGBT community but raises awareness, support, and advocates diversity. NRMA explains the importance of having the support of the majority to make a difference. The company also gives information on how an inclusive workplace increases innovation and helps to provide better customer service. Finally, the NRMA guide gives some practical tips to everyone such as using the correct pronouns, speaking up and listening.

Each organisation is implementing LGBT-supportive policies. They can take the form of training, resources, guides, etc… Some companies have formal written policies, this is particularly true for large organisations. For smaller organisations, those LGBT-supportive policies can take a less formal approach.

Conclusion

All around the world attitudes and acceptance towards LGBT people have changed. In the light of this globalisation and cultural change, companies had no choice but to enter a new era by changing the way LGBT employees are regarded in the workplace. Decades ago, LGBT people were not allowed to work in some types of jobs and industries. Now, they are encouraged to come as they are.

Although we can be pleased with global progress, it is still not a perfect world. As mentioned in this essay, discrimination against LGBT people is still a topic of conversation. Too many LGBT employees suffer from discrimination.

On the bright side, organisations have designed and implemented LGBT-supportive policies within their workplace. Many studies have now demonstrated the effectiveness of LGBT-supportive policies. Companies with LGBT-supportive policies reduce discrimination in the workplace and positively shape LGBT work experience.

Diversity is a “complex and multidimensional concept”

Although the situation is heading in the right direction, there are still some differences within the same organisation and/or countries. Indeed, diversity is a “complex and multidimensional concept” (Martín Alcázar et al., 2013, p. 44). As explained by Kaplan (2006, as cited in Buddel, 2011) companies must implement LGBT diversity policies with care. Different groups with other diversities such as traditions, religious beliefs or age must be considered as well. As a result, Hill (2009, as cited in Buddel, 2011) recommends celebrating all sorts of diversity including race, gender, sexual orientation, and gender identity for successful diversity policies more generally.

References

Bauer, M., & Kleiner, B. H. (2001). New developments concerning sexual orientation issues in the workplace. Equal Opportunities International, 20(5), 27-31. https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02610150110786985

Buddel, N. (2011). Queering the Workplace. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 23(1), 131-146. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10538720.2010.530176

Colgan, F., Creegan, C., McKearney, A., & Wright, T. (2007). Equality and diversity policies and practices at work: lesbian, gay and bisexual workers. Equal Opportunities International, 26(6), 590-609. https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02610150710777060

Costco Wholesale Corp. (2013). Employee Agreement https://hrc-prod-requests.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/files/assets/resources/Costco_Wholesale_Corp._2014CEI_EEOPolicy.pdf

Gallup, I. (2019). Gay and Lesbian Rights. [online] Gallup.com. Available at: https://news.gallup.com/poll/1651/gay-lesbian-rights.aspx.

Griffith, K. H., & Hebl, M. R. (2002). The disclosure dilemma for gay men and lesbians: 'coming out' at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(6), 1191-1199. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/disclosure-dilemma-gay-men-lesbians-coming-out-at/docview/57135942/se-2?accountid=10382

HRC Foundation. (n.d.). Sample Equal Employment Opportunity Policies. [online] Available at: https://www.thehrcfoundation.org/professional-resources/sample-equal-employment-opportunity-policies.

LGBTQ+ facts and figures. (2021, October 28). Stonewall. https://www.stonewall.org.uk/cy/node/24594

Lloren, A., & Parini, L. (2017). How LGBT-Supportive Workplace Policies Shape the Experience of Lesbian, Gay Men, and Bisexual Employees. Sexuality Research & Social Policy, 14(3), 289-299. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13178-016-0253-x

Martín Alcázar, F., Miguel Romero Fernández, P., & Sánchez Gardey, G. (2013). Workforce diversity in strategic human resource management models. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 20(1), 39–49. https://doi.org/10.1108/13527601311296247

Martinez, M. N. (1993). Recognizing sexual orientation is fair and not costly. HRMagazine, 38(6), 66. https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/recognizing-sexual-orientation-is-fair-not-costly/docview/205104012/se-2?accountid=10382

McFadden, C. (2015). Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Careers and Human Resource Development: A Systematic Literature Review. Human Resource Development Review, 14(2), 125. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender-careers-human/docview/1683897117/se-2?accountid=10382

Plater, T. J. (2017). Relationship between Employees' Fear of Disclosing Their Sexual Orientation and Employee Job Satisfaction among LGBT Employees (Order No. 10636259). Available from ProQuest One Academic. (1964855113). https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/relationship-between-employees-fear-disclosing/docview/1964855113/se-2?accountid=10382

Pichler, S., Blazovich, J. L., Cook, K. A., Huston, J. M., & Strawser, W. R. (2018). Do LGBT‐supportive corporate policies enhance firm performance? Human Resource Management, 57(1), 263-278. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21831

Rumens, N., & Kerfoot, D. (2009). Gay men at work: (Re)constructing the self as professional. Human Relations, 62(5), 763-786. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018726709103457

Sears, B., & Mallory, C. (2014). Employment Discrimination against LGBT People: Existence and Impact. In Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation Discrimination in the Workplace: A Practical Guide. UCLA: The Williams Institute. Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9qs0n354

Steffens, M. C., Niedlich, C., Beschorner, R., & K?hler, M.,C. (2019). Do positive and negative stereotypes of gay and heterosexual men affect job-related impressions? Sex Roles, 80(9-10), 548-564. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-018-0963-z

Why it pays to have gay-friendly policies. (2008). Human Resources, 7. https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/why-pays-have-gay-friendly-policies/docview/228192400/se-2?accountid=10382

?