8.8 Gender and Sexual Orientation

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

Sexual orientation diversity is increasing in the workforce. In June, 2020, the US Supreme Court ruled that the Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity to help ensure individuals cannot be discriminated against for employment or fired for their sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression (Ragins et al., 2003),  however lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender, queer/questioning and other (LGBTQ+) employees, still face other types of discrimination inside and outside of the workplace. In Canada, there is an anti-discrimination measure in the Human Rights’ Act that also prohibits discrimination based on gender and sexual orientation, including wage discrepancies. Section 11 of the Canadian Human Rights’ Act states that, “It is discriminatory practice for an employer to establish or maintain differences in wages between male and female employees employed in the same establishment who are performing work of equal value”(Openstax, 2019). In the modern landscape, people identify as many different genders. Although not explicitly stated, gender protection falls under the general purpose of the act.

How do do leaders manage all of this? It is important for them to really know their organizational members, and be reasonable with requests. If someone would like to be called a different name, or alternate name, in substitution of her or his given name, that is reasonable. Choosing to use a variety of pronouns is becoming more and more common. There are many goals within an organization that need to be achieved by all members, and it is best to resolve any conflicts based on sex and gender efficiently and effectively for all parties to return to a cohesive unit.

More than half of the Fortune 500 companies have corporate policies that protect sexual minorities from discrimination at work and offer domestic-partner benefits (Human Rights Campaign Foundation, 2017). Many employers are beginning to understand that being perceived as inclusive will make them more attractive to a larger pool of job applicants (Button, 2001). Furthermore, many organizations have come to recognize that gender and sexual orientation equity aligns to their mission and ethics.

Compared to heterosexuals, sexual minorities have higher education levels (Black et al., 2000) but still face hiring and treatment discrimination frequently (Ragins et al., 2011). LGBTQ+ employees are often faced with the decision of whether or not to be truthful about their sexual orientation at work for fear of being stigmatized and treated unfairly. To be clear, any stigmatization is the fault of the people who mistreat others, and sometimes even the organization itself. But as a result, LGTBQ+ individuals may choose to engage in what is sometimes called passing, or the decision not to disclose something about oneself. Passing often involves a great risk of emotional strain that can affect performance and wellbeing (Clair et al., 2005). Individuals who pass may distance themselves from coworkers or clients to avoid disclosure about their personal life. This behavior can also result in decreased networking and mentoring opportunities, which over time can limit advancement opportunities. The decision to be transparent about sexual orientation is sometimes called revealing (Ibid). Just like passing, revealing has its own set of risks including being ostracized, stigmatized, and subjected to other forms of discrimination at work. However, compared to passing, the benefits of building relationships at work and using their identity as a catalyst for tolerance and progressive organizational change may outweigh the risks when LGBTQ+ employees decide to reveal. The decision to “come out” should be made exclusively by the individual; “outing” someone else as any sexual orientation or gender identity is considered highly inappropriate and hurtful, and may have employment-related consequences.

Research shows that when laws are passed to prevent sexual orientation discrimination, incidents of workplace discrimination decrease (Barron et al., 2013). This same effect occurs when firms adopt policies that protect the rights of sexual minority employees (Button, 2001). By creating a safe and inclusive work environment for LGBTQ+ employees, companies can create a culture of tolerance and trust for all employees regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

LEADING CHANGE: Removing Bias In Recruiting

An increasing number of companies are using innovative new methods of recruiting. In many cases, firms remove any identifying information about applicants during the recruitment process. An example of this may include anonymous applications that omit fields requesting information such as an applicant’s name. Using computer application technology, some companies like Google administer surveys to their anonymous applicants that measure the abilities required for the job before they are considered in the next step of the recruitment process. Alternatively, companies may request that applicants remove identifying information such as names and address from their resumes before applying for positions. As resumes are received, hiring managers can assign a temporary identification number. A recruitment process like this can help organizations attract more candidates, hire the best talent, increase their workplace diversity, and avoid discrimination liability.

In other efforts, organizations work to alter their job descriptions to remove terms that result in gender or other biases. By involving diversity and equity experts, and sometimes using artificial intelligence-based language analysis, recruiters can eliminate unintended barriers and improve their hiring processes.