Introduction
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. All rights and freedoms are universal, interdependent, indivisible and interrelated. Sexual orientation and gender identity are inherent in the dignity and identity of each person and must not be a ground for discrimination or violation. Despite the fact that most states of the world and humanity as a whole are actively fighting to protect the rights of the LGBT community, discrimination is still relevant. One of the main oppressive areas is labor and business, which prevent members of the LGBT community from earning money and living like other people. It is necessary to understand and analyze what steps have already been taken to influence society, as well as what problems are still unresolved.
Supreme Court Combating with Discrimination
By a margin of six to three, the Supreme Court of the United States made a landmark decision for members of sexual minorities, and perhaps for the country as a whole. According to the Supreme Court’s ruling, it is illegal to fire an employee because of their gender identity or sexual orientation. The case was prompted by three precedents involving the firing of two gay men and a transgender man that went all the way to the Supreme Court (Colella & King, 2018). All three lost their jobs after their employers found out about their private lives. The fired men tried to appeal, citing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, specifically Chapter VII of that act, which states that employers have no right to discriminate against their employees on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin or religious beliefs (Colella & King, 2018). The Supreme Court agreed with the plaintiffs that discriminatory treatment of members of the gay and transgender community is essentially based on their gender, and is therefore illegal (Colella & King, 2018). An employer who fires a person for being gay or transgender is firing him for traits and actions that would not be in question if they were of the other sex. Gender plays a necessary role in this decision that cannot be concealed, and that is what Chapter VII prohibits.
The fact that the relevant mechanisms will operate at the federal level has had a positive effect on the attitude of LGBT activists toward the judicial system. The Supreme Court’s clarification of the illegality of firing people because they are LGBT is the result of a decades-long struggle by activists for the rights of disadvantaged groups (Çoban, et al., 2020). The Court’s decision offers hope that humanity can come together for the common good and continue to push for recognition of gay rights. Gay and transgender rights organizations found the Supreme Court case to be extremely significant and even more important than the fight for same-sex marriage rights, since almost every adult LGBT person is either working or looking for work.
In any case, the SC decision was a real historic victory for American liberals. In fact, part of one of America’s key slogans – justice for all – is embodied. This basic human right should have been expanded decades ago, but the long delay should not detract from the fact that it happened recently. It is a victory for LGBT people and all Americans who care about fairness and open-mindedness. These principles, against the backdrop of race riots in the U.S. with clear social undertones, sound the highest priority for the country.
Nevertheless, the incompatibility between conservative affiliation and liberal views on LGBT-related topics, which seemed obvious just a few years ago, is now beginning to look artificial. According to a CBS News poll taken even before the Supreme Court decision, a total of 82 percent of Americans were in favor of protecting gay rights in the workplace; three-quarters of respondents admitted that there is still discrimination against gays, lesbians and bisexuals in society (Çoban, et al., 2020, p.34). The Supreme Court decision was the most powerful indication to date of how radically, rapidly, and somewhat unpredictably Americans’ attitudes toward gays and transgender people have changed across the ideological spectrum in less than 20 years (Grusky & Hill, 2018). However, the struggle of the gay community for their rights in the United States is far from over – in many states, for example, people of non-traditional orientation can be legally denied services, housing or even medical care.
The Relevance of Discrimination and Difficulties at Work
First of all, it is necessary to legalize the main problems of the LGBT community. The main problems include psychological violence, illegal use of personal data, and discrimination in the place of work or study. 0.31% have experienced dismissal, another 0.85% have been forced to quit their jobs, 1% have been denied employment and 10.5% have had to provide incomplete information about themselves when applying for a job (Izharuddin, et al., 2019, p.68). Homosexuals were the most likely to experience layoffs and other types of discrimination. In the survey, 51 percent of businesses said they would be willing to hire LGBT people, 8 percent said it depended on the position, and 4 percent found it difficult to comment (Izharuddin, et al., 2019, p.68). Based on the fact that 57% of surveyed businessmen stated that there are no LGBT representatives in their company, which means that people do not risk disclosing such information (Izharuddin, et al., 2019, p.68). For many, closetedness is still a safety issue. Nevertheless, accepting collectives and supportive colleagues do exist, and it is necessary to make sure that more and more of them do.
It is also important to emphasize that discrimination at work is often not direct, but indirect. It should be noted that there have been cases of people not being hired because of their sexual orientation in recent years, but not many are known, because most people do not want to talk about it. This is a situation in which it is easier for LGBT representatives to forget about it and find another job (Brewster & Farndale & Mayrhofer, 2018). This approach is not only unproblematic, but also inhumane in its structure, because it completely ignores human needs and negatively affects the socialization of the individual.
Informal Rejections
Recruitment services have pointed out that formally such a reason as sexual orientation cannot be a reason for refusal of employment. In job advertisements it is legally forbidden to prescribe discriminatory conditions, direct or indirect limitation of rights or granting advantages depending on any qualities not related to the employee’s business characteristics. An employee’s private life should not be the object of the employer’s attention if it does not interfere with the performance of his/her official duties (Badgett, 2020). In addition, any form of discrimination, including questions about sexual orientation, is prohibited by law. Nevertheless, in some companies, a discrepancy between family status and the employer’s expectations can be a reason for refusing to hire, promote, or transfer an employee to another position. Practice shows that when choosing a place of work, in addition to wages, it is worth paying attention to the corporate culture (Badgett, 2020). If it does not coincide with the views of the employee, it is likely that the potential employee will not stay there long or will not be completely satisfied with the work.
Conclusion
Today’s world tends to view the LGBT community as a second norm. The movement in support of people with homosexual orientation and gender identity disorder is growing everywhere; liberal countries are legalizing a new type of unions – same-sex marriage; and legislation is being amended to prohibit discrimination on the basis of orientation and gender identity. Many large international companies in Russia also have an internal code of tolerance; however, despite bans, discrimination against LGBT people in the workplace persists. It can be expressed both in a formal form (reduction of wages, denial of insurance or benefits) and in interpersonal communications (derogatory jokes and comments, insults). The aim of this paper is to analyze how otherness is constructed in the workplace, what are the views regarding stigmatization and subsequent discrimination of LGBT people by homosexual and heterosexual people, and what types of motivations exist for members of the LGBT community to commit a fireplace outing in the workplace. In order to solve the research tasks, empirical data – in-depth interviews – were collected and analyzed. The sample is represented by two categories: employed LGBT representatives on the one hand and their heterosexual colleagues on the other hand. This allowed us to compare responses and find similarities and differences in the perception of the problem of discrimination against homosexual and transgender people by the homo- and heterosexual worlds, as well as to identify new patterns of LGBT employment discrimination.
References
Badgett, M. V. L. (2020). The economic case for LGBT equality. Why fair and equal treatment benefits us all. Beacon Press.
Brewster, C., Farndale, E., and Mayrhofer, W. (Ed.). (2018). Handbook of research on comparative human resource management. Edward Elgar Publishing, Incorporated.
Colella, A., and King, E. B. (Ed.). (2018). The Oxford handbook of workplace discrimination. Oxford University Press.
Çoban, B., Ataman, B., Appiah-Adeji, G., and Jamil, S. (Ed.). (2020). Handbook of research on discrimination, gender disparity, and safety risks in journalism. IGI Global.
Grusky, D., and Hill, J. (Ed.). (2018). Inequality in the 21st century. A reader. Taylor & Francis.
Izharuddin, A., Malihah, E., Yulindrasari, H., Aryanti, T., and Adriany, V. (Ed.). (2019). Research for social justice. CRC Press.