Subscribe by RSS
Subscribe by EmailTransgender Issues in the Workplace: Tip of the Iceberg?
pic by greggoconnell
Just when you think you know everything there is to know about HR, here comes an interesting question from Hrhero.com.
It reflects an issue that is sure to garner more attention in the future: transgender issues in the workplace. First, what does “transgender” even mean? According to one definition, transgender:
Transgender is generally used as a catch-all umbrella term for a variety of individuals, behaviors, and groups centered around the full or partial reversal of gender roles
Here is one example of an issue that might arise; notice, however, it is not clear whether transgender-ism is what is going on here or not:
Some of our employees have told me they believe that one of our employees who presents herself as a female may possibly be a man. She (he?) uses the ladies’ restroom. What type of questions can we ask within our company’s legal rights?
Before you read the answer, however, what would you do? Then, go on to the answer that follows……….
First, the attorney questions why the issue is being raised and says if there is a problem the person is creating, then it is best to address it, regardless of whether the person is a man or woman. I would guess that employees are just gossiping, which raises more issues than it answers.
The attorney proceeds by indicating that the state where the question comes from does not protect transgendered employees. (According to this website, six states, ten counties, and sixty-one cities, have some type of law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression.)
However, the attorney notes that the employee could potentially bring a suit, if she/he felt you were discriminating against him/her on the basis of a disability or even sex discrimination.
Interesting, huh? Your comments would be appreciated! Read more about the question and the attorney’s answer on transgender discrimination here.
Sphere: Related Content
Related Posts
If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing.
Comments
There’s no reason except “social conditioning” for a woman in the restroom to care whether the “woman” using the stall next to her has male genitalia, or for a man to care whether the (biological) man using the urinal next to him is dressed and looks 100% like a women (though the latter is probably less likely to be the choice of the male “trans” person).
As Judge Kozinski noted, there’s also no reason except social conditioning to expect women to wear bathing suits that cover the breasts. (Indeed, some places they don’t.)
How the law deals with all this will continue to be very interesting for many years, though I think the genie cannot be put back in the bottle, so the long term legal trend will be towards increased GLBT rights.
Michael, nice post.
I think this ties directly into the Harrah’s case.
Gender roles are _by definition_ stereotypes. They may be useful, they may be normative, or they may just be discriminatory and wrong. “All woman are weaker.” “All men have facial hair.” “All women should wear makeup or they are being unprofessional.”
The trans movement (to the extent there is one) is not just transitioning, it is also transcending, transgressing, and “translating” what gender identity even means. They argue that, unlike the middle-of-the-road gay or lesbian argument, neither orientation nor even gender identity are necessarily rigid, being instead social constructs. Which they are, really.
They’re fairly firm constructs; babies start differentiating between male and female voices quite early on, and behavioral mimicry and conditioning, mediated by social approval and disapproval is fairly complete by the time most folks start kindergarten.
But they’re illusory, none the less. In biology, and in fact, there’s no such thing as “two genders” with no crossover. It’s much more complicated (and interesting) than that.