rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA (Ron Rizzo) (02/01/85)
Here is the complete text of the National Gay Task Force's Report of
its Corporate Survey of personnel practices regarding sexual orienta-
tion.
How much of the non- or anti-discrimination policy is real is for the
reader to judge. The Adolph Coors Co. (beer) is listed as a category
1 company, i.e., one which "stated explicitly they do not discriminate
on the basis of sexual orientation". When the survey was done (1975-
1981) the national boycott against Coors was still in effect. Recently
a member of the Coors family asserted American blacks should thank whites
for historical enslavement because it brought them from nasty Africa to
the wonderful USA. So talk can be cheap. However, for many companies
corporate statements opposing discrimination undoubtedly mean what they
say.
If anyone knows of more recent surveys or information, please let us
know!
The following is printed without permission (shame on me!).
=========================
THE NGTF CORPORATE SURVEY
=========================
INTRODUCTION
The 1970s witnessed a dramatic increase in public awareness about issues
that affect gay people. Due in large part to the success of public edu-
cation programs initiated by gay and lesbian groups like the National Gay
Task Force, society's attitudes have begun to change, as have the conditions
under which gay people live and work. The result is that it is now easier
for gay people to lead more full and rewarding lives and to pursue their
personal goals without many of the stifling limitations that once existed.
Still, many forms of discrimination persist. The most widespread and
damaging is discrimination in the area of employment. Studies show that
there are gay people working at every possible level in every imaginable
field of employment. Yet, despite their numbers (Kinsey and others have
found that 10% of the American population is primarily homosexual), gay
people face a variety of problems on the job. Their chief concern is that
they may be harassed or ridiculed by supervisors and co-workers, perhaps
be passed over for promotion, fired, or even barred from their profession
if sexual orientation is permitted to be an issue in personnel actions or
professional licensing decisions.
Not only does job discrimination run counter to the ideals of a democratic,
pluralistic society, it is also bad for business. Anti-gay discrimination
penalizes the employer by depriving the company of qualified workers and by
impairing the productivity of gay employees already on the job; creative
energies are diverted from concerns of the business to concern about job
security. Bringing an end to such discrimination simply removes unnecessary
obstacles and allows every person to get on with the job in the best possible
environment. Thus, it is in the employer's own interest to assure all
employees that it is the policy of the company not to discriminate on
the basis of sexual orientation.
THE NGTF CORPORATE SURVEY
Recognizing the importance of these employment concerns among gay people,
NGTF undertook its corporate survey project in 1976 with the aim of encou-
raging major American corporations to adopt non-discrimination policies
based on sexual orientation. Between 1976 and 1981 NGTF surveyed over 850
firms: the "Fortune 500" (the top 500 American industrial corporations)
as well as over 300 leading non-industrial firms (involved in areas such
as finance, insurance, retail sales, etc.)
Considering the fledgling nature of the gay rights movement and the myths
and stereotypes that still surround homosexuality, the response to the
survey has been encouraging. In replying to the survey, many corporations
furnished copies of their existing policy statements. Others took our
inquiries as an opportunity to formulate a policy for the first time. The
survey represents an initial step in the process of determining employer
attitudes toward gay employees, educating the non-gay business world about
homosexuality and securing full civil rights for all gay people.
The survey was not intended to engender guarantees of job security for gay
people or to force employers to develop legal guidelines on the subject.
For many employers this was the first time they were confronted directly
with this sensitive issue. We expect the continuing efforts of NGTF, local
organizations and individual gay and lesbian employees will encourage cor-
porate employers to strengthen and disseminate more broadly their existing
policies. And we hope that these efforts will also motivate other firms
to issue non-discrimination statements for the first time.
WHO RESPONDED?
To date, 238 companies have responded to the corporate survey---most of
them answering statements that indicated an awareness that sexual orien-
tation is a private issue unrelated to an employee's ability to perform
a job. No firms stated that they DO discriminate on the basis of sexual
orientation and very few sent non-commital statements or statements that
did not address the inquiry directly.
The sizes of the responding corporations varied as widely as did the nature
of their responses. While certain industries appeared less willing than
others to adopt positive statements, virtually every sector of the economy
was represented among the respondents (see the list of corporations below).
What is msot evident is that the largest firms are taking the lead in this
area. For example, all of the top ten corporations in the "Fortune 500"
responded positively; further, 51% of the top 100 furnished positive policy
statements in contrast to 30% for all "Fortune 500" firms. Thus nearly six
miliion of the nine million employees of "Fortune 500" corporations are
currently covered by sexual orientation non-discrimination statements.
Over the six-year period of the NGTF survey, we have continued to corres-
pond with the responding firms, encouraging them to issue more specific
statements of their policies. Several firms have seen the need for this
and have amended their initial statements. For example, the Jos. Schlitz
Brewing Co. responded in 1979 that its policy considered that "an indivi-
dual's private life-style is a personal matter so long as there is no
negative impact on the performance of the work." While this statement
was certainly not a negative response, NGTF encouraged Schlitz to make
its policy more precise in regard to gay employees. As a result, Schlitz
responded with a far more explicit statement. It included a copy of its
newly-formulated policy on equal employment opportunity which added sexual
orientation to the enumerated categories protected by corporate policy
(see sample responses section). NGTF applauds such cooperation and
responsiveness and is encouraged by the fact that NONE of the responding
corporations have subsequently issued a retraction or weakening of their
original statements.
Since many of these policies were formulated as a direct result of the
NGTF survey, it is hoped that further projects such as this will yield
additional responses. As the business community becomes more aware that
the leading firms have adopted specific policies on this issue, smaller
firms may be expected to follow suit.
THE STATEMENTS FROM CORPORATIONS
Statements furnished by the 238 responding firms varied in their content
as well as in the way in which they were incorporated as company policy.
Some firms responded with strong and specific statements; others tried to
interpret existing statements prohibiting discrimination in general to
include sexual orientation without mentioning it explicitly. Some firms
had incorporated their statements in formal, published policies; others
expressed their policy only in their communication to NGTF.
In an attempt to convey the general results of the survey, we have grouped
the responses into six basic categories. While some responses do not fit
exactly in any one category, most fall into one of the six groups.
For those unfamiliar with the language of personnel management, it is im-
portant to note that certain phrases, while not mentioning it specifically,
are generally interpreted in the field to include sexual orientation. For
example, if a firm states that it does not discriminate on the basis of
non-job-related criteria, it can be considered to have submitted a basic-
ally "positive" response that would be recognized as fairly strong by
people working in personnel management. Nevertheless, part of our con-
tinuing effort is to encourage firms to make their statements as specific
as possible so that there can be no doubt in ANYONE'S mind as to the exact
policy of the firm on this issue.
CATEGORIES OF RESPONSE
1 Companies in this category have stated specifically that they do not
discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. In some cases it is
clear that firms have disseminatd their policies in company publications
such as personnel manuals, company newsletters, etc.
2 These companies have stated that they do not discriminate on the basis
of sexual orientation unless it interferes with job performance, disrupts
other employees, or adversely affects the company.
3 These companies have stated that they hire and promote employees solely
on the basis of their ability to do the job; they do not make specific
mention of sexual orientation.
4 These companies have stated that they are not aware of (or do not
inquire about) their employees' sexual orientation. They do not speci-
fically discuss what their response would be if an employee's sexual
orientation should come to their attention.
5 These companies have stated that they obey all laws that apply in
employment and personnel matters. However, they do not express a
willingness to establish a policy against discrimination in those
localities where there is no such legal protection for gay employees.
6 These companies either did not address the issue directly or did not
provide enough information for categorization.
FIRMS RESPONDING TO THE NGTF SURVEY
The numbers following each entry refer to the category of response listed
in the previous section.
ACF Industries, Inc. 1
Addressograph-Multigraph Corp. 1
Allegheny Power System 5
Allied Chemical 2
American Airlines 5
American Brands, Inc. 1
American Broadcasting Companies 1
American Can Co. 2
American Cyanamid Co. 2
American Express Co. 1
American Motors Corp. 1
American Telephone & Telegraph Co. 1
AMF, Inc. 1
AMP, Inc. 2
Anheuser_Busch Companies, Inc. 1
ARA Services, Inc. 1
Avon Products, Inc. 1
Bank of America 1
Becton Dickerson & Co. 5
Bell & Howell 1
Bemis Co., Inc. 1
Bendix Corp. 1
Bethlehem Steel Corp. 1
Boeing Co. 4
Boise Cascade Corp. 1
Borg-Warner Corp. 3
Bristol-Myers Co. 1
Brockway Glass Co., Inc. 1
CBS, Inc. 1
Cabot Corp. 3
Carnation Co. 1
Carrier Corp. 2
Central Broadcasting Service 1
Celanese Corp. 1
Central Soya 5
Chase Manhattan Bank 1
Chesebrough-Pond's Inc. 2
Chemical Bank 1
Chubb & Son, Inc. 1
Cincinnati Milacron, Inc. 3
Citicorp 1
Cleveland Illuminating Co. 5
Colgate-Palmolive Co. 1
Collins & Aikman Corp. 3
Commonwealth Life Insurance Co. 4
ConAgra 2
Congoleum Corp. 2
Connecticut General Life Insurance Co. 5
Continental Airlines 1
Continental Group, Inc. 5
Continental Telephone Service Corp. 5
Control Data Corp. 1
Adolph Coors Co. 1
Corning Glass Works 3
CPC International, Inc. 1
Crown Zellerbach 1
Cyclops Corp. 1
Dana Corp. 3
Dart Industries, Inc. 2
Deere & Co. 5
Dow Chemical Co. 2
Dow Corning Corp. 5
Dow Jones & Co., Inc. 3
E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc. 3
Duquesne Light Co. 6
Eastern Air Lines, Inc. 4
Eastman Kodak Co. 2
Eaton Corp. 3
Ebasco Services, Inc. 5
Emhart Corp. 3
Engelhard Minerals and Chemicals Corp. 6
Equitable Life Insurance Society of the United States 1
Exxon Corp. 3
Fairchild Camera & Instrument Corp. 1
Federal-Mogul Corp. 2
Ferro Corp. 2
Fieldcrest Mills, Inc. 2
Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. 1
First Charter Financial Corp. 1
First National Bank of Chicago 3
Fleetwood Enterprises, Inc. 3
Florida Power and Light Co. 5
Ford Motor Co. 3
General Cinema Corp. 1
General Electric Co. 1
General Foods Corp. 2
General Mills, Inc. 2
General Motors Corp. 2
General Signal Corp. 2
Genesco, Inc. 4
Georgia-Pacific Corp. 4
Gibraltar Savings & Loan Association 1
Gillette Co. 6
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. 3
GPU Service Corp. 3
Great Western Savings & Loan Assoc. 3
GTE Service Corp. 3
Green Giant Co. 2
Greyhound Corp. 2
Gulf Oil Corp. 3
Gulf & Western Industries, Inc. 2
Hanna Mining Co. 1
Harsco Corp. 5
Honeywell, Inc. 1
Hoover Co. 1
Hoover Universal, Inc. 2
INA Corp. 1
Inland Steel Co. 1
International Business Machines Corp. 2
International Multifoods 2
Internorth 6
Irving Trust Co. 1
John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Co. 3
Johns-Manville Corp. 3
Johnson & Johnson 1
Joy Manufacturing Co. 1
Kellogg Co. 2
Kennecott Copper Corp. 4
Kimberly-Clark Corp. 2
Knight-Ridder Newspapers, Inc. 1
Koppers Co., Inc. 2
Levi Strauss & Co. 5 [This is really disgraceful!]
Eli Lilly & Co. 1
Lockheed Corp. 5
Long Island Lightning Co. 1
Lousiana-Pacific Corp. 5
M. Lowenstein & Sons, Inc. 2
Macmillan, Inc. 1
R.H. Macy & Co., Inc. 1
MCA, Inc. 6
McDonald's Corp. 3
McDonnell Douglas Corp. 2
McGraw-Hill, Inc. 1
Mead 5
Mercantile Bank 5
Merck & Co., Inc. 1
Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. 1
Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. 1
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co. 3
Mobil Oil Corp. 3
Monsanto Co. 4
Morton-Norwich Products, Inc. 5
Motorola, Inc. 5
Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Co. 1
Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New York 1
National Broadcasting Co., Inc. 1
National Can Corp. 3
National Life Co. 1
Natomas Co. 1
New York Life Insurance Co. 3
New York Times Co. 3
Norris Industries 4
Northern States Power Co. 3
Northrop Corp. 5
Northwest Bancorporation 1
Norton Co. 2
Norton Simon Inc. 1
Ogden Corp. 1
Olinkraft, Inc. 2
Oscar Mayer & Co. 1
Pacific Gas & Electric Co. 1
Pan American World Airways 3
Paine Webber Jackson & Curtis, Inc. 3
Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co. 3
Penn Mutual Life Insurance Co. 1
J.C. Penney Co, Inc. 1
Pennsylvania Power & Light Co. 3
Peoples Energy Corp. 1
Perkin-Elmer Corp. 6
Pfizer, Inc. 1
Philip Morris, Inc. 2
Phoenix Mutual Life Insurance Co. 3
Pillsbury Co. 2
Pitney Bowes 1
Pittsburgh National Bank 1
Polaroid Corp. 3
Potlatch Corp. 2
PPG Industries, Inc. 2
Prestolite Co. 2
Procter & Gamble Co. 3
Quaker Oats Co. 5
Quaker State Oil Refining Corp. 1
Rainer National Bank 6
Republic Steel Corp. 3
Revlon 1
R.J. Reynolds Industries, Inc. 1
Richardson-Merrell, Inc. 1
Rockwell International 1
Rohm & Haas Co. 2
St. Joe Minerals Corp. 1
Schering-Plough Corp. 1
Jos. Schlitz Brewing Co. 1
SCM Corp. 1
Scott Paper Co. 1
Scovill 2
Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc. 2
Sears, Roebuck & Co. 1
Seattle-First National Bank 1
Southeast Banking Corp. 6
Sperry Rand Corp. 5
Squibb Corp. 6
A.E. Staley Manufacturing Co. 2
Standard Brands, Inc. 1
Standard Oil Co. of California 1
Standard Oil Co. (Indiana) 3
Stauffer Chemical Co. 3
Sterling Drug, Inc. 6
Stop & Shop Companies, Inc. 1
Sun Co. 2
Supermarkets General Corp. 6
Tesoro Petroleum Corp. 5
Texaco, Inc. 2
Texas Utilities Co. 3
Time, Inc. 2
Transamerica Corp. 5
Trans World Airlines 3
Transohio Savings 5
TRW, Inc. 1
Unigard Insurance Group 5
Union Carbide Corp. 1
Union Oil Co. of California 1
Union Pacific Corp. 5
United Airlines 1
United Merchants & Manufacturers, Inc. 2
U.S. Bancorp 4
Warner Communications, Inc. 1
Washington Post Co. 3
Wells Fargo Bank 1
Western Electric 1
Western Savings 1
Weyerhaeuser Co. 1
Whirlpool Corp. 5
Williams Companies 2
Witco Chemical Corp. 2
F.W. Woolworth Co. 5
World Airways, Inc. 1
Wm. Wrigley, Jr., Co. 3
Xerox Corp. 3
Zayre Corp. 5
SAMPLE STATEMENTS OF NON-DISCRIMINATION BASED ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION
Statement from AT&T Chairman John DeButts, March 4, 1975:
"An individual's sexual preferences are not criteria either for becoming
an employee or remaining an employee of the Bell System. Job retention
and promotability are based on demonstrable job performance and behavior.
An individual's sexual tendencies or preferences are strictly personal
and information about these matters should not be sought out by company
personnel.
Our policy position indicates both our ongoing effort to end discrimina-
tion in employment of all types and society's new attitude towards its
members. I believe it is straightforward and indicates our effort to
respect the human rights of our employees or prospective employees."
Statement for Jos. Schlitz Brewing Co. Management Policy #9, July 14,
1980:
"It is the policy of the Company and the responsibility of its manage-
ment to promote equal employment opportunity without regard to race,
color, religion, age, sex, national origin or sexual orientation. This
policy applies to all phases of personnel activity including hiring,
training, assignment, promotion and compensation."
Statement from Citicorp Senior Vice President Lawrence M. Small, March 11,
1975:
"Citicorp has long believed that employment decisions should be made on
the basis of qualification and suitability to perform the particular job
and not on the basis of non-job related characteristics such as race, sex,
religion, national origin or age. We view sexual orientation as a non-
job related characteristic and thus do not make employment decisions
based on this attribute."
Statements from EQUALITY, publication of Penn Mutual Life Insurance
Company, September, 1978:
"It is Penn Mutual's policy to provide equal employment and advancement
opportunity for all employees, regardless of their race, color, religion,
sex, national origin, age or sexual preference. Equality of opportunity
is a sound business objective that, by allowing us to make effective use
of our human resources, helps us secure profitable growth."
A NOTE TO THE EMPLOYER...
NGTF has been working in this area for some years and is eager to be of
assistance. We can help in formulating a policy or suggest effective
ways to disseminate the policy through your firm. Please contact us.
In addition, NGTF has recently prepared a booklet for corporate manage-
ment entitled, "Are There Gay People In My Business? Answers To Employers'
Questions." This booklet discusses the need for non-discrimination state-
ments and also addresses other related topics of interest to employers:
the number of gay people on the job, the problems that working gay people
face, why gay people are not asking for affirmative action, the response
of the courts to employment discrimination, etc. (See bibliography for
information on obtaining this booklet.)
A NOTE TO THE GAY EMPLOYEE
What can an individual gay employee do to get an anti-discrimination policy
implemented where he or she works?
This partly depends on how open you are about your sexual orientation at
work. Find out if your firm already has a policy prohibiting discrimi-
nation based on sexual orientation. If you are comfortable, suggest that
the management disseminate the policy to all employees. If your employer
does not have a policy, let the management know the difficulties that such
a situation can create. Give your employer copies of this brochure and
NGTF's "Are There Gay People In My Business? Answers To Employers'
Questions."
If you are not open on the job, send your senior management, including the
top personnel executives, copies of these brochures (anonymously, if neces-
sary). These important pamphlets can provide an opening to serious manage-
ment consideration of this issue. You have a great deal to gain. It is
important for management to recognize that interest in this issue originates
from employees rather than from outside the company.
Encourage gay-rights groups in your area to work on a similar survey of
local employers. Remember, NGTF exists to help you in matters such as
these. We will provide assistance in how to contact firms, what type of
letter you should write, and what kinds of problems you might encounter.
And we want to know your results. You will be more successful than you
expect.
ADDITIONAL NGTF EMPLOYMENT-RELATED PUBLICATIONS
"Are There Gay People In My Business? Answers To Employers' Questions."
This leaflet answers 15 commonly asked questions about gay employees, such
as the number of gay people on the job, what gay people want from employers,
the need for non-discrimination statements, etc.
"Gay Rights Protections in the U.S. & Canada." Lists all cities, counties,
and states with gay rights laws, including the area of each protection,
such as housing, employment, credit, etc. Revised quarterly.
"A Gay Bibliography." Published by the Gay Caucus of the American Library
Association. The most comprehensive bibliography of gay and lesbian books,
articles, etc.
For an expanded bibliography or information concerning local gay organiza-
tions across the U.S. and abroad, contact NGTF.
THE NATIONAL GAY TASK FORCE...
The National Gay Task Force is a gay civil rights and public education
organization. Its purpose is to educate the public about same-sex
relationships; to work for civil rights in the areas of employment,
housing, and public accomodations; to combat all forms of discrimination
based on sexual orientation. NGTF has a nationwide membership and also
serves as an information clearinghouse for more than 3,000 lesbian and
gay organizations around the country.
Since its founding in 1973, NGTF has undertaken a wide range of political
and educational efforts, including
* Convinced the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality
from its list of "mental disorders".
* Introduced the first gay rights bill in Congress.
* Convinced the Federal Communications Commission to require broadcasters
to address gay concerns.
* Negotiated an end to discriminatory practices in the Jobs Corps, the
Public Health Service, the Internal Revenue Service, the Agency for
International Development and the Bureau of Prisons.
NGTF conducts research and surveys, serves as the principal advocacy
agency for gay people and publishes a wide range of educational materials
for both the gay and heterosexual public. Further information may be
obtained by writing:
The National Gay Task Force
Suite 1601
80 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10011
212-741-5800
NGTF (R)
Production of this material was made possible in part by funding under
CETA, Title VI, administered by the Department of Employment, City of
New York. Additional funding was provided by a grant from The Fund
for Human Dignity, Inc.dbrown@watarts.UUCP (Dave Brown) (02/05/85)
to the net.misc section? References: <1299@bbncca.ARPA>