Transexual gets ?35,000 compensation for workplace discrimination

[Still Life]

How is it fair that the company is now forced to allow the exact same position for a female named Ms. Y.

It's not fair to the business. However, businesses have an ethical and legal obligation to follow the precedents set by a framework of rules which govern a society and this is reflected in the sexual discrimination laws. You don't just decide to become a female (in this case) overnight and the courts would have weighed this into their decision.

If customers don't like it, they can go elsewhere because society has seemingly deemed transsexuals as appropriate through their respective laws.

 

[dkyros]

I don't really care for this story. Yes she was treated unfairly and had the right to sue, but we all do things we don't want to do for work. I might of done the same thing if I was the boss and a guy came up to me that was working for some time and asked to dress like a women. My reasoning is that it would disrupt work flow and likely lower productivity in the office. Everyone would be too busy gossiping about the person, the person would be upset at the gossip it sounds like a headache. If he dressed like a she and was open from the beginning it would be different, but this person is just a trouble maker.

 

[PunkRex]

I don't think they deserve a cent.

Wanna work at Hooters? Wear their uniform.
Wanna work at the Playboy Mansion? Wear the outfit.
Wanna work at McDonald's? Wear the gear.
Wanna work at First Direct Logistics? Dress how the owner wishes you to.

Don't like it? Don't work there.

I hate it when transsexuals use their condition like this.

I dont think the main problem was the clothing guy, I think it was the fact they asked her to keep calling herself a man because it would be to "confusing" and some how easier on everyone else. Surely just saying "hes a women named Louise now" would have been the most simple way of doing it.

I agree with you on uniforms though, if you dont like the way a place is run you dont have to work there, clothing, hair, tatoos, they all count.

Tough.

The company wanted them to go by a certain name. Don't like it? Don't work there. Don't want to be called a Playboy Bunny? Don't work at the Mansion.

Im not really disagreeing with you, im just saying I understand why she got upset. It seems to have gotten really bogged down in paperwork and turnt into a big mess of concideration.

 

[Terminal Blue]

I call foul on he/she. If your gonna go through a complicated life change dont expect others to be okay up front about it or expect them to know how to treat you.

How is it complicated? I'm not seeing it.

I've had people around me transition, both ways actually, and it's generally a very slick process provided everyone involved is aware and willing to cooperate. I'd be very surprised if the office didn't tell people months before that it was going to happen, unless they have an incredibly crappy diversity policy.

Just treat people how they identify themselves. That's not complicated, is it?

 

[Still Life]

As a woman, if someone asked me to wear a suit to work, I would gladly do it. Most women dress in more gender-neutral clothing, anyway. This person was just being extreme about it, in my opinion.

This case is not about clothing. It's about the forced imposition of a gender identity upon a person who is merely exercising civil rights.

Louise was evidently uncomfortable with her male identity and had taken steps to correct her internal misalignment. A company is ethically and legally bound to respect that, ergo the decision of the court. That's not self-entitlement.

 

[Still Life]

Just treat people how they identify themselves. That's not complicated, is it?

Think you'll find a lot of people haven't the capacity when another deviates from societal norms.

 

[PunkRex]

I don't think they deserve a cent.

Wanna work at Hooters? Wear their uniform.
Wanna work at the Playboy Mansion? Wear the outfit.
Wanna work at McDonald's? Wear the gear.
Wanna work at First Direct Logistics? Dress how the owner wishes you to.

Don't like it? Don't work there.

I hate it when transsexuals use their condition like this.

I dont think the main problem was the clothing guy, I think it was the fact they asked her to keep calling herself a man because it would be to "confusing" and some how easier on everyone else. Surely just saying "hes a women named Louise now" would have been the most simple way of doing it.

I agree with you on uniforms though, if you dont like the way a place is run you dont have to work there, clothing, hair, tatoos, they all count.

AS explained in a previous post, say her name was Hermon. Hermon Hannon, before the change. Now if Herman Change their name to Louise, the company needs to reflect this, paperwork. Rather than do this, they asked if she could use her male name while working with outside agents. Why? Because Hermon Hannon had that position, not Louise Hannon. Mrs. Hannon could have said "No, I will not do this for you, this is my name now" but she went with it.

The sad part in this case is that the company was attempting to make concessions that worked with its clients, and Louise was against those, but when with them for a time anyways, then decided NO!

Now say I get a job as an accountant. I am told I need to wear a suit and be presentable in said suit to all outside clients. I tell my boss "Look, I love t-shirts, I hate suits. I'll leave" and they ask me to stay, saying "You can wear a t-shirt, as long as you are presentable to outside clients in a suit and tie" so I agree for a while.

Now my co-workers are getting wierded out. My boss says he's got complaints. People aren't comfortable around me as I don't wear a suit around the office in a professional environment. I can stay with the company if I work from home. I agree and go home. After 4 months I decide FUCK THIS and sue the company.

This is the EXACT same circumstance without me being transgendered on it. I don't like suits, she wants to be a woman. That's the only difference. No one's rights are being stepped on any more than the other, but people would call me absurd and fight for her.

The article doesn't give all the information though, so you have no idea what was said between them or the actual reason for why she was sent home, just what was decided. Doesn't mean it's the facts, but this is what speculation tells me

I dont know if I consider taste to be the same as self loathing but this is a good point guy.

 

[Terminal Blue]

"provided everyone involved is aware and willing to cooperate"- you shouldnt expect them to is all I'm saying, at least when your back is turned.

1) Umm.. yes you should, you have a legal obligation to cooperate.
2) You are allowed to think whatever you want. However, the second you act on it to the detriment of someone else it is discrimination, which is illegal.

What you're basically saying is that people are so shit at dealing with things like this that we should accept their shitness and move on. Sure, people can be shit, but that's where the law comes in.. to ensure people behave better than they otherwise would.

and even with todays fast surgery and how "slick" it is-your making a boy from a girl-its complicated.

That's not an answer..

As I said before, you can't even have surgery until you've had a year living in role, assuming you even want it at all.

I'm not talking about the physical process of altering someone's organs, I'm talking about the very easy social process whereby someone dresses in different clothes and everyone calls them by a different name and pronoun. That's remarkably uncomplicated.

 

[infinity_turtles]

Wow... While I fully support anyone who's transgendered having equal rights in all things and all that, I gotta say this seems too far to me. In a business, maintaining a good relationship with your clients comes before making sure your employees are comfortable. Now, if an employer is willing to go to bat for it's employees like that and take a social stand, good on them and I hope they do well, but to say if a business doesn't do that they can be sued? That's going too far in my book. It's a lose-lose, forcing either a loss of business or the potential for a hefty lawsuit on the company.

Also note that this is coming from a straight male who was required to cross-dress when working as a pro Dom at a BDSM club while living in Vegas. Granted, that was established when I was hired, but when I had enough of it I eventually quit, not sued my boss.

 

[Hecate]

This case is not about clothing. It's about the forced imposition of a gender identity upon a person who is merely exercising civil rights.

Louise was evidently uncomfortable with her male identity and had taken steps to correct her internal misalignment. A company is ethically and legally bound to respect that, ergo the decision of the court. That's not self-entitlement.

I realize clothing isn't all of the issue. Like I said, if it really bothered her that much to continue acting as her given gender, she could have just walked away. If she wanted to keep her job badly enough, she could have dealt with it.
The company did try to make adjustments for her, and it didn't work out, and she sued them. I think that's ludicrous. I don't think they were at fault for giving an honest effort to cater to someone making such an extreme lifestyle change. They took their own risks in trying to keep this person on and keep their customer base (who would, no doubt, want to continue working with the same man they knew - who had chosen to become someone else, which makes the situation horribly complicated).

I realize she was exercising civil rights, but I don't think that was the right decision to make. It just came off as pretentious and ungrateful. :|

 

[MarkusWolfe]

I never said I wanted to burn anyone. YOU made that assumption.

I'm going to politely see to it that she works somewhere I can't see her instead of burning it in a fire.

^ Implying your first reaction when encountering something which disturbs you in this way is to burn it, and only the fact that it's a human being prevents you from doing so.

Well, SOMEONE never learned what hyperbole was.

Furthermore, why isn't 'make it go away' a valid way of dealing with it? Provided that I don't screw over the employee in the process, it's a win-win situation, is it not? She keeps her job, and I get her out of my sight.

Because 'it' is a person, and you are compromising their career to cater to your prejudice. 'Oh, but they get to keep their job'.. Lucky them! That's pretty good for a freak isn't it? Who knows, in five years when you've had time to think about it maybe they can have a special paper bag to put over their head and you'll let them come into the office for a few minutes.

Seriously, we're talking about people wearing the 'wrong' clothes, not out of simple perversity, but because they have legally changed gender (not that I even oppose doing it out of perversity). What exactly is your problem. Why does it disturb you? You've not given any kind of valid reason beyond 'it does'.

Oh, boo-fucking-hoo. People with power compromise other peoples careers for giggles and shits all the time. Am I terrible for doing the same so that I feel comfortable in my work environment, and thus am able to maximize my own productivity? Yeah, I could get used to it, but that takes time, and you only get a finite amount of that. It's quicker to have them work somewhere you don't see them.

Truth be told, there's nothing inherently disturbing about cross-dressing. In fact, it's probably the sudden change in gender identity that made this individual seem 'disturbing' to her fellow employees. It's no different than to be disturbed by a sudden cultural identity change, or even a sudden personality change. It is completely normal to be disturbed by such things.

Now, here's the real issue: Why do I have to accept and respect everyone? Sure, the laws say 'no discrimination', but am I not allowed to choose my own preference in friends? Are the racism police going to break down my door and arrest me if I have too many white friends? Am I not allowed to decide for myself and on my own criterion who I do and do not respect? Are the thought police going to snatch me from my bed at night because the list of people I highly respect doesn't have enough women on it?

I have a legal obligation to show respect for others regardless of their differences. That is not the same thing as a legal obligation to have respect for others. There is nothing illegal about being a racist asshole as long as you're professional about it. It's wrong, but it's not illegal.

 

[Terminal Blue]

I have a legal obligation to show respect for others regardless of their differences. That is not the same thing as a legal obligation to have respect for others. There is nothing illegal about being a racist asshole as long as you're professional about it. It's wrong, but it's not illegal.

Until you act on it, which is illegal.. for example, by forcing all your black staff to work from home so you don't have to look at them.

I can't believe that's 'the real issue' for you. Noone cares about your friendship circle, but it matters how you treat people in the social world. Your obligation is not to love everyone, but to showing the very basic respect of not doing things which harm them or their livelihoods because they display traits which you dislike.

 

[MarkusWolfe]

I can't believe that's 'the real issue' for you. Noone cares about your friendship circle, but it matters how you treat people in the social world.

Difference?

 

[Still Life]

I can't believe that's 'the real issue' for you. Noone cares about your friendship circle, but it matters how you treat people in the social world.

Difference?

Your friends are your micro-world. The rest of society is part of your macro-world and comes with separate codes of conduct.

 

[JimmyFury]

If you wish to assign clothes a gender that is your choice. Your choice has no bearing on the outside world.

That's a two way street and an entirely silly argument...

You argument is based on wanting her to dress like a man. Thus you assign clothing a gender just as much as anyone. If the "outside world" (as opposed to...?) didn't assign clothes a gender then there would never have been an issue to begin with.

 

[MarkusWolfe]

I can't believe that's 'the real issue' for you. Noone cares about your friendship circle, but it matters how you treat people in the social world.

Difference?

Your friends are your micro-world. The rest of society is part of your macro-world and comes with separate codes of conduct.

You know what the macroworld is? A whole lot of microworlds stacked on top of each other. I am still allowed to choose who is a 'work friend' and who is a 'coworker'.

If someone does something that I don't like because they're different than I am, I still don't have to like them. Laws say I have to respect their differences, but that's it. That is clearly what has happened here.