Hostile territory

Employers’ Unwillingness to Accommodate Transgender Employees

Dados Bibliográficos

ID6058271
AutoresJoel Rudin (0000-0002-9408-5337, Rowan University), Sinead Ruane, Sinéad G Ruane (0000-0001-7684-5710, Western New England University), Linda Ro, Linda Ross (0000-0002-7444-1939, Rowan University), Andrea Farro (0000-0002-5475-1526, Rowan University), Tejinder Billings, Tejinder K Billing (Rowan University)
Ano2014
Volume33
Fascículo8
Páginas721-734
Data de publicação2014-11-17
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoEqual Opportunities International (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 1758-7093 • E-ISSN: 2040-7149
EditoraEmerald (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1108/edi-12-2013-0116
OpenAlexW1981651605
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas6
Referências citadas28

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to enhance the understanding of employers’ responses to the restroom requests of transgender employees, and to assess the ability as educators to reduce transphobia in the students. Design/methodology/approach – Subjects were 194 undergraduate business students at a medium-sized public university in the northeastern USA who were enrolled in an undergraduate course in organizational behavior. During class, they read a brief case which asked the students to play the role of a CEO in Little Rock, Arkansas, receiving a complaint from a female employee about using the same restroom as a coworker who is transitioning from male to female. Findings – The most inclusive response was also the rarest, with only 27 percent of students recommending unisex bathrooms. Hostile actions, forcing the transitioning employee to use the men's restroom, were recommended by 38 percent of those who correctly realized that an employee would be unprotected by sexual orientation discrimination law in this case and by 30 percent of those who thought that she could sue for that type of discrimination in that jurisdiction. Research limitations/implications – It would be interesting to replicate this with non-student samples such as human resource managers and executives. The use of a US sample and of a text-based case can also be viewed as weaknesses. Because gender identity is embodied, self-constructed, and socially constructed, no single research study can capture the totality of work life for transgender employees. Practical implications – Transphobia is so powerful that a substantial percentage of the students recommended courses of action that they believed to be illegal even though the study was designed to discourage a hostile response. Employers that are concerned about transgender rights will need to do a lot more than just grafting the word “transgender” onto their extant set of policies. Social implications – Since today's business students are tomorrow's business leaders, the authors could eventually make the business world more tolerant if the authors could identify a message that resonates with the students and causes them to re-evaluate their homophobia and transphobia. Originality/value – Empirical studies of transgender issues have been dominated by the qualitative approach, so there is a need for more quantitative research on this topic. The hostile responses usually indicated greater acceptance of transgender employees who have completed gender reassignment surgery. This seems difficult to reconcile with a conception of transphobia as a generalized distaste towards all those who transgress gender norms

Complaint · Employment discrimination · Harassment · Industrial and organizational psychology · Lesbian · Political science · Public relations · Sexual orientation · Sociology · Transgender · Transphobia · Business Law and Ethics · Ethics in Business and Education · Gender Diversity and Inequality · Gender Studies · Law · Psychology · Social Psychology