Current Ethical Dilemma in the Workplace Case - Essay Example

Elisa is a lesbian who has been "out" at work and attempting to find a way to help her partner receive health benefits. Elisa is an assistant director in a major accounting firm. When she was hired by the firm she read the anti-discrimination policy which did not include the words "sexual orientation." She worked for the company for three years and then decided to let people know that she was a lesbian. The accounting firm had never dealt with the fact that they had gay and lesbian employees in the past because none of their employees let it be known about their sexual orientation; in other words everyone was thought to be heterosexual. When Elisa came out her decision brought with it a need for the company to begin to ask questions about what they should do Elisa has shared that she and her partner are having a child together. Her partner Ellen would benefit from partner benefits so that they can insure they will have a healthy baby. Elisa has quietly asked her boss to consider extending her health benefits to her spouse and this is still in negotiation. The Problem Elisa and Ellen have been together for seven years. They are committed same sex partners and they have a home together. They were "married" after five years and they have lived as any heterosexual couple would live. They understand that there are no laws that protect them but Ellen works only part-time because she is also going to school to gain her bachelor's degree. Elisa's firm offers academic reimbursement and healthcare to the spouses of heterosexual couples but they do not extend them to homosexuals. They do not have to offer these benefits and most do not. Elisa may have to take a few days off from work when Ellen has the baby which would be allowable if they were a heterosexual couple. Elisa will have to take her vacation days if she wants to take off because there are no provisions for partner leave. Most benefits are given to "married couples" when someone works in a job and gays and lesbians cannot marry in most states. Beyond healthcare and leave, there are other issues of retirement income. Currently Ellen would not be able to collect retirement benefits if something happened to Elisa because they are not married. Although Elisa can make Ellen the beneficiary there are no laws that would give her the retirement if someone from Elisa's family would contest it. The Law According to attorney Emily Doskow (2009) a dictionary definition of "family" is "the basic unit in society having two or more adults living together and cooperating in the care and rearing of children." ("Same Sex Marriage"). This description would apply to Emily and Ellen because they are two people living together raising children. There has been a heated debate about gay marriage in the last few years with "defense of marriage" policies being made at the local, state and federal levels. Currently there are only six states -- Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine and New Hampshire -- that have same sex marriage (Doskow, 2009). Although this is an alternative for some gay and lesbian families, moving to one of these states is not practical for Elisa and Ellen right now because their family is in Washington State and they do not want to move so far away while they are expecting a child. Currently lesbians and gays are not protected by law. Although President Obama has recently given some benefits to same sex partners he did not extend health care benefits to them. Most states have followed the "letter of the law" to decide what they should do with gay and lesbian partners and so far they have not had to give them anything. The challenge for most businesses is that they want to be fair, but the law only protects heterosexual couples from discrimination. The Challenge for Business The website, Find Law (2009) states that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act that was put into place in 1964 prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of "race or color, religion, sex, pregnancy, childbirth and national origin (including membership in a Native American tribe)." It also states that someone cannot be fired for talking about discrimination if they feel they have been a victim of discrimination. There are no provisions for "sexual orientation" so a business must put these provisions in if they want to use them. Unfortunately there are employees who feel adamant that gays and lesbians should not have the same rights as married heterosexual couples so the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was created to protect heterosexual marriage. According to Cornwall (2009) "domestic partners" cannot receive benefits because it "has no bearing on the federal definition of "marriage" or "spouse" and will not qualify domestic partners for the Section 1138 federal benefits that accompany traditional marriages between a man and a woman." (Cornwall Website). This means in essence that federal benefits that a heterosexual "spouse" can get (whether married or common law) will not be given to homosexual spouses. This means that there benefits such as Social Security, Veterans Benefits, employment protection or federal pensions cannot be gained by homosexual spouses. To some people this is blatant discrimination and to others it is in defense of marriage. Same Sex Marriage Benefits Same sex couples have been battling for many years to get equal benefits from their employers. Everyone has started on the federal and state levels hoping to gain some leeway in this area. Unfortunately 40 states still will not give benefits to same sex couples which means that many "stay in the closet" at work for fear of losing their jobs. It seems that the only "defense of marriage" goes back to a religious movement that says that "marriage" is between "a man and a woman." Across the country opponents of gay marriage line up to stop legislature from accepting same sex marriage. As Bishop Harry Jackson, senior pastor of Hope Christian Church said, "We are not going to sit by and allow an unelected board of bureaucrats to deny voters their rightful say on this issue and, by their action, allow the institution of marriage and the entire structure of our society to be radically redefined," (as quoted in Alexander, 2009). Proponents of gay marriage state that being able to marry is a basic right for all people and they say it is similar to what blacks experienced during the civil rights movement (Rupli, 2009). Gay couples state emphatically that same-sex marries is a civil rights issue that would bring equal legal protection under the law in the same way that traditional marriage allows. Opponents feel that gay marriage will undermine "a religious institution" and it "will threaten the traditional nuclear family" (Rupli, 2009). Same Sex Marriage as an Ethical Issue When we look at the situation for Elisa and Ellen it is plain to see that this is both a moral and an ethical problem. When looking at it from the standpoint of married employees it is a matter of being far, under the law to all people who are connected together in some way. Common law marriages are recognized in the United States and many spouses receive benefits after the "common law" steps have been done. It seems that the only real problem stems with the "religious right" who feel that gays and lesbians should not be recognized. In order to get benefits from a job people must be "married". According to Rupli's article interracial marriages had the same challenge before 1960 because it was considered a criminal offense. This did not change until the case of "Loving vs. Virginia" was tried in 1967 because a white woman and a black man were arrested in their home in the middle of the night. They sued at the local level and the ruling stated that marriage, is "one of the basic civil rights of man, basic to our very existence and survival." (Rupli, 2009). Many people are examining this case to see how it applies to gay marriage. It seems that this comes down to a matter of whether gays and lesbians should be treated as equal in the sight of the law or whether they are another group where it is "okay" to openly discriminate against them. Many people have suggested alternatives to calling this situation "marriage." Some have suggested "domestic partner" with most people suggesting that domestic partner is better than "marriage". However, domestic partner rights do not come out to be the same as those for heterosexual married couples. Recommendations The accounting firm that Elisa works for must take an unprecedented step in deciding what they will do for domestic partners. They must decide whether the company in good conscience can continue to hold their stance at not giving domestic partner benefits. My recommendation would be that they begin now to examine this area because it could be just a matter of time before this process is implemented nationwide. Blumner (2009) and others have made statements to this effect. The reason is because more people know gays whether they are in their families or they are working with them. Some of the younger generation already has accepted gay marriage and in a CBS News/New York Times poll it was shown that 42% of Americans said that marriage benefits should be extended and gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry. This business must look at their bottom line and decide whether they want to include all employees or continue to discriminate against a few. There should be board meetings talking about this issue. Many businesses start with their anti-discrimination policy by adding the words "sexual orientation." Although this is not able to be enforced by law, it is a starting place. This company must look at whether they want to be looked at as a company that is fair or one that discriminates. Penttila (2004) suggests that "providing benefits to same-sex couples is on CEOs' radar" because across the country universities, private employers, and 40% of Fortune 500 companies are offering benefits to domestic partners. According to the U.S. Census (2000) there were 4 million same sex couples who were living together and not married (as quoted in Penttila, 2004). This is a sign that the world may be changing and that eventually gays and lesbians will have rights. The question is, will Elisa's company be one of the first of one of the last? I would also recommend that religion must be taken out of this ethical dilemma because people believe in many different ways. If the only argument is that it does not preserve what people have seen as marriage in the past, it may be time for a change. We are an ever changing world and we accept people of all different colors and ethnicities so this should not be a problem. Each manager will have to vote their conscience in a way and help their business move forward. This is another type of diversity so there would be training about gay and lesbians in the workplace to make sure that everyone understood what was being done and why it is important. References Alexander, K. (2009, June 18). Judge asked to block decision D.C. residents fight board's ruling against referendum. The Washington Post. Retrieved June 26, 2009 from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/17/ AR2009061702651.html. Blumner, R. (2009, June 1). Widespread acceptance of gay marriage just a matter of time. GazetteXtra.com. Retrieved June 26, 2009 from http://gazettextra.com/news /2009/ jun/01/ widespread-acceptance-gay-marriage-just-matter-tim/. Cornwall, M. (2009, May 19). Mark Cornwall: Estate law covers same-sex couples. Newshawk Santa Barbara & Goleta. Retrieved June 26, 2009 from http://www.noozhawk.com/mark_cornwall/article/052009_mark_cornwall_estate _law_covers_same_sex_couples/. Doskow, E. (2009). Same-Sex marriage: Developments in the law. NOLO. Retrieved June 25, 2009 from http://www.nolo.com/article.cfm/objectID/6DF0766E-C4A3- 4952-A542F5997196E8B5/118/304/190/ART/. Federal Anti-Discrimination Law. Find Law. Retrieved June 24, 2009 from http://smallbusiness.findlaw.com/employment-employer/employment-employer- discrimination/employment-employer-discrimination-laws-federal.html. Penttila, C. (2004, September). Domestic dispute: the debate over benefits for same-sex couples heats up. Entrepreneur Magazine. Retrieved June 26, 2009 from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0DTI/is_9_32/ai_n6194223/. Rupli, R. (2004, March 19). Proponents of gay marriage in us compare issue to civil rights movement of 1960s. National Black Justice Coalition/Voice of America. Retrieved June 25, 2009 from http://www.nbjcoalition.org/news/001029.html. Read More