Search results

Lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) employees constitute one of the largest, but least studied, minority groups in the workforce. This article examines what we know, and what we need to know, about the career and workplace experiences of this understudied population. The construct of sexual identity is defined, followed by a review of the research on sexual orientation in the workplace. Then an analysis of the differences between LGB employees and other stigmatized groups is presented. Three unique challenges facing LGB employees are identified, and conceptual models are developed that explain underlying processes. Finally, career theories are critically analyzed, and an identity-based longitudinal theory of LGB careers is presented.

The purpose of this paper is to summarize the limited body of research that focuses on the efficacy of sexual orientation anti-discrimination legislation in reducing discrimination.

Reviews past research that documents overt and subtle forms of workplace discrimination against gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals and describes how legislation plays an important role in changing social norms and underlying attitudes.

Empirically demonstrates that legislation effectively can reduce discrimination.

Informs legislative debate and promotes the expansion and adoption of national, state, and local legislation on sexual orientation anti-discrimination legislation.

Sexual orientation and employment bias is examined in Cyprus by implementing an experiment for the period 2010-2011. The design is aimed at answering three main questions. Do gay males and lesbians face occupational access constraints and entry wage bias than comparable heterosexuals? Do gay males and lesbians benefit from providing more job-related information? Does the differential treatment between gay male/lesbian and heterosexual applicants disappear as the information of the applicants increases? The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The author sent applications to advertised vacancies and experimented with two information sets the “sexual orientation” and “information” of the potential applicants.

The estimations suggest that gay male and lesbian applicants face significant bias than heterosexual applicants. Moreover, both heterosexual and gay male/lesbian applicants gain by providing more job-related information. However, the estimations suggest that the informational premium for sexual orientation minorities could not reduce the discriminatory patterns.

The current results indicate that discrimination against sexual orientation minorities in the Cypriot labour market is a matter of preference, not the result of limited information. One strategy the Cypriot government may employ is to try to affect public opinion and people's attitudes towards sexual orientation minorities.

This is the first nationwide field experiment in the Cypriot labour market and contributes to the literature as it is the first field study on sexual orientation which tries to disentangle statistical from taste-based discrimination in the labour market.

This study aimed to experimentally investigate whether disclosing one's sexual orientation while applying for a job would impact hiring decisions.

The experiment employed a 2 (Applicant Gender: Male/Female) × 2 (Applicant Sexual Orientation: Heterosexual or Gay/Lesbian) × 2 (Job Type: Masculine/Feminine) between-subjects design. Participants (N = 349) were randomly assigned to one of eight applicant conditions. They were first presented with a job description, followed by a cover letter displaying the applicants' qualifications, gender and sexual orientation. Participants evaluated the applicant's competence, social skills and hireability, and provided self-reports of their attitudes toward gays/lesbians and traditional gender roles.

The results demonstrated a distinct pattern of discrimination toward gay/lesbian applicants who were rated significantly lower in competence, social skills and hireability than were heterosexual applicants. Additionally, using multigroup structural equation modeling, we found that sexual orientation differentially impacted the relationship between attitudes and hireability ratings; negative attitudes toward homosexuality, beliefs about sexual orientation as a choice and belief in traditional gender roles were significant predictors of hireability ratings for gay/lesbian applicants, but were unrelated to evaluations of heterosexual applicants.

The current study highlights the underlying mechanisms involved in hiring discrimination against Lesbian Gay Bisexual Trans (LGBT) workers including lower evaluations of competence, social skills and structural differences in the impact of attitudes. These direct links must be explicitly addressed for continued progress related to equality, diversity and inclusion in Human Resource Management (HRM). Continued multidisciplinary research that considers gender identity and sexual orientation signal salience, consequences of specific career stereotypes, regional differences and the effects of societal shifts in attitudes overtime will continue to improve our understanding and drive us toward a more equitable future.

By identifying the underlying mechanisms involved in hiring discrimination, this study highlights the need for diversity trainings that go beyond the blanket approaches to diversity management and explicitly address conscious and unconscious biases that may influence the hiring process. Additionally, it is critical for organizations to provide top-down support from leadership, and implement mechanisms that allow LGBT voices to be heard and feel comfortable in their work environment to reduce the psychological strain.

Prior to the recent landmark ruling by the Supreme Court on June 15, 2020, which extended the 1964 Civil Rights Act workplace protections to gay, lesbianand transgender employees, in many places across the United States Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) identifying workers could still be legally discriminated against. The pattern of discrimination identified in the current study provides clear evidence that these protections are necessary, and long overdue.

This study identifies two clear patterns of hiring discrimination: (1) lower hireability ratings and (2) structural differences in the evaluative process for gay/lesbian applicants. These findings provide experimental evidence, currently lacking in the literature, that support survey-based and qualitative findings of LGBT's experiences, and demonstrate how negative attitudes, irrelevant to the qualifications of an applicant, seep into hiring decisions.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the true level of discrimination against openly gay and lesbian applicants in hiring decisions in OECD countries as well as on its determinants.

The author presents an overview of all studies conducted in order to test for discrimination against homosexual applicants in the labor market by the correspondence testing method. Moreover, the author performs a meta-analysis of correspondence tests from 18 separate studies conducted in OECD countries to test sexual orientation discrimination, containing more than 70 estimates of effects and representing a total of more than 50,000 resumes sent to employers. In addition to presenting overall results, the author focus on subgroups of specific correspondence tests in order to highlight the differences across gender, type of jobs, procedure, continent and type of information provided in applications.

The author provides evidence that sexual orientation discrimination occurs in the labor market in OECD countries, such that openly homosexual applicants face similar discrimination as ethnic minority applicants. Discrimination is significantly greater in the selection process for low-skilled than for high-skilled jobs. In the selection process for low-skilled jobs, lesbian candidates face significantly lower discrimination than gays (except in jobs that are considered “women’s” jobs). Discrimination is significantly higher in Europe than in North America. Moreover, the way sexual orientation is signaled may influence the level of discrimination found. Finally, discrimination against homosexual applicants is not only a matter of preferences: providing more positive information in applications significantly reduces the level of discrimination.

This paper offers the first quantitative analysis of sexual orientation discrimination in OECD countries through meta-analyses.

Borrowing from the literature on social cognition and schema theory, the purpose of this paper is to examine sexual orientation and sex discrimination, to critique and refine that doctrine, particularly when traditional gender roles are enforced in workplaces. The insights of cognitive schemas on lesbian and gay identity are employed to link models of judicial decision making and gender/sexual orientation.

Methodologically, the paper is located in the sociolegal tradition, but also uses case analysis to supplement and advance its thesis. Because US nondiscrimination law distinguishes between sexuality and gender discrimination, it provides a unique laboratory to critique not only American law, but the structure of nondiscrimination law generally.

Judges' and others' schemas of lesbian and gay men suggest explanations for the analytical confusion in nondiscrimination law. Additionally, the paper's specific findings both supplement and question aspects of extant models of judicial decision making and gender/sexuality.

Social cognition framework enables judges and commentators to reconceptualize facts and relevant doctrine in gender and sexual orientation discrimination cases and to critique some fundamental assumptions of nondiscrimination law. Further, because the paper bridges judicial decision making and gender/sexuality, researchers in those areas can use this analysis of a specific legal context to provide additional insights into how those models work and their underlying, hidden assumptions. This is a conference paper based on this author's work on schema theory and sexual orientation identity in nondiscrimination law.

The purpose of this paper is to identify organisational good practice concerning equality, diversity and sexual orientation and consider the impact of the Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003.

The paper employs in‐depth interviews and a short survey with 154 lesbian, gay and bisexual people (LGB) and 60 interviews with management, trade union and LGB group representatives within 16 “good practice” case study organisations.

Before the introduction of the (SO) Regulations (2003), progress concerning equality, diversity and sexual orientation was made based on social justice and/or business case arguments. The research shows that an inclusive organisational response can benefit both LGB employees and their employers. However, an “implementation gap” between equality/diversity policy and practice on sexual orientation was identified. The introduction of the law as a further driver to equality action in the sexual orientation area has been positive. However, LGB employees voiced concerns about the way in which organisations rely on LGB people to come forward with complaints before tackling problems. Thus, the protection provided by the (SO) Regulations 2003, although welcomed, was not seen as a panacea to tackling discrimination and harassment on grounds of sexual orientation in the workplace. LGB respondents looked to their organisation management to provide proactive leadership on equality/diversity issues and stop treating the sexual orientation strand as the “poor relation” within the organisational drive for equality and diversity.

The paper addresses the gap in knowledge regarding LGB people's perceptions of equality/diversity policy and practice within UK workplaces, providing information on good practice for employers, trade unions, government and LGB campaigning organisations.

Social identity shaped by sexual orientation is unique because it is invisible (as compared to age and some ethnic identities); a circumstance that may activate homophobia perceptions when an individual’s sexual orientation becomes fodder for speculation. Chapter 7 enjoins a wide variety of related issues in order to sharpen a focus on sex in the workplace; love and sex in the literal sense, as well as social identity shaped by sexual orientation, sex-based discrimination, sex as political action, and important ways that sex intersects with other social identity dimensions including age, gender, ethnicity/race, and socioeconomic status. An important distinction made throughout the chapter is the degree that protections are offered to various groups with regard to sex and work. These protections (or lack of them) are critical for gays, lesbians, bisexuals, the transgendered, and queer or questioning people who consider whether or not to disclose information about their sexual identity at work.

While many multinational corporations have adopted policies or guidelines and implemented programs to communicate an inclusive perspective on sexual identity in the workplace and to promote diversity training for all employees, too few workplaces around the globe offer legal protections for workers relative to sexual identity. People are subject to workplace discrimination whether they are gay or lesbian, or simply appear to be so and sexual harassment according to gender remains a fixture of organizations. To explore the organizational research on sexuality, Chapter 7 attends to subthemes of: love, lust, and sex-based harassment in the workplace; how organizations address sexual orientation and sex-based harassment in the workplace; managing one’s sexual identity in the workplace; and intersectionalities of sexual identity with ethnicity, gender, and social class.

The article aimed to identify and analyze the income differences across the income distribution between homosexuals and heterosexuals by occupational groups in Brazil.

PNAD-C microdata was used in two periods (2013–2015 and 2016 to 2019), highlighting the different economic, social and political contexts in Brazil. Recentered influence function and quantile income decomposition were estimated to verify the difference and income discrimination according to the guideline the worker’s sexuality.

For some cases homosexual workers earn more and in others, homosexuals earn less than heterosexuals. The differences in remuneration according to sexual orientation were smaller in positions that demand low qualification and competence. The quantile income decomposition between 2013 and 2015 revealed the positive effect of discrimination was the generator of income disparities between homosexuals and heterosexuals, with greater impact for the 10th and 90th quantiles and on groups that require small levels of complexity and education. Between 2016 and 2019, there was the presence of both effects, but the explained effect was the promoter of wage disparities in most occupational groups.

Given the dataset, it was only possible to work with proxies of homosexual couples.

There has been little research linking the themes of discrimination based on sexual orientation and occupational groups, and so far, it does not exist similar in Latin America. This study found that sexual orientation influences remuneration according to the occupational group that the worker belongs to, affecting income and, consequently, occupational choice. This connection of issues will contribute to new insights into discrimination based on sexual orientation, as well as more effective public policies aimed at reducing discrimination against homosexuals.

There is currently very little research to support the popularly held claim that “closeted” homosexual workers will have a less positive work‐related attitude and no empirical investigation of companies that prohibit discrimination on grounds of sexuality. This study used data from a survey of 744 homosexual employees to determine the relationships of reported disclosure of sexual orientation, anti‐discrimination policies and top management support for equal rights with relevant work attitudes. All three independent variables were found to be significantly related to affective organizational commitment and conflict between work and home. Additionally, anti‐discrimination policies and top management support were related to job satisfaction. However, none of the independent variables were significantly associated with continuance organizational commitment or job stress. It is suggested that human resource managers concerned with integrating gay and lesbian employees begin by educating top managers and creating a work environment in which disclosure of homosexual orientation is supported.