Shari Hutchinson’s professional future at the Child Support Enforcement Agency in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, may have ended the moment she set up her desk.
Like many of her co-workers, Hutchinson wanted a picture of her significant other at the office, so she placed one of her partner, Diane, at her workstation along with all her other things. Shortly after her first day of work in 2002, Hutchinson brought Diane into the office to meet her co-workers and her supervisor. She also listed Diane as her emergency contact on agency forms, stating that her relationship was “partner” or “domestic partner.”
It was this not uncommon behavior, Hutchinson believes, that may have doomed her career at the agency. In a federal lawsuit filed against Cuyahoga County in 2008, Hutchinson claimed that the county passed her over for dozens of promotions in favor of less qualified straight people–a practice that neither Ohio law, nor federal law makes illegal.
That could all change, however, with the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA,) introduced on Thursday by a bipartisan group of lawmakers in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. Modeled after Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the bill seeks to create a national ban on workplace discrimination against LGBT Americans in the same way that federal law already prohibits employment discrimination based on religion, race, gender, national origin, or disability. The bill proposes that employers cannot fire, refuse to hire, give unequal pay to, or treat in an otherwise discriminatory manner, like allowing a hostile work environment, any employee based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
Currently, there is no federal law against LGBT workplace discrimination, and it is perfectly legal to fire someone for being gay in 29 states and for being transgender in 34 states.
Over the years, Republicans have largely opposed versions of ENDA for various reasons ranging from religious concerns to false assumptions that the law already exists. Though ENDA does include a exemption allowing some religious organizations to make employment decisions based on sexual orientation or gender identity, opponents argue that it is too narrow in scope.
Others object because they believe the bill unfairly regulates the private sector. Some, like Republican Rep. James Lankford, believe being gay is a choice and that it should not be illegal to fire someone for that choice. And others, like Republican Rep. Kenny Marchant, who voted down ENDA in 2007, claim there already are protections for gay people in the workplace.
“The legal protections offered under the Employment Non-Discrimination Act are desperately needed by LGBT Americans from east to west and from north to south,” said Heather Cronk, co-director of GetEQUAL, a national LGBT advocacy organization, in a statement. “Every day, I hear stories from folks working two and three jobs just to get by, constantly fearful that their employers might find out that they’re gay or transgender. That kind of stress diminishes productivity and workplace stability, but it also strikes at the heart of our own human dignity. This is a problem that needs solving, and now is the time to solve it.”
Not only do most Americans support federal protection for LGBT employees, Cronk noted in an interview with msnbc.com Wednesday, but an overwhelming majority mistakenly believe it already exists (like Rep. Marchant.) In a Center for American Progress poll, nearly three-fourths—73%—of the American public said they supported protecting LGBT employees from workplace discrimination. The survey also found that nine in 10 voters incorrectly believed that Congress had already passed a clear, federal law prohibiting employers from discriminating against employees based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
But in fact, no such law exists–the Senate hasn’t even voted on a workplace discrimination ban based on sexual orientation since 1996, when a similar measure failed by only one vote. A version of the law without transgender provisions passed the House in 2007, but died in the upper chamber.
“It’s absolutely absurd,” said Tico Almeida, president of Freedom to Work, a national organization committed to banning workplace harassment and career discrimination against LGBT employees.
“The Democrats really do deserve some criticism,” he said of their failure to put the bill to a vote in the Senate for 17 years, eight of which were under Democratic control. However, he added, “I do think Harry Reid is going to do it this year.”
If the Senate does take up the measure in 2013, Almeida believes it stands a good chance of getting the 60 votes needed to break an expected filibuster. Two critical factors in particular put ENDA in a more favorable position than ever before to pass the upper house.
One is Sen. Tammy Baldwin, the newly elected Democrat from Wisconsin and the nation’s first openly gay U.S. senator. Advocates are hopeful she will campaign hard for the bill’s passage based on her prior support for the measure as a House member.
“I know she’s going to fight,” said Almeida.
The other factor working in ENDA’s favor might be Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio. Portman recently reversed his opposition to same-sex marriage last month, two years after his son told him he was gay. “[Portman’s] son is about to graduate from Yale, and he can legally be fired for being gay in Ohio right now,” said Almeida. “I can’t imagine Rob Portman would vote against a bill that would prevent that from happening to his son.”









