Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)

[Greed and Death]

Most people do not ask that.

But I have to wonder, will this beer allow me to fire a male who deals with customers for appearing too feminine to be professional ?
Or fire a female who is too masculine to be professional ?

I think the more important question is why you think femme males and butch females are unprofessional.

Because in many circumstances clients will shift who they do business with based on how the customer service appears. In short it is professional because it may cost an employer money.

[Condunum]

I think the more important question is why you think femme males and butch females are unprofessional.

Because in many circumstances clients will shift who they do business with based on how the customer service appears. In short it is professional because it may cost an employer money.

Then it's not a question of sexual orientation, is it? If a feminine man has an inability to maintain a professional personality at work, he's not fit to work there. The point of this is to stop discrimination based on sexual orientation. It doesn't mean the standards of behavior change in the meeting room.

[Greed and Death]

Because in many circumstances clients will shift who they do business with based on how the customer service appears. In short it is professional because it may cost an employer money.

Then it's not a question of sexual orientation, is it? If a feminine man has an inability to maintain a professional personality at work, he's not fit to work there. The point of this is to stop discrimination based on sexual orientation. It doesn't mean the standards of behavior change in the meeting room.

and the transgender portion of the bill ...

[Condunum]

Then it's not a question of sexual orientation, is it? If a feminine man has an inability to maintain a professional personality at work, he's not fit to work there. The point of this is to stop discrimination based on sexual orientation. It doesn't mean the standards of behavior change in the meeting room.

and the transgender portion of the bill ...

I don't see how it's a problem. Again, if they can't be professional they aren't a professional. The standards of conduct are the standards of conduct, and anyone can abide by them.

Hell, I am genderfluid and as big a fairy as they come. And yet, I can still wear a suit, shake a hand and deliver a presentation.

[Greed and Death]

and the transgender portion of the bill ...

I don't see how it's a problem. Again, if they can't be professional they aren't a professional. The standards of conduct are the standards of conduct, and anyone can abide by them.

Hell, I am genderfluid and as big a fairy as they come. And yet, I can still wear a suit, shake a hand and deliver a presentation.

That is good for you.

What about those under going hormonal therapy?

[Condunum]

I don't see how it's a problem. Again, if they can't be professional they aren't a professional. The standards of conduct are the standards of conduct, and anyone can abide by them.

Hell, I am genderfluid and as big a fairy as they come. And yet, I can still wear a suit, shake a hand and deliver a presentation.

That is good for you.

What about those under going hormonal therapy?

It does not matter which group you pick the rules remain the same.

[Greed and Death]

That is good for you.

What about those under going hormonal therapy?

It does not matter which group you pick the rules remain the same.

So firing someone for looking too gender ambiguous to be professional is ok then ?

[Condunum]

It does not matter which group you pick the rules remain the same.

So firing someone for looking too gender ambiguous to be professional is ok then ?

Tell me how you will know they look too gender ambiguous, or how that will affect their performance/professional look.

[Greed and Death]

So firing someone for looking too gender ambiguous to be professional is ok then ?

Tell me how you will know they look too gender ambiguous, or how that will affect their performance/professional look.

Useing this as a rough guide.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/0 ... 41099.html

I would say it would be hard for her to clearly fit in a defined role between 6 months and 24 months. Clients would be put off an employer could lose business.

Though maybe a more aggressive surgery schedule could make the gap smaller.

[Condunum]

Tell me how you will know they look too gender ambiguous, or how that will affect their performance/professional look.

Useing this as a rough guide.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/0 ... 41099.html

I would say it would be hard for her to clearly fit in a defined role between 6 months and 24 months. Clients would be put off an employer could lose business.

Though maybe a more aggressive surgery schedule could make the gap smaller.

There's no point in that where the person looks out of the ordinary. At about 12 months had I just seen one of those pictures, I would have assumed her female. Unless her behavior is eccentric to the point of causing conflict in the work environment, hormone therapy is not enough reason. What you're saying is that someone can physically look feminine or masculine simply because that's the way they look and that would be sufficient to say they don't belong in the work environment. That's bullshit.

Unless your professionals are required to disclose their gender to their clients, there's no basis here.

[Baader-Meinhof Gruppe]

Tell me how you will know they look too gender ambiguous, or how that will affect their performance/professional look.

Useing this as a rough guide.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/0 ... 41099.html

I would say it would be hard for her to clearly fit in a defined role between 6 months and 24 months. Clients would be put off an employer could lose business.

Though maybe a more aggressive surgery schedule could make the gap smaller.

What about the business the employer would gain from LGBTQ clients due to them hiring someone like that? It very well may exceed business lost due to bigots not wanting to work with the business no?

[Norstal]

Yep, exactly. And why I see this as little more than an empty move to stop discrimination in hiring.

"Well, do you have any previous experience moving cardboard boxes?"

"lolnope"

"Are you Marketing?"

"lolnope, Social Communication. Plus, I have English certificates."

"And you are... ?"

"Twenty years old."

"lolfuck you"

Wat

Are you suggesting we shouldn't discriminate degrees?

Wat

[Baader-Meinhof Gruppe]

"Well, do you have any previous experience moving cardboard boxes?"

"lolnope"

"Are you Marketing?"

"lolnope, Social Communication. Plus, I have English certificates."

"And you are... ?"

"Twenty years old."

"lolfuck you"

Wat

Are you suggesting we shouldn't discriminate degrees?

Wat

In reality degrees shouldn't be the deciding factor. If we had someone who put together the ACA site applying for a programming job and they had a degree and then you had someone from the Chaos Computer Club but they had never graduated high school who is more qualified? According to this system the jackass with the degree is, but in reality the CCC member is far more qualified. In the situation the other poster mentioned the company would be right to discriminate, but in this situation the company is working on false assumptions that will cost them.

[Franklin Delano Bluth]

Useing this as a rough guide.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/0 ... 41099.html

I would say it would be hard for her to clearly fit in a defined role between 6 months and 24 months. Clients would be put off an employer could lose business.

Though maybe a more aggressive surgery schedule could make the gap smaller.

What about the business the employer would gain from LGBTQ clients due to them hiring someone like that? It very well may exceed business lost due to bigots not wanting to work with the business no?

Even if it doesn't, so what? The worker is more important than the financial self-aggrandizement of the exploiter.

[Franklin Delano Bluth]

Wat

Are you suggesting we shouldn't discriminate degrees?

Wat

In reality degrees shouldn't be the deciding factor. If we had someone who put together the ACA site applying for a programming job and they had a degree and then you had someone from the Chaos Computer Club but they had never graduated high school who is more qualified? According to this system the jackass with the degree is, but in reality the CCC member is far more qualified.

Please don't assume that competency of the professionals building the thing is necessarily the reason for the problems it experienced. They may well have done the best anyone could reasonably be expected to do given the resources and constraints they were forced to work with.

[Baader-Meinhof Gruppe]

What about the business the employer would gain from LGBTQ clients due to them hiring someone like that? It very well may exceed business lost due to bigots not wanting to work with the business no?

Even if it doesn't, so what? The worker is more important than the financial self-aggrandizement of the exploiter.

Precisely, but by not hiring LGBTQ workers they risk losing customers as well. That is my point.

[Baader-Meinhof Gruppe]

In reality degrees shouldn't be the deciding factor. If we had someone who put together the ACA site applying for a programming job and they had a degree and then you had someone from the Chaos Computer Club but they had never graduated high school who is more qualified? According to this system the jackass with the degree is, but in reality the CCC member is far more qualified.

Please don't assume that competency of the professionals building the thing is necessarily the reason for the problems it experienced. They may well have done the best anyone could reasonably be expected to do given the resources and constraints they were forced to work with.

There was Latin filler text in it. Meaning they put crap in that served no purpose, on purpose. If that doesn't say incompetence I don't know what does. If time and money was an issue they wouldn't have wasted it on something that served no purpose like that. Thus, they just suffered from lack of competence.

[Borinata]

I'm generally against these Non-Discrimination laws generally. People vote for politicians at the ballot box every year or so; they vote for and against businesses with their dollars on a daily basis. Considering the poor track record of existing legislation, I fail to see how adding another box on the Department of Labor and the Department of Justice's checklists (and adding a few words at the bottom of employment applications) will improve hiring opportunities for the LGBT community. Most interviewers will simply use another excuse as cover and most Human Resources codes are so arcane they permit firing anyone for some infraction anytime.

A better solution would be supporting businesses that support LGBT equality and winning the hearts and minds of people who don't support your views. Most companies that engage in this behavior (overtly at least), do so because they know their customers don't care-and I'm sure the market research they perform backs up that position.

Bottom line, you can't legislate morality, you have to change the society that generates morality.

[Colbert Super PAC]

WHAT???!!! No, this will KILL jobs!!! People will claim to be gay and then employers will be FORCED to hire them!!! Why won't the government just leave the free market alone and let private companies decide how much they want to discriminate their employees!!!!!111

[Ethel mermania]

Please don't assume that competency of the professionals building the thing is necessarily the reason for the problems it experienced. They may well have done the best anyone could reasonably be expected to do given the resources and constraints they were forced to work with.

There was Latin filler text in it. Meaning they put crap in that served no purpose, on purpose. If that doesn't say incompetence I don't know what does. If time and money was an issue they wouldn't have wasted it on something that served no purpose like that. Thus, they just suffered from lack of competence.

filler text is used to determine page layout, before you have the actual material. its a pretty common publisbhers trick.

[Conservative Conservationists]

I get concerned by any bill that requires you to be a particular gender, race, religion, disability status etc.
Even something like maternity leave does not need to define a woman. It instead could say "the primary caregiver to a child under 1 year".

If society wants equality, it cant do it by applying rules to some but not to others. Some will call it "positive discrimination". It is still discrimination and raises a permanent question of whether the individual is in the position due to skill or some status. What is wrong with treating all equally and just imposing jail/fines when there is proof when there is a racial, sexist, homophobic or whatever else decision?

[Grenartia]

The Senate has advanced a bill to expand workplace protections for gay, lesbian and transgender Americans, marking the chamber’s first vote on the issue in more than 15 years.
The procedural vote, which required the support of 60 senators, was 61-30. Seven Republicans and all Democrats voted for the measure.
The Senate hasn't voted on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) since 1996, when it failed by just a single vote. But, after surviving Monday night’s hurdle, the current version of the bill is poised for final Senate approval later this week, although it currently appears to have no future in the House.
The legislation would go beyond a similar bill the Senate previously rejected, which would have banned job discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The current version adds “gender identity” as a protected status. The bill would also exempt religious institutions, religious-affiliated colleges and schools, and the U.S. military.
On Monday morning, Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., announced his support for ENDA, becoming its key 60th supporter. The other Republicans backing the measure were Sens. Rob Portman, R-Ohio., Pat Toomey, R-Pa., Mark Kirk, R-Ill., Susan Collins, R-Maine and Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska had announced support for the bill but was not present for the vote.
Speaking on the Senate floor for the first time since his stroke in January of 2012, Kirk - one of the bill's co-sponsors - said, “I’ve been silent for two years due to a stroke – a little under two years ago,” but he said that he was speaking “because I believe so passionately in enacting the ENDA statute.”
No senators came to the floor on Monday to speak in opposition to the bill.
Despite the expected passage in the Senate, it likely will be blocked by the GOP-led House.
A spokesman for Republican House Speaker John Boehner said Monday that he opposes the legislation.
"The speaker believes this legislation will increase frivolous litigation and cost American jobs, especially small business jobs,” said spokesman Michael Steel.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013 ... house?lite Thats the main bit, the rest is the dems telling peope to elect them.

What say ye NS? Do you like the bill, oppose it? Do you think it will pass?
Im all in favor for this bill, and i dont really see it hurting the economy. However, Mr. Boehner would not let this pass, and it will probably fall flat on its face.

I hope against hope it passes the House. Maybe then I won't have to worry about being turned down for a job for simply being who I am.

[Grenartia]

I get concerned by any bill that requires you to be a particular gender, race, religion, disability status etc.
Even something like maternity leave does not need to define a woman. It instead could say "the primary caregiver to a child under 1 year".

If society wants equality, it cant do it by applying rules to some but not to others. Some will call it "positive discrimination". It is still discrimination and raises a permanent question of whether the individual is in the position due to skill or some status. What is wrong with treating all equally and just imposing jail/fines when there is proof when there is a racial, sexist, homophobic or whatever else decision?

Except, where you're wrong is that none of your concerns are reflected in the bill itself.

It doesn't say you have to hire an LGBT person over a cishet person, even if the cishet person is more qualified. It says you can't not hire or fire an LGBT person because they're LGBT. In fact, this bill basically does what you advocated in the underlined sentence (I'm not sure about the exact punishment, but its effectively the same).

[Baltic Finland (Ancient)]

It's fantastic. America's steps towards progress might seem slow, but sure. Can I hug the senate after they pass this?

[Ifreann]

There's really no reason to be against this beyond "ew teh fagggz", which, of course, means that you can count on a good number of Americans to be against it.

I don't know, I can think of a pretty good reason.

The bill would also exempt religious institutions, religious-affiliated colleges and schools, and the U.S. military.