November 7th, 2009
 

365 Gay: News

Obama transition team bans LGBT discrimination


(Washington) The Obama-Biden transition team is telling prospective employees in the new administration it will not discriminate against LGBT workers.

“The Obama-Biden Transition Project does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, or any other basis of discrimination prohibited by law,” the Transition team says on its official Web site.

Although the commitment pertains only to transition team workers, LGBT civil rights activists say they believe Obama will issue an Executive Order shortly after being sworn in to extend that throughout the administration.

“The inclusion of gender identity is a bold departure from the past – and it sends a clear message,” said Christopher E. Anders, ACLU Senior Legislative Counsel.

“By including sexual orientation and gender identity in its non-discrimination policy, the Obama-Biden transition team makes clear that it will focus on the relevant qualities that actually predict an applicant’s success on the job – professional experience, character, skills and education.”

Although President Bill Clinton signed Executive Order 11478, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, there are no explicit federal protections from gender identity bias in government hiring.

During the Bush administration, U.S. Special Counsel Scott Bloch refused to protect LGBT workers. The Office of the Special Counsel is supposed to protect whistleblowers and investigate complaints of discrimination by federal workers.

Bloch’s stonewalling of complaints of discrimination by LGBT federal workers dates to February 2004, when he ordered references to sexual orientation removed from the Office of the Special Counsel website.

A month after the references disappeared from the OSC website, Bloch said gay workers were no longer protected.

After intense pressure from Federal Globe – the LGBT organization for federal civil servants – and from Democrats on the Hill, the White House said it would honor the Executive Order signed by Clinton that assured LGBT workers of civil rights protections.

But with Bloch’s approval, several union contracts negotiated with various branches of the government removed the list of categories that are protected, replacing them with the more nebulous phrase “any class protected by law.”

Bloch said in May 2005 before the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs subcommittee that his interpretation of the Clinton executive order cannot be used to protect gay workers, because it does not specifically name LGBT workers.

“President-elect Obama and Vice President-elect Biden, by explicitly rejecting the bigotry and intolerance of the past, are committing that gay, lesbian, and transgender professionals can serve in government without fear of discrimination,” said Anders.  “This is a critical next step in securing the basic rights of LGBT community.”

The ACLU and other rights groups are calling on Obama to make passage of a gender-identity inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act – known as ENDA – one of his priorities.

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act, or ENDA, passed the House in 2007, but without protections for the transgendered.

The legislation would make it illegal for employers to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation in hiring, firing, promoting or paying an employee.

ENDA as originally introduced by Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) included transpeople, but Frank removed those protections in committee, saying it would be impossible to pass.

More than a dozen LGBT groups immediately distanced themselves from the legislation. Frank and the Human Rights Campaign now say they will fight to ensure an inclusive ENDA is passed.

The bill expected to be reintroduced with gender identity protections in the next session of Congress.


Login or Register to comment.

or Login with Facebook:

  • Pat Said: November 10th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
    • This is just the first step. Just wait till he gets in there. I have such faith and hope that Barack is completely opposite of his bigoted “religious” voters. He will not allow religion to strip away our rights. This first step proves it. January cannot come soon enough!!
      (We have to have dark rainy nights before we have brilliant rainbow days!! I WILL be married once again in CA, I just KNOW IT!) :)

  • Rachel Said: November 10th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
    • This is good news and a sign that Obama is serious about treating all people fairly. Protections on the basis of gender identity are extremely important for all people who do not conform to gender stereotypes. It is not just for transgender people.

  • Julia Said: November 10th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
    • Pat — to quote a song by The Nitty Gritty Dirt Band, “if we’re ever gonna see a rainbow, we’ve gotta stand a little rain.”

      I’m a 65-year old straight woman who hopes to see gay equality in her lifetime.

  • Marco Said: November 10th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
    • I am conerned about the editorial slant I am detecting at 365gay.com, which appears to be leaning toward assimilative apology.

      How can anyone write an article discussing the Obama/Biden non-discrimination statement and not discuss how it contradicts the Obama/Biden position on gay marriage?

      For the sake of some effort toward objectivity shouldn’t this contradiction be pointed out?

  • Pat Said: November 10th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
    • Julia, I knew there was a song about rain and rainbows. Ha. Thanks! My sentiment exactly. Gotta deal with the rain first.
      Marco, we all know that politicians must say the “popular” thing to get into office, but once they are in there, especially the second four years, they can let their hearts lead them. Barack is absolutely for gay marriage. He has said he just doesn’t think Americans are READY for it. But he believes we should have the same rights. He has even talked about his mother and father in relation to gay marriage, so GIVE HIM A BREAK! Give him a chance to prove he is on our side! HE WILL!

  • Ophidimancer Said: November 10th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
    • Actually, Obama’s stated position on gay couples is one of full legal and constitutional equality with straight couples.

      That he won’t call our unions “marriage” is the only wrong, and something that he even admits is wrong.

      Other than that, he’s an advocate of full legal equality.

  • Chris Said: November 10th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
    • Let’s hope so….but why has Obama not come out against Prop 8 post-election? Especailly since his voice and image were used in emailings and robocalls by the Yes on 8 people to African-Americans.

  • randy Said: November 10th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
    • That he won’t discriminate should be a given without out having to publish a memo. I notice that he includes the phrase where prohibited by law or some such. Which means he has an escape clause.If your not going to discriminate why the proviso. Because you are already against gay marriage that’
      s why.The federal gov. already discriminates against us with there 1138 items that protect them and not us. And as for not calling it marriage and still wanting us to have the same rights…I guess that he’’s right…..we’ll still get there with you…we’ll just be in the back of the bus when it pulls into the station. Thanks for nothing. Your silence on the Gay Rights flushed down the toilet in Ca.Fl and Az along with your victory is deafening. President of the United Straights if you ask me.

  • blacksteel Said: November 10th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
    • Marco said: “How can anyone write an article discussing the Obama/Biden non-discrimination statement and not discuss how it contradicts the Obama/Biden position on gay marriage?”

      Apparently, no matter what Obama says or does in support of gays is acceptable to some. Seems like he has to do everything at once, or else he’s attacked. Maybe McCain/Palin and the religious right would have been better for gays?

      And here I’ve been wondering when “Wayne” would show up to comment on this article and find a way to twist it against Obama. Guess “Wayne” isn’t needed after all…

  • AlexH Said: November 10th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
    • Yeah, when Barack included us in his acceptance speech it felt like change was coming. I do believe once he takes office things will be changing for the better for LGBT equality across this country. Prop 8 is a temporary set back for us Californians, but it won’t last.

  • LOrion Said: November 10th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
    • NEXT steps…pass Hate Crimes Law, pass fully inclusive ENDA, and repeal DOMA and DADT. After all aren’ the military ‘federal employees’?

  • Rachel Said: November 10th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
    • As a transsexual fired from her job and kicked off ENDA, I understand frustration and anger more than anyone. With that being said, Obama has brilliant political insight. The President cannot legalize gay marriage (in fact, constitutionally, marriage is up to the states to administer) and it was possible he could have lost the election had he made a strong statement against Prop8. Cowardice…perhaps. Smart politics….yes.

      We lost California….for now. If the Dems can repeal DADT and DOMA and pass an inclusive ENDA while we hang onto marriage rights in Massachusetts and Connecticut…perhaps even add NY or NJ…this would be awesome progress. CA will come around. It is still the most liberal state. A 50% referendum on civil rights is madness. But keep in mind, you only need 50% to reverse it. Put it on the ballot next year…we lost the battle but not the war,

  • Marco Said: November 11th, 2008 at 12:16 am
    • Well, I hope the positive sentiment carries through, but I find it a bit premature and Utopian, and I fear any comparision to McCain/Palin to make the President Elect sound more pro-GLBT.

      It kinda diminishes the point when one side of the analogy is a bar so low as to make for a ridiculous comparison, no?

      I also remember the Clinton era, and the lesson that politicians currying political favor with vague promises for popular expedience can cause as much harm as good.

      If not for Clinton’s stirring the pot of culture without conviction would we have ended up with “Don’t Ask; Don’t Tell” and “DOMA?”

      I don’t mind the Obama zeal, but saying he is pro-GLBT is kinda like saying he is anti-war, and exactly when is Obama going to send those two additional brigades to Afghanistan?

      I am just suggesting we ought suspend hagiography and bring a bit of balance to the perspective of politicians saying popular things by actually waiting on their achievements and not their promises.

      Kagaroos!!

  • Obamaisanahole Said: November 11th, 2008 at 12:55 am
    • Well, Ophidimancer, other than the US Constitution originally stating the Negroes were to be considered only three-fifths of a human being, it was a perfect document.

      Ophidimancer said: “That he (Obama) won’t call our Unions “marriage” is the only wrong…Other than that, he’s an advocate of full legal equality.{

      ….Uh…really…that’s sort of an oxymoron isn’t, Ophidimancer? Almost full legal Equality isn’t Equality. Now is it? Sort of like being a little pregnant. Try to be a bit more honest.

      I suppose you, Ophidimancer, would be tickled pink with Obama treating the GLBT community as if they were each three-fifths of a American citizen so you could call it “full Equality”. WTF is that? How deluded can you be?

  • Kris Said: November 11th, 2008 at 1:39 am
    • Like anyone wants to listen to you, obamaisanahole, grow up. Just seeing your “name” is something that the children say in schools, so go back to school, and learn, not just sit on your ass, and twiddle your thumbs.

 
Login

Register
Lost your password?


or Login with Facebook