LGBT News Second employee alleges chase bank surveyed staff's lgbt loyalty

Every company I have worked for has optionally allowed me to identify as LGBT.

Most large companies have diversity programs, and LGBT can be an invisible minority. There are also many straight folk that consider themselves to be LGBT allies so, those folks would want to be part of the diversity programs.

Just because you don't consider yourself an ally doesn't mean you are for or against LGBT folk. Really this just feels like someone trying to manufacture controversy to get attention. That or just plain ignorance.

 

I took the survey. The question appeared--the answers to the whole survey, not just to this question, were collected in a manner which allowed statistics to be gleaned without correlating answers to particular people. Participation in the survey was not required nor was an answer to any particular question. JPMorgan has an incredibly supportive record when it comes to LGBT rights. For instance, not only do they provide domestic partner benefits but, because such benefits when they are provided to someone who is not a legal direct relation of the employee result in an extra burden to the employee under the US tax code, JPMorgan Chase makes up the difference by adding it to the employees base pay. In other words in order to insure that I, who insure my domestic partner, end up with the same take home pay as my colleague who insures his wife--they technically pay me more to make up for what they perceive to be the anti-LGBT unfairness of the tax code. While it does seem true that expressing openly anti-LGBT opinions in a way that made coworkers or customer feel uncomfortable could potentially adversely affect one's employment at JPMorgan Chase I feel certain that not saying yes on that question would have no negative effects.

 

They are asking for simple demographic information. If a person does not want to disclose this, then they do not have to. The company that I work for asks almost the same question to try to find out how their diversity is spread out.

 

It certainly seems like they're overstepping their bounds a bit. I don't quite agree with the fine individuals writing comments that this is tantamount to fascism, but I do think it's inappropriate for a company to ask employees about their personal politics.

That being said, the process does seem pretty anonymous, and for the cause of statistics, and not to root out the crazies "Family values" crowd.

 

They have these types of surveys at my place of employment too; though the last question is not on there (asking if you're an ally is a new one to me). However, our surveys, so we're told, are not even connected to our name and there is no way of personally identifying. Hopefully that is true and true at all places of employment. Also, you can skip any questions you'd like.

 

It's no different than asking someone their ethnicity. A lot of companies can get tax breaks or other perks if they have certain demographics in their employ. And as the LGBT community is starting to actually get widespread protections under the law as a minority, these questions will become common.

Just as with ethnicity, you are allowed to decline to answer.

 

I work for a major university, and we have an extremely accepting policy regarding sexual preference and gender, or the expression thereof. We do have awareness trainings and periodic emails discussing the University's diversity policy, but I can't see the need for these kinds of questions...in the 7 years I've been here, there has been no such survey, and I feel much of the campus would find it needlessly intrusive. We already have clear policies, and a rigorous set of programs to promote tolerance, and help anyone who feels intimidated. I see no need for the last two questions.

 

I'd also question its relevance as an answer to that particular question. Are homosexual allies a recognizer minority deserving protection like the others?

Also, just because someone doesn't identify as an "ally" doesn't mean they are homophobic non-supportive of gay rights. Same as you can have people who live very sustainable lifestyles but wouldn't identify as "eco activists", they might just see themselves as living an ordinary life.

We have similar surveys, and whilst anonymous, I decline to answer. I just don't see what the company can possibly do with that knowledge - its not like gay people require special accommodations like other minorities might (religious miniroties might need prayer time, single mothers might need flexible work hours etc).

The only thing I've ever seen these things used for is getting additional government funding for meeting their minority quotas or for giving themselves good publicity ("we employ x amount of gay people, aren't we great?!"); it almost comes across sounding like "they are gay, but we still employ them, aren't we kind?". I find the thought of being used as some PR tool by the company incredibly patronizing. I also don't see why they think employing LGBT people should be something worthy of a pat on the back - it should be something completely ordinary.

 

I agree there are benefit for the company and perhaps the person to self identify, but with the tolerance acceptance policy and the privacy, self belief, you shouldn't be asked to identify. There should be an option to not answer and the poll should be anonymous to any party.