This group presentation was part of the module “Managing Diversity and Equal Opportunities”. The presentation received a 2.1 grade.

2. Introduction; items
discussed

 Overview of LGBT employees; LGBT graduates
 The business case
 Case studies
 Legal perspective
 Theory
 Implications for managers
 Critical review
 Conclusion

3. Overview
 subject although neglected
 Broad knowledge about the
still occurs more often then we might realise
 Problems exists as the industries all so diversified and
many employers feel uncomfortable to hire people
with different sexuality (Fear/Prejudice)
 Good Example which proves that sexual orientation
affect existence of people within the workplace is that
lesbians earn up to 14% less than their heterosexual
female peers with similar jobs, education, age and
residence.
According to Badgett, M.V.

4. What are the benefits for the
business?

 Show business is well diversified
 Less employee turnover (LGBT employees value
employment more than heterosexuals)
 New ideas and greater perspective for the business
(good impression on customers, aim at different
groups)
 Enhance corporate reputation

5. LGBT graduates

 Graduate recruiters have a positive attitude towards
LGBT employees
 recognising there is a wide pool of talent
 Employers consider ability most important during
recession
 The business case; pink pound, marketing, LGBT
consumer spending £70 billion
 Stonewall group starting out guide
 Geographical differences; LGBT graduates most attracted
to large cities
(Real world magazine)

6. Criticism of the business
case
heterosexual employees
 Assumes wages are the same for LGBT workers and
 Arabheibsni (2004) highlights wage variations ;
heterosexual males earn average of £11.30 p/h
compared to gay men
 Lesbians earn more than heterosexual women
 Regional variations in employers attitudes towards
discrimination; Arabheibsni (2004)
 Company attitudes vary according to location and
industry
(Arabsheibani et al 2004)

7. Continued
 Policy's are focused on younger LGBT employees;
particular recruitment

 Sargent (2009) mangers don’t recognise the differing
needs of specific types of LGBT employees
 Policies focused on recruitment
 Older LGBT candidates felt they faced most
discrimination when applying for jobs
 Lack of career progression for older LGBT’s
 older lesbian had the most difficulty progressing in
their career
 Older lesbians, Older gay employees
(Sargeant. M (2009);

8. Theory
 Utilitarian view;
 society
 you need diversity in order to be productive
 Benefits of diversity benefit wider
 Criticism of utilitarian view
 Encourages some discrimination as it suggested that
discrimination against a particular group is ok if it
benefits wider society
 Rights view;
 All people have a equal right to be treated fairly
 Criticism of rights view
 Sometimes its of economic benefit to lack diveristy
(La Follette) (Kirton and Greene)

9. Continued
 Justice view;
job criteria only
 Unfair to treat people differently
 Should discriminate according to
 Equal opportunities;
 Liberal approach; philosophy of sameness, if barriers are
removed then a free labour market will run
 Diversity management;
 economic philosophy, capitalize on skills of workforce,
procedural
 Radical viewpoint; still discriminate against candidates based
on ability,
 Criticisms; subjective, unspoken quotas, PR stunt

10. Case study; industry attitudes

 Attitudes to LGBT workers vary widely according to
industry
 Companies keen to be seen as LGBT friendly
 Stonewall group top 100 LGBT friendly employers
 Private sector; 92% of LGBT employees at EY felt company
was inclusive
 Public sector; Government, police, education and NHS
most LGBT friendly
 NHS; March 2011 introduction of NHS leadership
program exclusively for LGBT employees provided by
stonewall
 57% of SMEs view EO as important
(Stonewall group) (Real world magazine 2011) (Cassell et al 2000) (Palmer
and Bradley 2006)

11. continued
 Criticism
 PR stunt; fill unspoken quotas

 ignores restrictions of social class; how many people at
Earnest and Young came from privileged backgrounds?
 Large companies have lots of HR staff to design diversity
policies
 Statistics lack validity; some employees don't reveal their
sexuality
 Research shows that SMEs are less effective at
implementing EO policys but are better at sustaining
them
 Utilitarian - the business needs to make money
 Justice; managers influence is strong in implementation
of EO in SMES
(These are my opinions so don’t need referencing)

12. References
