WHAT DO EMPLOYERS OWE LGBT EMPLOYEES IN EXPAT ASSIGNMENTS? When lesbian, g-a-y,
ID: 359031 • Letter: W
Question
WHAT DO EMPLOYERS OWE LGBT EMPLOYEES IN EXPAT ASSIGNMENTS?
When lesbian, g-a-y, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) employees are offered an assignment in another coun- try, they face some considerations that aren’t likely to affect their straight colleagues: how their sexual orienta- tion will be treated in the new country. While some coun- tries have relaxed attitudes, dozens frown on or even criminalize same-sex relationships and other behavior that doesn’t conform to their gender norms. An assign- ment in one of those countries could be uncomfortable at best and dangerous at worst. In countries that outlaw same-sex relations, punishments include prison and, in a few cases, even the death penalty. Even where the laws aren’t enforced, they contribute to a climate in which people don’t report violence against or black- mail of LGBT persons. With this in mind, LGBT managers acknowledge turning down foreign assignments in order to protect themselves.
LGBT employees who accept these assignments can expect some extra surprises or challenges. One challenge—easier for single and childless employees—is a need to hide their identity. An employee of a British company, while working in Nigeria, asked her British HR department not to share with her local colleagues that her next of kin was her wife, because she expected prob- lems could result. On the positive side, some employees find LGBT subcultures that warmly welcome them and help them navigate the new culture where they are posted. And some find that being an expat already marks them as “different” in the eyes of locals, so the sexual orienta- tion doesn’t matter much.
Given that LGBT employees often are treated differ- ently in foreign assignments, employers have to deter- mine what their role will be in offering the assignments. For example, they might offer LGBT employees overseas assignments only in countries where they believe these employees can travel and live safely. Or they might ensure that their cross-cultural training touches on these issues, regardless of any assumptions about employees’ sexual orientation, so that all employees can make informed decisions. Some companies with a commitment to equal opportunity go further and try to influence change in the countries where they operate—for example by pointing out that anti-LGBT laws make the countries less attractive to multinational businesses.
Questions
1. How would you apply the principle of justice or fairness to employers’ decisions about whether and how to offer foreign assignments to LGBT employees?
2. What would be the most ethical way for employers to address the safety risks of asking a LGBT employee to work in a country such as Dubai, Russia, or Uganda, where laws are hostile to homosexuality?
Explanation / Answer
(1)
According to Rawl's theory of justice, the risks and rewards should be evenly distributed among the members of a society. Uneven distribution is just only when the worst off become better off than they might be under an equal distribution. Consider the organization as the society and the employees as its members. When LGBT are sent for foreign assignments, the risks are more than the other employees of the organization. So, the risk is unevenly distributed while the reward remaining the same for all. This uneven distribution of risk is unjust because even at a hypothetical condition of equal distribution of risk and reward (for example, when it is not possible to adjust the risks, the reward is less for the other employees to balance the risk and reward), the LGBT employees will not have lesser reward than now. To make the decision of sending the LGBT employees, the employers should make their compensation distinctively better than the other employees so that the unequal distribution is justified by the better condition of the LGBTs with respect to their position in a hypothetical equal distribution.
(2)
First and foremost is that the employers should always try to find the alternatives of LGBTs when it comes to sending these employees to the mentioned nations. Moreover, the employees should be informed well regarding the risk and should be given a free consent regarding his/ her decision-making of taking the assignment. If at all, that is not possible to find alternatives of LGBTs (which should be rare cases!), due care and safety measures must be taken. For example, the employers can hide the credentials and personal information from the host country, provide residence and security at the host country, and have continuous communication and feedback from the concerned employee. The employers can also contact the embassy in the host country in advance in order to take care of the employee.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.