| Topic Name: |
Has Hewitt really lived up to what we promise? |
| Message Name: |
supportive vs. exploitive |
| Date Posted: |
02/17/2006 |
| In Reply To: |
There is a huge difference between providing benefits to employees (adoption benefits to gay couples and straight couples, health care coverage for spouses and spousal equivlents) and putting up posters in the workplace that say, "Hi, I'm a lesbian and use less than common, but socially acceptable, sexual partners and positions."
One is supportive while the other is exploitive.
The original post was not about the benefits and the support, but about the exploitation. |
| Message: |
is in the eye of the beholder. Every benefit geared towards one segment comes somewhat at the expense of others. It is true that single associates get fewer benefits than married associates and couples get fewer than those with children. They don't get a compensating bump in pay for using less resources: they subsidize the others. People who stay healthy pay for their gym memberships while those who let themselves go get their drugs and procedures paid for (in no small measure by the premiums paid by and for the healthy people). Frankly, this is a more serious fairnesss issue than whether or not somebody puts up some posters (cheap to produce) or messages on The Source (costs next to nothing). People here who are objecting to diversity messages are simply bothered to be reminded that there are people in the world different from them who are proud and want to be heard. Why it bothers them so much is hard to explain, except as a result of their own insecurities. People who are secure in their own ways are generally quite happy, or at least content, to see others express their own beliefs.
|
|
