1st Letter to HR
October 5, 2009
Dear XXXXXXXXX, V.P. of Human Resources:
I wanted to write you about concerns I have over our company’s harassment policy. Thank you in advance for taking the time to read my letter. If you permit, I would like to begin a dialogue with you in order to address my concerns regarding the following issues.
My over-arching concern is the specific mention in the harassment policy of individuals based upon their “sexual orientation” and “gender identity and/or expression”. 1) Primarily, I would like to know, what drove the company to include these lifestyles in its policy? Doing so seems to permit potentially detrimental affects that I will outline along with additional rationale.
It appears that there was little consideration given to how this affects those, such as myself, with deeply held religious values that deem these lifestyles inappropriate and offensive. As a Christian, I understand that God forbids such damaging ways of life. I also understand that Christ calls me to love all people, even if they are opposed to me. I must treat all people with dignity & respect because they are created in God’s image, even if I disagree with them. I am also morally obligated to compassionately challenge these sinful lifestyle choices and any imposition of their acceptance upon myself and others. For me not to do so would be hypocritical and ignoble.
Please understand the crucial difference between opposing a person’s behavioral choice and opposing the actual person. For example, I can beneficially despise the act of lying without despising the person doing it. I know there are a number of other teammates world-wide, Christian or otherwise, who share the same particular morals. 2) Was it considered that it can make certain leaders or other teammates uncomfortable and dishonorable when there is an expectation to discuss imposed acceptance of lifestyles they do not agree with?
This policy is additionally troubling when mixed with open-ended language regarding harassing conduct such as “either intentional or unintentional”, “includes, but is not limited to”, “whether actual or perceived” and “The mode or system of promulgation or display is not important”. The problem is that this opens the door for harassment claims against a person merely based upon their moral or religious beliefs that object to the aforementioned lifestyles. Someone could be “offended” simply because of another’s religious expression or possession of religious material, even if nothing specific was ever said or done. 3) How would our company handle such a claim? 4) Would someone be violating the policy if they simply said they disagreed with the lifestyle?
Furthermore, homosexual and transgender lifestyles are moral behavioral choices. Research confirms they are not biologically or genetically determined, unlike traits of most legitimate protected classes. People in these lifestyles can and do change their behavior in some instances which substantiates the designation as a moral choice. One may change their sexual identity, but the permanency of their genetic gender (XX or XY) can never be altered. Individuals reserve the right to freely choose their own lifestyles. 5) But, is it the company’s place to dictate which lifestyles are morally acceptable to its employees?
I agree with and encourage our company’s promotion of ethics in the workplace. Yet, one’s ethics depend on their morality. It is contradictory for me to condone immorality, especially when it takes place outside the workplace. Sexual conduct of any sort is forbidden in the workplace, but these lifestyles invite other disconcerting situations. 6) Would a teammate be “harassing” if they took offense to sharing a restroom occupied by another who had changed their sexual orientation or had a same-sex attraction?
In the best interest of all teammates, I urge the company not to take sides in this cultural battle. Sexual orientation and gender identity do not represent the type of diversity that is constructive to our businesses, nor is it conducive to positive teammate morale. The subject policy in its current form seems eminently hostile towards any who would find these lifestyles morally objectionable. If you have not heard from other teammates on these issues, this is likely due to such perceived intimidation.
Please know that I would never participate in or encourage any of the forbidden conduct outlined in the policy. No harassment, discrimination or retaliation towards anyone is ever acceptable in my view. I would expressly recommend a general statement to that end in place of any specific mention of the subject lifestyles. 7) Would the company seriously consider modifying the Harassment, Discrimination, and Retaliation Prevention Policy accordingly?
I realize today’s culture is insensitive and even aggressive towards religious views that are not all-embracing. However, if one’s religious morality brings no moral conviction, it is meaningless. I am grateful that our company is respectful of its teammates and strives to maintain a productive and safe work environment. I am also grateful for our company’s open door policy and the ability to approach you with these concerns directly. I look forward to hearing your response to the seven italicized questions. I would also welcome a discussion in person if you are ever in the Indianapolis area.
In Much Appreciation,
Josh XXXXXXXXX
Dear XXXXXXXXX, V.P. of Human Resources:
I wanted to write you about concerns I have over our company’s harassment policy. Thank you in advance for taking the time to read my letter. If you permit, I would like to begin a dialogue with you in order to address my concerns regarding the following issues.
My over-arching concern is the specific mention in the harassment policy of individuals based upon their “sexual orientation” and “gender identity and/or expression”. 1) Primarily, I would like to know, what drove the company to include these lifestyles in its policy? Doing so seems to permit potentially detrimental affects that I will outline along with additional rationale.
It appears that there was little consideration given to how this affects those, such as myself, with deeply held religious values that deem these lifestyles inappropriate and offensive. As a Christian, I understand that God forbids such damaging ways of life. I also understand that Christ calls me to love all people, even if they are opposed to me. I must treat all people with dignity & respect because they are created in God’s image, even if I disagree with them. I am also morally obligated to compassionately challenge these sinful lifestyle choices and any imposition of their acceptance upon myself and others. For me not to do so would be hypocritical and ignoble.
Please understand the crucial difference between opposing a person’s behavioral choice and opposing the actual person. For example, I can beneficially despise the act of lying without despising the person doing it. I know there are a number of other teammates world-wide, Christian or otherwise, who share the same particular morals. 2) Was it considered that it can make certain leaders or other teammates uncomfortable and dishonorable when there is an expectation to discuss imposed acceptance of lifestyles they do not agree with?
This policy is additionally troubling when mixed with open-ended language regarding harassing conduct such as “either intentional or unintentional”, “includes, but is not limited to”, “whether actual or perceived” and “The mode or system of promulgation or display is not important”. The problem is that this opens the door for harassment claims against a person merely based upon their moral or religious beliefs that object to the aforementioned lifestyles. Someone could be “offended” simply because of another’s religious expression or possession of religious material, even if nothing specific was ever said or done. 3) How would our company handle such a claim? 4) Would someone be violating the policy if they simply said they disagreed with the lifestyle?
Furthermore, homosexual and transgender lifestyles are moral behavioral choices. Research confirms they are not biologically or genetically determined, unlike traits of most legitimate protected classes. People in these lifestyles can and do change their behavior in some instances which substantiates the designation as a moral choice. One may change their sexual identity, but the permanency of their genetic gender (XX or XY) can never be altered. Individuals reserve the right to freely choose their own lifestyles. 5) But, is it the company’s place to dictate which lifestyles are morally acceptable to its employees?
I agree with and encourage our company’s promotion of ethics in the workplace. Yet, one’s ethics depend on their morality. It is contradictory for me to condone immorality, especially when it takes place outside the workplace. Sexual conduct of any sort is forbidden in the workplace, but these lifestyles invite other disconcerting situations. 6) Would a teammate be “harassing” if they took offense to sharing a restroom occupied by another who had changed their sexual orientation or had a same-sex attraction?
In the best interest of all teammates, I urge the company not to take sides in this cultural battle. Sexual orientation and gender identity do not represent the type of diversity that is constructive to our businesses, nor is it conducive to positive teammate morale. The subject policy in its current form seems eminently hostile towards any who would find these lifestyles morally objectionable. If you have not heard from other teammates on these issues, this is likely due to such perceived intimidation.
Please know that I would never participate in or encourage any of the forbidden conduct outlined in the policy. No harassment, discrimination or retaliation towards anyone is ever acceptable in my view. I would expressly recommend a general statement to that end in place of any specific mention of the subject lifestyles. 7) Would the company seriously consider modifying the Harassment, Discrimination, and Retaliation Prevention Policy accordingly?
I realize today’s culture is insensitive and even aggressive towards religious views that are not all-embracing. However, if one’s religious morality brings no moral conviction, it is meaningless. I am grateful that our company is respectful of its teammates and strives to maintain a productive and safe work environment. I am also grateful for our company’s open door policy and the ability to approach you with these concerns directly. I look forward to hearing your response to the seven italicized questions. I would also welcome a discussion in person if you are ever in the Indianapolis area.
In Much Appreciation,
Josh XXXXXXXXX