20/20's 411 on Library of Congress Firing

Submitted by Blake on October 21, 2005 - 9:23pm
Topic: 
Employment & Work Stories
Politics

Babylon Sister writes "This Friday, October 21, ABC's 20/20 will run a story on Diane Schroer at 10:00 PM EDT. Diane has an amazing story. A retired Army Special Forces Colonel,
Diane accepted a job researching terrorism for the Library of Congress, only to
have the offer rescinded when she told her supervisor that she is transgender..

Talking to the American public about gender identity discrimination is a
significant challenge. We hope Diane's story will be a bit of help in changing
that. Diane's long and distinguished record of service in the military over 25
years makes what the Library of Congress did seem particularly unfair, even to
people who are usually difficult for us to reach. That the government chose
this moment to toss aside expertise on counterterrorism only makes the situation
more absurd. Nobody makes the case better than Diane herself. As she put it in
a speech this summer, "...for 26 years I went into every godforsaken hell-hole
anyone could conceive of, without so much as a whimper--Port Au Prince,
Mogadishu, Kinshasa...only to be told I was not good enough to work for the
federal government..."

We are hoping Diane and her case against the Library of Congress will advance
the national conversation on gender identity. (More information about her case
is available at
http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRig hts.cfm?ID=18385&c=105>
http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRig hts.cfm?ID=18385&c=105)

Matt Coles
Director
ACLU Lesbian & Gay Rights and AIDS Projects
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, NY 10004
(212) 549-2627
http://www.aclu.org/LGBT> http://www.aclu.org/LGBT"

Comments

Submitted by Amke on October 22, 2005 - 8:34pm.

I happened to but I was personally disappointed in how little time/focus they put on the library/discrimination issue.... not that the entire story/situation wasn't interesting/important.... I really want to keep an eye on this and see what happens. I can't imagine how the LOC can possibly claim that they acted legally in what they did!

Submitted by Babylon Sister on October 22, 2005 - 10:26pm.

I watched - They were pretty slim on the discussion of the legal basis for the suit (I'm sure it's under Title VII - which was upheld as covering transgender people in some federal districts - but denied in others. It applies the concept of sex stereotype discrimination to transgender people. It will at some point be likely resolved at the level of the Supreme's. A positive decision in the DC district would be very powerful as how it sees many of these cases can presages the Supreme's decisions - and is often a posting given to those thought worthy of being a Supreme. They didn't mention that the DC non-discrimination ordinance has been interpreted to cover transgender people under the category of appearance - but being the federal government & possibly? considered an arm of Congress - it may not apply. Transgender people were excluded from federal sex discrimination legislation by previous court decisions - and excluded from coverage under the ADA when it was drafted - at the behest of Jesse Helms.

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=112357831528 4

Here's a list of local non-discrimination ordnances that cover this category of discrimination:

http://transgenderlaw.org/ndlaws/chart.pdf

And yes much too slim on the Library of Congress - they should have found a way to discuss why LOC made the decision to rescind the offer - there were a few statements reported. They should have been put on record - especially as a taxpayer funded institution. Or they could have interviewed employees/former employees or union reps. At least a glimpse of the face of the people who made the decision - they should have stopped them leaving the building and asked for a comment. Their should be some accountability for the decision.

She seemed poised, articulate and quite capable. Certainly up to the task . I liked that they portrayed her as a whole person with achievements, family & interests - that being transsexual wasn't the sum total of her existence. And that they showed how the discrimination the LOC chose to engage in affected friends & her whole family.

I do think however think it's time for people to retire the obligatory gratuitous shot of a transgender woman putting on makeup. I can't imagine they would find it appropriate for any other professional woman.

Submitted by Babylon Sister on October 24, 2005 - 4:18pm.

It does appear that the basis of the suit is Title VII – copies of the original company, Plaintiff’s Response and the Complainant’s Reply to the LOC’s Response are online at:

http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRig hts.cfm?ID=19296&c=105
http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRig hts.cfm?ID=19170&c=105
http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRig hts.cfm?ID=18383&c=105

The person making the hiring decision and perhaps then making the decision to discriminate – may be Charlotte Preece. Though of course – ultimate responsibility resides with Dr. James Billington as Librarian of Congress.

It is important to note that not only does the District of Columbia outlaw this type of discrimination – over 150 Members of Congress have stated that they personally find it unacceptable and changed their own hiring policies to cover transgender people. If the Library of Congress serves these members – this seems to be a good time to ask these members to demand an accounting from the Librarian of Congress and the hiring officer.

I should update a previous statement – yes the ADA excludes transsexuals for coverage – but only if the person in question has no physical aspects to their transsexuality. If Ms. Droer has any physical basis whatsoever to her condition – this would seems another avenue she could sue under.

*Pledges Project – Over 150 Members of Congress have signed Pledges to not discriminate based upon gender identity or sexual orientation in hiring in their Congressional Offices.

http://www.hrc.org/Content/ContentGroups/Publicati ons1/2004ScoreCard.pdf

Partial List:

[Download and print this page - PDF]
At a Glance...
145 Total signatories
21 Senators
124 Representatives
15 Republicans
128 Democrats
2 Independents
Arizona
Rep. Raul M. Grijalva (D)
Rep. Jim Kolbe (R)
Rep. Ed Pastor (D)
California
Rep. Joe Baca (D)
Rep. Xavier Becerra (D)
Rep. Anna Eshoo (D)
Rep. Sam Farr (D)
Rep. Bob Filner (D)
Rep. Jane Harman (D)
Rep. Michael Honda (D)
Rep. Tom Lantos (D)
Rep. Jerry Lewis (R)
Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D)
Rep. Grace Napolitano (D)
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D)
Rep. Linda Sanchez (D)
Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D)
Rep. Adam Schiff (D)
Rep. Hilda Solis (D)
Rep. Pete Stark (D)
Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D)
Rep. Mike Thompson (D)
Rep. Maxine Waters (D)
Rep. Diane Watson (D)
Rep. Henry Waxman (D)
Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D)

Colorado
Rep. Diana DeGette (D)
Rep. Tom Tancredo (R)
Rep. Mark Udall (D)
Connecticut
Sen. Christopher Dodd (D)
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D)
Rep. John Larson (D)
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D)
Rep. Christopher Shays (R)
Rep. Rob Simmons (R)

District of Columbia
Eleanor Holmes Norton (D)

Florida
Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R)
Rep. Robert Wexler (D)
Georgia
Sen. Zell Miller (D)
Rep. John Lewis (D)
Rep. Denise Majette (D)
Rep. David Scott (D)

Hawaii
Sen. Daniel Inouye (D)
Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D)
Rep. Ed Case (D)

Illinois
Rep. Jerry Costello (D)
Rep. Danny Davis (D)
Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D)
Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D)
Rep. Jesse Jackson (D)
Rep. Bobby Rush (D)
Rep. Janice Schakowsky (D)
Rep. John M. Shimkus (R)
Indiana
Rep. Julia Carson (D)

Iowa
Rep. James Leach (R)

Kansas
Rep. Dennis Moore (D)

Louisiana
Sen. John B. Breaux (D)
Sen. Mary Landrieu (D)
Rep. William Jefferson (D)
Rep. Jim McCrery (R)
Maine
Rep. Tom Allen (D)
Rep. Michael Michaud (D)
Maryland
Rep. Elijah Cummings (D)
Rep. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger (D)
Rep. Chris Van Hollen Jr. (D)
Rep. Albert Wynn (D)
Massachusetts
Sen. Edward Kennedy (D)
Sen. John Kerry (D)
Rep. William Delahunt (D)
Rep. James McGovern (D)
Rep. John Olver (D)

Michigan
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D)
Rep. Sander M. Levin (D)

Minnesota
Sen. Mark Dayton (D)
Rep. Betty McCollum (D)
Rep. James L. Oberstar (D)
Rep. Martin Sabo (D)
Mississippi
Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D)
Missouri
Rep. William Lacy Clay Jr. (D)
Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (D)

Nevada
Rep. Shelley Berkley (D)
New Hampshire
Rep. Jeb Bradley (R)

New Jersey
Sen. Jon Corzine (D)
Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D)
Rep. Robert Andrews (D)
Rep. Rush Holt (D)
Rep. Robert Menendez (D)
Rep. Frank Pallone (D)
Rep. Bill Pascrell (D)
Rep. Donald Payne (D)
Rep. Steve Rothman (D)

New York
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D)
Rep. Joseph Crowley (D)
Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D)
Rep. Nita Lowey (D)
Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D)
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D)
Rep. Michael McNulty (D)
Rep. Gregory W. Meeks (D)
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D)
Rep. Charles Rangel (D)
Rep. Edolphus Towns (D)
Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D)
Rep. James T. Walsh (R)

North Carolina
Rep. Frank W. Ballance Jr. (D)
Rep. Brad Miller (D)
Rep. David Price (D)
North Dakota
Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D)

Ohio
Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D)
Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (D)
Rep. Deb Pryce (R)
Rep. Tim Ryan (D)

Oklahoma
Rep. Brad Carson (D)

Oregon
Sen. Gordon Smith (R)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D)
Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D)
Rep. David Wu (D)
Pennsylvania
Rep. Robert Brady (D)
Rep. Mike Doyle (D)
Rep. Jim Greenwood (R)

Rhode Island
Sen. Lincoln Chaffee (R)
Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D)
Rep. Jim Langevin (D)
Sen. Jack Reed (D)

Tennessee
Rep. Jim Cooper (D)

Texas
Rep. Chris Bell (D)
Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D)
Rep. Martin Frost (D)
Rep. Charles Gonzales (D)
Rep. Gene Green (D)
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D)
Rep. Nick Lampson (D)

Utah
Rep. Jim Matheson (D)
Vermont
Sen. James Jefford (I)
Rep. Bernard Sanders (I)

Virginia
Rep. Jim Moran (D)

Washington
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D)
Rep. Brian Baird (D)
Rep. Jay Inslee (D)
Rep. Richard Larsen (D)
Rep. Jim McDermott (D)
Rep. Adam Smith (D)

Wisconsin
Sen. Russell Feingold (D)
Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D)
Last updated Oct. 27, 2003

Submitted by lislemck on October 25, 2005 - 1:05am.

I watched as well, and was very disappointed that there wasn't more discussion of the LOC. Not even a discussion of what the position was, CRS I think. But something to explain LOC's role beyond storehouse would have been nice. Does the public know why LOC would want a terrorism expert?

I cannot see how any employer can in good conscience make a job offer and then take it away based on gender identity. For me, it is like racism, sexism, classism, homophobia--it just doesn't bear up with what hiring the best person is supposed to be about. The fact that no one from the LOC was willing to defend or explain their position, begging your pardons, speaks volumes.