Workplace Harassment and Attitudes towards LGBT People: Differences across Human Service Occupations in South Florida

Research documents that discrimination and harassment directed toward lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals are ongoing and prevalent in the workplaces in the United States. However, no studies have identified the specific occupations wherein LGBT-discrimination and harassment are most severe. Furthermore, no study has examined how prepared and comfortable employees feel in addressing discriminatory situations. Utilizing a dataset comprised of 1,691 participants, in this exploratory study we sought to identify whether differences in workplace environment toward LGBT individuals existed across four human service occupations (mental health, medicine, education, and public and private government-related non-profit community organizations). We found that education professionals reported the highest incidences of verbal and physical harassment directed toward LGBT individuals. Education professionals also reported feeling least prepared to handle sexual orientation and genderrelated issues despite being most likely to speak-up against sexual orientation and gender-identity bullying. Medical professionals reported receiving the least amount of training on LGBT-related contact. Differences across race/ethnicity and gender regarding discriminatory LGBT attitudes and environment were also found. Our results offer important implications for researchers and workplace equality advocates that seek to foster affirming workplace environments for sexual and gender minorities. Florida Public Health Review, 2017; 14, 1-12. BACKGROUND A fundamental responsibility and purpose of human service occupations is to meet the needs of all people and improve individuals’ quality of life. Inherent in these purposes is the attention and sensitivity to affirming people’s cultural diversity, including sexual orientation and gender identity. Within the United States workforce, however, institutional and interpersonal discrimination toward lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals is a pervasive problem. Researchers have identified workplace policies and practices that discriminate against members of the LGBT community (e.g., hiring practices, organizational discrimination policies, etc.) as well as incidents of verbal and physical aggression directed toward LGBTs (Badgett, Lau, Sears, & Ho, 2007). In a nationwide report of workplace discrimination against LGBTs, Pizer, Sears, Mallory, and Hunter (2012) noted that 37% of lesbian and gay individuals experienced workplace harassment or discrimination within the past five years. Further, 12% of lesbians and gays reported losing their job due to their sexual orientation, and 90% of transgender respondents reported harassment or mistreatment at work because of their gender identity. Estimates place eight million self-identified LGBT individuals in the country’s workforce (Sears, Mallory, & Hunter, 2009), with nearly 328,000 of these employees located in Florida (Mallory & Sears, 2015). The need to curtail heterosexism and discrimination in the workplace is paramount. We seek to advance the field’s knowledge of LGBT workplace discrimination by identifying specific human service occupations wherein LGBT individuals may be at greater risk due to prevalent exposure to discriminatory environments. We seek to identify in which human service occupations employees feel the most equipped and comfortable handling discrimination against LGBTs. Identifying occupations that are most discriminatory and where employees feel the least prepared to deal with these matters is critical so that intervention specialists may target these occupations with programs to foster an LGBT-affirming workplace climate. Attention to LGBT-specific discrimination and harassment in the workplace has become a growing area of interest. Researchers note that LGBT 1 Sheridan et al.: Workplace Harassment and Attitudes towards LGBT People: Differenc Published by UNF Digital Commons, 2017 Florida Public Health Review, 2017; 14, 1-12. Page 2 http://www.ut.edu/floridapublichealthreview/ discrimination is a pervasive issue that spans institutional policies and practices (e.g., hiring practices, same-sex partner benefits, and inclusion of sexual orientation within nondiscrimination policies) as well as interpersonal interactions with coworkers and supervisors. For example, 46.4% of participants reported the absence of a LGBT resource at their workplace (Ragins & Cornwell, 2001). Additionally, in a 2009 non-probability sample collected by Herek, gay men and lesbian women reported either being fired from their job or denied a promotion. In addition to self-report data, experimental studies examining LGBT workplace discrimination also found evidence for discrimination in hiring practices (Horvath & Ryan, 2003). One report among heterosexual employees also noted that 12% to 30% of those surveyed witnessed LGBT discrimination in their workplace (Pizer et al, 2012) further underscoring the prevalence of discriminatory environments at work. The ubiquity of discrimination and harassment in the workforce is a troubling issue facing the LGBT community for two reasons. First, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (2013) indicates that most Americans spend an average of 8.8 hours of their day devoted to work-related activities. For LGBT individuals working in a discriminatory environment, the majority of their day is steeped within an environment of potential discrimination, stigma, and prejudice. According to the minority stress theory, ongoing stress associated with sexual minority stigma, prejudice, and discrimination is directly linked to a host of negative health outcomes (Meyer, 2003), thereby explaining the health disparities between LGBT people and their heterosexual counterparts. Indeed, researchers have confirmed that LGBT workplace discrimination is linked to detrimental outcomes, including those that are work-related as well as those that affect the overall health and wellbeing of LGBTs (Brenner, Bradley, Lyons, & Fassinger, 2010; Brewster, Velez, DeBlaere, & Moradi, 2012; Herek & Garnets, 2007; Ragins & Cornwell, 2001). For example, Liddle et al. (2004) found that employee creativity and collaboration is hindered in a hostile environment resulting in decreased productivity. Intentions of quitting one’s job due to LGBT discrimination also has been documented (Ragins & Cornwell, 2001). Among transgender individuals, Brewster et al. (2012) found that discrimination and harassment in the workplace was significantly associated with decreased workplace satisfaction. With respect to mental health, Smith and Ingram (2004) noted increased reports of depressive symptoms and psychological distress among lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals due to workplace heterosexism. Furthermore, LGBT employees’ physical and mental health is negatively affected due to feelings of anxiety and isolation, and fear of LGBT identity disclosure (Liddle et al., 2004). The research is compelling that discriminatory workplace environments lead to adverse consequences for LGBT individuals. However, what is less clear is which occupations place LGBT employees at most risk of exposure to discriminatory environments. In order to design and implement interventions to reduce LGBT discriminatory environments, it is first necessary to identify which occupations are in immediate need, so that these professions may be targeted. However, to date, no studies have compared the LGBT attitudes and related comfort and skill levels of employees across different occupations. In advancing the field’s knowledge of LGBT workplace discrimination, the purpose of this current study was to assess for differences in discriminatory LGBT environments across selected human service occupations. Attending to discriminatory environments in the human service sector makes an important contribution to the literature given the human service sector’s emphasis on quality of life, diversity, and well-being. Identifying particular human service occupations containing discriminatory LGBT environments allows researchers and workplace equality advocates to focus on human service occupations most in need of intervention, training, and psychoeducation on sexual orientation and gender-identity topics. Such training will benefit LGBT employees of these occupations and will also allow human service professionals to better serve communities and ensure the health and well-being of their LGBT clients. Purpose In addressing the purpose of our study, we examined the LGBT attitudes and environments across four human service occupations in Florida, including: (1) mental health, (2) medicine, (3) education, and (4) public and private non-profit organizations. For each of these occupational sectors, at least one study documented the presence of LGBT discrimination (e.g., Burke & White, 2001; Harbin, Leach, & Eells, 2008; Pizer et al., 2012). We also assessed demographic differences by race/ethnicity and gender as researchers have noted differences in personal attitudes toward LGBT individuals based upon these demographic variables. Among racial groups, Durell, Chiong, and Battle (2007) found in a New York City sample that black individuals 2 Florida Public Health Review, Vol. 14 [2017], Art. 1 https://digitalcommons.unf.edu/fphr/vol14/iss1/1 Florida Public Health Review, 2017; 14, 1-12. Page 3 http://www.ut.edu/floridapublichealthreview/ reported higher levels of homophobia than their white, Latino, and Asian counterparts. Negy and Eisenman (2005) also found that African-American college students had modestly higher homophobia than Whites. Regarding gender differences in personal attitudes toward LGBT individuals, researchers have found that men report more negative attitudes than women (Herek, 1988; Nagoshi et al., 2008). We believe such differences in negative LGBT attitudes among race/ethnicity and gender also may occur in the workplace, and therefore, we consider these variables in our study. Fin