“The only constant is change” is one of the more enduring clichés in our lexicon. Tired-sounding it is, to be sure, but it endures for a good reason: because it is true. And since change is constant, there is a constant need to adjust to it, which is stressful and energy-sapping.
It could help to consider that there are different kinds of change. There is the kind that makes us arch our eyebrows at the irony it represents, but then it allows us to go back to our regular routines and adjust to it more or less at our own pace. One such change is the recent creation of the The Michigan Competitive Workforce Coalition. This is an alliance of major employers in the state that are advocating for expanding the worker protections in Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (ELCRA). Specifically, they want to protect people from employment discrimination based on their sexual orientation and/or gender identity. The Coalition sees changing ELCRA as not only the right thing to do ethically and socially, but the right thing to do for business. It is about making Michigan competitive in the war for talent.
Look who the founding members of the coalition are: AT&T, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Consumers Energy, Steelcase, Strategic Staffing Solutions, Whirlpool Corporation, Dow Chemical Company, Google, Herman Miller and PADNOS. Jim Murray, president of AT&T Michigan, makes the argument this way: “Rebuilding Michigan’s economy means building Michigan’s reputation as a state known for treating all people fairly, recognizing talent, rewarding work and a shared commitment to doing what it takes to strengthen our economy and attract jobs.”
The irony in this development lies in the fact that this major group of employers in the state wants to expand a law that directly regulates the day-to-day conduct of their businesses, and whose direct contacts with those businesses, when they occur, are typically negative and sometimes punitive. This is real change; it is richly ironic, and most HR professionals will be happy to adjust to it.
And then there is the kind of change that, welcome or not, has the potential to rattle us HR professionals to our very bones.
Have you ever heard the terms “gender fluid,” “gender variant,” “non-binary,” “agender,” “pangender”? According to The Daily Beast, these are just a few examples from a glossary of more than 50 gender-identity options now available to Facebook users. For the uninitiated, Facebook allows you to identify yourself as “male,” “female” or “custom,” the latter option presumably allowing for any gender identity you choose. According to the glossary, these are “non-binary” terms, meaning they are “a way of describing one’s gender as outside the two-gender (i.e., man/woman) system and/or challenging that system.” “Gender variant,” is an umbrella term “that refers to anyone who, for any reason, does not have a cisgender (i.e., standard gender) identity.” But there are even those who object to the term “gender variant” because it implies that any of the terms are deviations from the traditional (and more "natural") two-gender system. This fact tends to legitimize the two-gender system and de-legitimize anything else.
Do not make the mistake of writing all of this off as political correctness gone finally, irretrievably off the rails and out of the real world. Recently a “We the People” petition collected more than 100,000 signatures asking the White House to “legally recognize genders outside of the male-female binary (such as agender, pangender, gender fluid and others) and provide an option for those genders on all legal documents and records.” And consider that Australia and New Zealand both allow an “X” in place of an “M” or “F” on passports, and the U.K. recognizes “Mx” (pronounced either “mix” or “mux”) as a gender neutral title. There is every reason to expect plenty of advocacy for these kinds of gender distinctions in the American workplace sooner or later.
Now consider the fact that the Michigan legislature, if and when it decides to update ELCRA, will have to write into the law language that will cover all relevant circumstances. They will have to at least consider using some of these “non-binary” terms. And consider what the implications could be for such day-to-day issues as administrative compliance with the law and rest-room access in the workplace. Consider those factors, and you can see where this could very well go for HR professionals.
Not all change is good, and not all change is bad, but change is always constant. Welcome or not, sometimes it is easy to adjust to, and sometimes extremely hard to adjust to. But adjust to it we must.
Other source: lexology.com