- 2009 Rank: 100 (Second year running!)
- 2008 Rank: 100 (Perfect score! The only Cincinnati based business to do so on the 2008 index)
- 2006 Rank: 80
Proctor and Gamble
- 2009 Rank: 85
- 2008 Rank: 85
- 2006 Rank: 65
- Missing Points: P&G did not include gender identity and expression in their non-discrimination policy.
- Notes: As of May, 2009, this policy has changed and the score is likely to increase in 2010.
Frost, Brown, Todd
- 2009 Ranking: 85
- Missing Points: Does not including gender in its diversity training, nor does it have trans benefits in its insurance; does not cover domestic partners in dental, vision, COBRA, or dependent coverage.
- Notes: This is the first year FBT appears on the list.
- 2009 Ranking: 80
- Missing Points: Does not include gender identity/expression in its non-discrimination policy; does not cover domestic partners in dental, COBRA, vision, or dependent coverage.
- Notes: 2009 is the first year Convergys appears on the list! Honestly, I've never been quite sure what they do...
- 2009 Rank: 75
- 2008 Rank: 60
- 2006 Rank: 65
- Missing Points: Does not include gender identity and expression in its non-discrimination policy, nor include some insurance benefit for trans-identified persons in their insurance; only gives some benefits -- minus dental, vision, COBRA, dependent coverage -- to domestic partners.
- Notes: 5/3 scores the lowest in 2008 out of all the Cincinnati businesses, which surprises me as they have a very large and very prominent LGBT employees organization. I checked their website and though they stress their diversity, there is no mention of DP benefits, so maybe not? I think I'm actually disappointed by this.
- 2009 Ranking: 75
- 2008 Ranking: 75
- 2006 Ranking: 35
- Missing Points: Exlusively dealing with gender identity and expression -- no protection in non-discrimination policy of gender identity/expression, no diversity training including gender, and no trans wellness benefits for employment.
- Notes: Despite what they are missing, a 40-point increase in two years is huge, but that seems to have capped off. Also, a commentator on the P&G post pointed out that Kroger just started allowing affinity groups, which means there will be a little internal pressure to start including some of these points.
- Abercrombie and Fitch - New Albany - 100 (duh!)
- Cardinal Health - Dublin - 100
- KeyCorp - Cleveland - 100
- Nationwide - Columbus - 100
- NCR Corp. - Dayton - 100
- Owens Corning - Toledo - 100
- Progressive Corporation - Mayfield Village - 100
- Squire Sanders and Dempsey LLP - Cleveland - 100
- AmTrust Bank - Cleveland - 83
- Limited Brands - Columbus - 80
- National City Corporation - Cleveland -80
- Vorys, Sater, Seymore, and Pease LLP - 80
- Huntington Bancshares - Columbus - 75
- University Hospitals of Cleveland - 50
- Cooper Tire and Rubber - Findlay - 33
- Dana Holding - Toledo - 20
- Lauren Manufacturing - New Philadelphia - 5
In short: every single other city, except for Cleveland, has one "100" business. We now, also, have two. :-) We're actually doing slightly better in our big businesses.
This original post was written based on the 2008 Rankings; I should have been using the 2009 rankings. I tried to edit it to make sure it reads right, apologies if there are mistakes.
If KeyCorp is in Cleveland, then Cleveland does have a "100" business.
Also, isn't A&F part of Limited Brands?
Oh, sorry, correction... Cleveland has two. That was the point of the "also" comment for Cincinnati.
I thought so, too, but HRC has them listed separately?
Oh no, you've referenced the HRC CEI, which means you now get to read Jere's patented rant about the shortcomings and flaws of the CEI (TM).
I'll be brief. Two points.
1. The CEI only measures policy, which may be remarkably different from actual environment and atmosphere. A nondiscrimination policy without teeth is useless. Nothing about the (current) CEI measures how successful these policies are in changing the workplace environment. Instead, the CEI is a marketing tool.
2. The current CEI is remarkably lenient (some have said shamefully so) on gender identity issues. Companies only had to do 1 of 3 things in GI (health insurance coverage OR trans-specific training OR ...) to score perfectly, so among companies scoring 100, there is quite a bit of variety in trans equality.
I'm happy to see that future versions of the CEI are taking both my criticisms into account and will be a more useful tool for analysis after 2012 (when the changes take full effect). They will also be scoring companies on their engagement in queer civil rights issues outside the workplace (e.g. supporting ENDA, marriage equality). Even so, the CEI is only ONE tool for rating and evaluating the inclusiveness and LGBT-friendliness of corporations.
Post a Comment