What are some alternatives they should consider? What is the best alternative?
The civil rights movement has started with aim to ensuring that the rights of all people are equally protected by the law, including the women's rights and rights of minorities. But no one has even thought the same quest would provoked by completely different group of people. The gay and lesbians rights, the movement has followed just after civil right movement. This movement is for the people who were born homosexual and could not explain why or how they became so. There was no choice in being a Black race or white race as there was no choice in being attracted to people of the same gender or being homosexual. Therefore, as a gay person, they were not making an illegal choice but rather they were just being the person they were born to be. Oliver Sparling case is a case of discrimination in employment, which is against the “Protections for sexual orientation and gender identity” law. Illinois is seen as one of the most liberal states in the United States. in regard to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) rights. Illinois has protected LGBT persons from discrimination since 2006, based on legislation enacted in 2005. The anti-discrimination law adds "sexual orientation" to the state's existing nondiscrimination statute which already bans discrimination in employment, housing, public accommodations . Sparling case is not only discriminative but also victimization in nature when viewed from AFI management side. During Sparling two years of service he receive overwhelming response from clients and other team members in Chicago office, he never put any of the team member in uncomfortable or embracing situation, Many gay, lesbians and bisexual’s fear disclosure of sexual orientation they don't want the whole world to know about the relationship, and especially in office they try to keep it low because team members/management are very judgmental and sometime may lose of future opportunities, Sparling is no different in this situation. His behavior was of no Different from any of his straight colleagues in Bible house either. He never discussed his relation with any of the team member, until the concerned rise by Bible house management. Sparling had never given opportunity to AFI management to talk about his relation in the past; this is the clear case that management has never acted in discriminative fashion with Sparling before. Now raise the question, why the management has changed their opinion with one client feedback?
One should understand the sensitivity of the situation. Franklin was more concern about the project but not for the feeling of Sparling. The way Franklin handled the situation clearly shows the opportunistic and discriminative mentality of the organization.
Mr. Franklin should have hold off his thought even before having a conversation with Sparling; if Franklin thinks by having conversation with Sparling would solve the problem of Bible house than it’s as case of clear misinterpretation, how someone could even think to do something like this thinking that it would help out with the problems.
In the conversation Franklin said, “That once the project is completed Sparling can have normal life back in Chicago. But when it comes to Bible house office in Birmingham he has to obey client condition”. Here Franklin missing the basic point in the first place, what if the same scenario repeats with other client, what if Bible house raise more concerns like hair style or dressing related issues. Will Franklin hold the same conversation again, and does Sparling have to go through the same discrimination trauma again?
Whatever may be the outcome, Sparling will be the victim of discrimination any situation. This case shows how disastrous and dangerous discrimination in the workplace. Management should have considered dealing