Equality Means Business' Report on the Link Between Economic Competitiveness & Workplace Equal Opportunity in Florida

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit the executive summary of a report conducted by Equality Means Business, a project of Equality Florida and the Equality Florida Institute, organizations dedicated to ending discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. The report demonstrates what we already know to be true--that LGBT discrimination in the workplace is corrosive to both the domestic and global marketplace. We must continue to work diligently to ensure that all citizens are guaranteed equal rights and equal protection under the law.
The full report is available online at http://www.eqfl.org/emb/economic
Florida State laws are negatively impacting business operations and profits to a much higher level than previously suspected. A groundbreaking study, released by Thinkspot Inc. in March 2015, demonstrates the costly negative impact on Florida's employers from lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) discrimination.

Equality Means Business, formed to spotlight major employers in Florida that have adopted comprehensive nondiscrimination policies, commissioned Thinkspot to conduct research addressing the economic case for ending discrimination against LGBT people in the Sunshine State.

The study details extensive analysis of published research and findings from in-depth interviews with C-level business leaders. It reveals negative costs realized by individual employees, employers, and Florida's business community. Study findings also illuminate areas of erosion for Florida's competitive position in the global marketplace. This summary provides highlights of the study's findings.

THE COSTS
The costs resulting from lost productivity and employee turnover alone are estimated conservatively to exceed $362 million annually. Other costs recognized by the state's business community include forgone new business opportunities, product quality degradation, customer loyalty erosion, safety incidents, corporate reputation damage, and lost opportunities to attract talent--particularly among the Millennial generation.

The cost of LGBT discrimination is not isolated to the individual. Discrimination in the workplace negatively impacts the host company, its customers, its industry (e.g., supply chain), and the geo-political areas (i.e., city, county, state) those employers call home. Research demonstrates that the link from employee engagement to profits and competitiveness is direct.

DIMINISHED COMPETITIVENESS
For many companies, a culture of non-discrimination fostered and maintained through policies is a prerequisite for daily operations. Global corporate peers demand their vendors demonstrate ``cultural intelligence.'' Global business opportunities (i.e., revenues) are lost in the absence of workforce discrimination protection.

Responses from business executives reveal that representative companies have interests far beyond the ability to attract and retain the best talent, as well as responding to global customers' demands for inclusion policies as a prerequisite for doing business.

The currently unrealized effort to pass federal legislation providing non-discrimination intensifies the competition between states in realizing the benefits of protection in the workplace. Florida ranks in the middle of the national pack at 25. Florida businesses are at a competitive disadvantage created by the collective perception as being hostile to the LGBT community.

The lack of protections available to LGBT people in a state like Florida stands in stark contrast to the protections available in high-equality states, where state law eliminates these differential costs.

INCONSISTENT POLICIES WITHIN THE STATE
In researching for the report, the authors discovered employers that made significant effort to implement internal policies that protect members of the LGBT community within the office, but felt those efforts were ``undercut'' by inaction or regressive action of government at the local and state levels. The interviews also revealed a perception that some governments appear to be actively working against companies' ability to create a ``safe'' and ``inclusive'' environment and fail to demonstrate critical ``cultural intelligence'' to industry peers and global partners.

An employer pointed out that the workplace is only one part of the factor--an employee would also need to go home and may have a partner working at a different location without protections and could face any number of other discriminations. One CEO noted where a highly-sought after C-level candidate turned down a very attractive job offer because, although the company was a great fit and provided partner benefits and other protections, the candidate did not feel he would be welcomed in the state and in the community. Potential employees considering work in Florida carefully examine the environment created by the host communities and state.

INTERVIEWS WITH FLORIDA BUSINESS LEADERS
In-depth interviews were conducted with participants representing organizations of varying sizes and sectors, from manufacturing and medical services to Florida's emerging tech sector. They spanned in size of workforce from 18 to 400,000. The interview findings document an overall theme that broad and consistent discrimination protection is a matter of state competitiveness. This is especially evident for critical industries such as technology, tourism, and medical services, and for companies operating or headquartered out of the state while competing within a global market.

For many companies, a culture of non-discrimination fostered and maintained through formal policies is a prerequisite consideration for daily operations and for promoting their own relevancy among global corporate peers who demand their supply chain partners and vendors demonstrate ``cultural intelligence''.

DAMAGED STATE REPUTATION
Leaders provided continual reference to concerns over Florida's negative reputation, especially related to diversity, inclusion, and discrimination at the state-level. Executives link this reputation issue to the loss of highly sought-after candidates, the direct loss of high-potential incumbent talent, and hesitancy of large global partners considering acquisitions or including Florida companies as supply chain partners, often in a global arena.

Executives noted that when identifying their companies as operating within or headquartered in Florida, responses of industry peers, potential partners, or clients will often be negative and even express doubt about the value and validity of the company itself. Executives linked these responses directly to negative perceptions of Florida's brand as ``backwards'' and not promoting diversity of ideas and cultures.

Participants repeatedly noted that they had to exert deliberate effort to ``overcome'' negative reputational issues related with being headquartered or having major operations within Florida. On one account, a company headquartered in a major metropolitan area in Florida noted that their largest competitor (based out of California) had raised questions about how ``good your talent could actually be'' because they are living and working in Florida ``where basic human protections are either not provided or fought against.''

AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IMPERATIVE
Seventy-five percent (75%) of the participants noted plans to expand in the coming 36 months. Several reported that relocation or expansion decisions were made in favor of a location with a public policy climate that promoted diversity and non-discrimination for the LGBT community.

MILLENNIAL EXPECTATIONS
The executives suggest that Millennials are flocking to workplaces where they believe their values are reflected, and suggest they want a company culture that ``treats all people fairly.'' Meanwhile, leaders report hearing frequent expressions of frustration and confusion by highly-sought younger workers at why ``some older people'' make a ``big deal'' out of non-discrimination (in and outside of the workplace) or speak actively about LGBT issues in negative, cautionary, or bigoted tones. Competing for talent, particularly for members of the Millennial generation now entering the workforce, makes inclusion and diversity a requisite.

SUPPORTING DISCRIMINATION PROTECTION IS STATUS QUO
Executives suggest that the ``battle is over'' in corporate America and the boardroom. Supporting discrimination protection is status quo for large companies and for most medium-sized firms, and a requirement for competition in many cases. Business leaders felt their competitive positioning efforts were ``undercut'' by negative or absent external public policies in local markets and inaction at the state level to support business needs. Some suggested the need for state action to address these issues and eradicate both the negative perceptions of the state and cultural landscape.

COMPLIANCE THROUGHOUT SUPPLY CHAINS
Failing to represent the presence and authentic implementation of a non-discrimination policy can result in real, hard loss of revenue from global clients and partners as well as significant damage to brand reputation.

A PREREQUISITE FOR BUSINESS
For companies to compete for business, they must both have and evidence non-discrimination policies and culture. Another element relates to softer aspects of brand reputation and acceptance among industry peer groups. Leaders express ``reputation'' as extremely delicate and important, especially in the early stages of competitive opportunities.

PUBLIC SUPPORT AND LEGISLATIVE EFFECTIVENESS
Public opinion in Florida supports the passage of legal protections from workplace discrimination for LGBT people. Survey results found that 73% of respondents supported passage of this legislation that would have added protections from sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination to existing state law. Three sources of public opinion data indicate that 80% of Florida residents think that LGBT people experience a moderate amount to a lot of discrimination in the state.

The study also shows evidence of the effectiveness of state legislation. Evidence from states with sexual orientation non-discrimination laws indicates that the likelihood of a gay or lesbian employee in those areas even filing a legal complaint is estimated at only 0.01 to 0.08 percent annually.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source