City of Little Rock to Weigh Unnecessary Ordinance

Current Events,

The City of Little Rock has announced it will begin the process of considering a so-called “nondiscrimination” ordinance pertaining to city employment.

According to news sources, the ordinance would prevent the city from making employment decisions based on sexual-orientation or gender-identity, and it would prevent businesses that contract with the city from doing so as well. However, the ordinance is unnecessary and may run afoul of new state law.

You may recall that S.B. 202 passed during the last legislative session prevents cities and counties from extending any special rights or protections beyond those found in the Arkansas Civil Rights Act of 1993. However, the bill specifically exempts employment policies by cities and counties.

Under S.B. 202, the City of Little Rock might be free to decide it will not make employment decisions based on sexual-orientation or gender-identity, but it is questionable whether or not the city can require private businesses to adopt similar policies as a prerequisite for doing business with the city.

The fact that this ordinance apparently seeks to regulate private business is especially troubling.

However, this proposed ordinance appears to be completely unnecessary for two reasons.

First, there is no objective evidence at this point that people in Little Rock are being hired or fired based on their sexual-orientation or gender-identity. In that sense, this is a solution in search of a problem.

And second, the City of Little Rock already has a policy in place preventing employment decisions based on sexual-orientation and gender-identity.

The official Administrative Personnel Policy and Procedure Manual for the City of Little Rock says,

“It is the policy of the City not to discriminate in its employment and personnel practices because of a person’s race, color, creed, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, genetic information, veteran’s status, political opinions or affiliation. This policy applies to all terms and conditions of employment, including, but not limited to: hiring, placement, promotion, termination, layoff, recall, transfer, leave of absence, compensation, and training.” (Emphasis added)

This proposed ordinance seems absolutely unnecessary in light of the fact that Little Rock already has this policy in place. With that in mind, it is unclear exactly what the City of Little Rock hopes to accomplish.

READ MORE

Gym Bans Woman Who Complained of Man in Locker Room

Current Events, ,

Planet Fitness in Michigan has revoked the gym membership of a woman who complained and told other members about a man using the women’s locker rooms.

According to various sources, the gym revoked Yvette Cormier’s membership because she violated their “judgment free” conduct policy.

In response to the situation, Planet Fitness released a statement saying,

“Our gender identity non-discrimination policy states that members and guests may use all gym facilities based on their sincere self-reported gender identity.”

Ms. Cormier told CNN the policy was “something they [should have] pointed out when I signed up.” She told another news outlet, “I wouldn’t have signed up for this gym if I knew that ahead of time” and that the gym is “failing to protect me if anything happens in those locker rooms with a man.”

Fortunately for Ms. Cormier, she can still take her business to a gym that does not let biological males who claim to be female use the women’s locker rooms; however, under some of the so-called “nondiscrimination” laws and ordinances filed around the country, all “places of public accommodation” (including fitness gyms) would be forced to let a man use the women’s locker rooms, showers, and changing areas if he claims to be a woman.

This was a concern many people raised about the ordinance the Fayetteville City Council passed last year; that ordinance was repealed at a special election, but the Eureka Springs City Council hastily passed an even broader ordinance last month.

The issue is one of public safety, which Ms. Cormier summed up very well in her interview with CNN:

“This is all new to me. I didn’t go out to specifically bash a transgender person that day. I was taken aback by the situation. This is about me and how I felt unsafe.”

You can read more about this situation here and here.

READ MORE

Eureka Springs Calls Election on Ordinance

Current Events, , , ,

News media are reporting the Eureka Springs City Council will hold a special election this May to let voters decide whether to keep the city’s controversial “nondiscrimination” ordinance hastily passed earlier this month.

According to reporters, this move preempts the petition process underway in Eureka Springs to repeal the ordinance, and it will give the city council control over the wording of the ballot.

The Conway City Council passed an ordinance earlier this week addressing city employment policies based on sexual-orientation and gender-identity.

Many argue these ordinances will be nullified when Act 137 (formerly known as Senate Bill 202) takes effect later this year.

READ MORE