Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  KINDA SORTA

UPDATE: KPMG Joins Nissan, FedEx, AT&T, And UnitedHealth In Ignorantly Supporting TN’s Anti-LGBT Bill

UPDATE 5/23 11AM: A reader just sent us this statement from audit, advisory and tax service provider KPMG about their role in the repealing of Nashville’s LGBT protections:

KPMG did not vote to support the Chamber’s adoption of a policy to back this bill, nor do we support the legislation, the effect of which runs counter to KPMG’s policies, core values and our long-standing support for diversity in the workplace in all its forms.

Now that word has gotten out about their board member roles in helping repeal LGBT protections for Nashville city contractors, Nissan, FedEx, AT&T, Alcoa and UnitedHealth have all offered AmericaBlog piss-poor excuses for doing so. Would you like to hear what it sounds like when huge corporations try to distance themselves from an anti-gay and anti-trans law but most stop short of actually explaining why they did or what they plan to do about it? It’s kinda like watching worms on a hook, but dumber.

AT&T:

AT&T does not support any laws or efforts that are discriminatory. AT&T does support the principals of ensuring that state and local laws are consistent, which is the stated purpose of HB 600/SB 632. However, the bill has become implicated in efforts to erode the rights of the gay community, which we do not support.

AmericaBLOG’s reaction: “The lead lobbyist on the bill was the religious right group. AT&T didn’t realize that when it started lobbying on the bill too – sure they didn’t. And I’m sure they had no idea they were going to repeal civil rights protections for gay and transgender Americans either, because AT&T couldn’t find any lawyers to explain what the bill was really going to do.”

FedEx:

FedEx did not lobby for SB632/HB600 – it is our policy not to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. While FedEx is a member of the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce, we do not support every position proposed by the Chamber.

AmericaBLOG’s reaction: “Cute. You’re not just a member. You’re on the board of directors. That’s a far cry from being just a member who isn’t up on what’s taking place.”

Nissan:

We believe that consistent statewide employment standards, rather than a cumbersome array of local laws and ordinances, are essential to maintaining our state’s economic competitiveness. However, HB600/SB632 has become more closely associated with eroding civil liberties than fostering a strong business climate and this we do not support.

AmericaBLOG’s reaction: “They’re all for repealing gay and trans rights laws so as long as no one perceives the move as anti-gay or anti-trans… Nissan finds our civil rights “cumbersome.”

United Healthcare:

We did not lobby for nor support Tennessee SB632/HB600.

AmericaBLOG’s reaction: “Even though UnitedHealth denies supporting this legislation, they’re on the board of the chamber of commerce, and that chamber, that they oversee via the board, did lobby for the bill. If I were on the board of an organization that tried to repeal the 64 Civil Rights Act, for example, I have a feeling ignorance wouldn’t be much of a defense.”

Not only does that leave EIGHT companies that have still not responded, but not a single one of the respondents even bothered suggesting that they will ask the Tennessee governor to veto the bill or do anything else to help promote employee non-discrimination in the state. The only company to issue such a statement was Alcoa:

Alcoa provides equal employment opportunity without discrimination and supports state and local legislation protecting the rights of all community members. We do not agree with the chamber on this issue and would ask that the governor veto the bill.”

AmericaBlog has started a petition and a Facebook group asking all 13 of the huge corporations that supported the bill to release statements asking Tennessee’s governor to veto it.

By:           Daniel Villarreal
On:           May 23, 2011
Tagged: , , , , , , , , ,

  • 11 Comments
    • Hyhybt
      Hyhybt

      Going only on what you’ve provided here, FedEx’s and United Healthcare’s answers seem much more legitimate than you’re giving them credit for. That a board of directors supports something does not normally indicate that everybody ON the board supports it, any more than California’s passage of Prop 8 indicates that every voter wants to restrict marriage rights.

      May 23, 2011 at 2:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      @Hyhybt: said..

      “That a board of directors supports something does not normally indicate that everybody ON the board supports it,”
      _____________________

      If you are sitting in a car, and your friend gets out, robs a store, gets in the car and you drive off with them and then hang out with them then go home.

      Guess what? Under the law you are guilty.

      Mor a corporation, an organization that makes money off of people using their services trying to say that they do not support the actions taken by a group in which they hold membership and pay money for that membership is totally false.

      If the TN Chamber of Commerce supported a bill to take voting rights away from women, or was donating money to candidates saying they wanted to nominate Supremem Court judges that would make Interacial Marriage illegal, they would have quit the organization.

      The fact that they did not shows that gay rights are only something that they will support as minimally as they think they need to to keep gay business.

      May 23, 2011 at 2:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hyhybt
      Hyhybt

      @Cam: That you see that as equivalent does not make it so. Normal people work with those with whom they do not agree on every point all the time, especially when the issue is not central to the purpose of the association.

      May 23, 2011 at 2:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      @Hyhybt: said…

      “@Cam: That you see that as equivalent does not make it so. Normal people work with those with whom they do not agree on every point all the time, especially when the issue is not central to the purpose of the association”
      ____________________________________

      So lets see, it isn’t the same? I said that if the association was supporting a candidate working against women’s rights, or supporting a candidate wanting to outlaw interacial marriage the companies would have quit. Yet YOU say that that is completely different from the association actively working against gay rights.

      The only different is the group being discriminated against. Why do you feel gays are less worthy of support from companies than women or people in inter-racial marriages?

      May 23, 2011 at 3:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hyhybt
      Hyhybt

      @Cam: I was plainly referring to your comparing being on the minority side of a board vote with aiding a robbery.

      May 23, 2011 at 10:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • IAbuseGays
      IAbuseGays

      @Hyhybt: His analogy works extremely well as the idea is exactly the same – which is that they both show the intent of the parties to act together. Which is Cams point.

      May be you don’t have a legal background so you don’t understand how aiding and abedding or collution works. I don’t know. I don’t care. I suspect it is that you are playing that denial game. So long as you deny what is being said, you can go on believing whatever you want to believe. But, as tot he analogy, you are wrong. Its actually a very good one.

      And let’s not forget you are just making shit up. You have no way of knowing what you said is true. But, even if one assumes it is, its not a defense.

      May 24, 2011 at 12:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hyhybt
      Hyhybt

      I’ve made nothing up; I’m simply operating, for the sake of discussion, on the assumption that the statements made are true. So: have you never been part of a group that disagreed on ANYTHING AT ALL, yet you did not separate yourself from them over that one issue? Particularly one organized for a specific purpose? Say, for example, you’re on a five-member school board, and three of them vote to fire the band director, who you believe should be kept. Do you resign over it? Would the statement made by doing so be worth the loss of positive influence you hope to have in that position? If it’s REALLY something important, as this is, you state publicly that you disagree.

      Happens at the Supreme Court all the time, too, come to think of it. Should four justices resign whenever the other five decide the other way?

      May 24, 2011 at 1:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • IAbuseGays
      IAbuseGays

      when decisions split on the S Ct. , those voting against submit their dissent in this thing called a dissenting opinion. Same with other organizations in public. but hey, you are not at all just making shit up to fit what you want to believe.

      May 24, 2011 at 2:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hyhybt
      Hyhybt

      “when decisions split on the S Ct. , those voting against submit their dissent in this thing called a dissenting opinion. Same with other organizations in public.

      I agree. And, in this case, they’re essentially doing that. Queerty has posted quotes showing exactly that, in this very article.

      you are not at all just making shit up to fit what you want to believe.And again we agree: I am not making things up :)

      Have a good night.

      May 24, 2011 at 2:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • IAbuseGays
      IAbuseGays

      @Hyhybt: I knew you would find someone way to be right. The problem of course is that what you wrote makes little sense if one thinks about it 2 seconds.

      May 24, 2011 at 11:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hyhybt
      Hyhybt

      @IAbuseGays: How so?

      May 24, 2011 at 12:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Queerty now requires you to log in to comment

    Please log in to add your comment.

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.