Major Companies Say Gay Marriage Ban Is Bad For Business

Thomas Rabe, right, places a wedding ring on Robert Coffman’s finger during a marriage ceremony at City Hall in Baltimore, Tuesday, Jan. 1, 2013. (Patrick Semansky/AP)

Alcoa, Office Depot, Panasonic, Xerox, Morgan Stanley, Apple and Caesars Entertainment are among the dozens of American companies submitting a joint brief to the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday, arguing in favor of gay marriage.

A draft of the joint brief obtained by Fortune magazine argues that laws banning same-sex marriage force the companies to endorse “second-class status” for gay and lesbian employees, in violation of their own company policies of equal and fair treatment for all.

But the draft goes on to make a business argument, saying the discriminatory law puts the companies at a competitive disadvantage because it “impedes businesses from achieving the market’s ideal of efficient operation – particularly in recruiting, hiring and retaining talented people.”

The companies are weighing in on Holligsworth v. Perry, in which the court is being asked to rule whether California’s Proposition 8, the ballot initiative which amended the state constitution to ban gay marriage, is constitutional.

A number of leading Republicans have also filed a brief in that case, asking the court to back gay marriage.

And a larger group of companies – over 200 – is preparing to argue in favor of gay marriage in a second Supreme Court case challenging the Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as strictly hetrosexual.

Bloomberg: Apple’s Backing Puts Gay-Marriage Focus on Obama at Court
Slate: Why Only Two Republicans in Congress Admit to Supporting Gay Marriage
New York Times: Gay Marriage Bans May Come at a Price

Guest:

William Taylor, founder of Fast Company and blogger for Harvard Business Review.

We welcome comments from all of our listeners. Post below. Please stay on topic and be civil. Comments may be moderated by us, but you are solely responsible for the content of your comments.

http://twitter.com/JohnnyFroggg J Frog

Of course, “Not to get political”….but it was funny that William Taylor mentioned Meg Whittman’s about face on the issue but failed to mention the President’s. Probably because his was a “real” conversion and Meg’s was fake. Right.
- J__o__h__n
  
  His opposition was fake. He hinted at it before he grew a spine. I don’t know enough about Whittman’s other social views to guess how sincere she is or was.
http://www.ohioken.com Ken Palosi

I find this article interesting in stating that many companies are concerned about the business impact of a ban on gay marriage. What makes it more interesting to me is that Amazon.com has come out this week with an advertisement for its Kindle Paperwhite that has a man and a woman on a beach discussing the Paperwhite. After awhile the man says that he just ordered a Paperwhite on his smart phone and that they should celebrate. The woman turns to him, smiles and says “my husband is bringing me a drink now.” The man smiles and says “so is mine.” They both turn to a tiki bar and two men sitting at the bar wave back to them. Amazon apparantly has decided not to wait for a Supreme court decision and has made a bold move in making a business statement. It will be interesting to see if this has any impact on the sales of the Kindle Paperwhite.
burroak

Talent is found, and thrives in technology, entertainment, design, medicine, law, education, media, the trades, military, culinary arts, politcs, etc; it does not stop at skin color, ethnicity, or sexuality, but rather, permeates…..exists.
Discus1434

Do I understand this correctly? Gay people are more creative, more industrious and generally the engines of commerce. If the reverse were stated, there would be an outcry about the discriminatory nature of the statement, but Robin sat on her social agenda and let this pass. Shame on her. There is no evidence supporting this statement and it is an unfortunate artifact of our “integrity takes a back seat to policy” society that outrageous lies are allowed as long as they are politically correct. If you allow the argument that homosexuality conveys superiority, then you open the door for those that want to argue that it proves inferiority.