As seen within the article Steve, who becomes Stephanie, faces many challenges throughout their transition from biological male to transgender female. Many of these challenges are immersed in social, legal, and moral issues, most of which stem from working in a conservative company with little to no procedures in place. By addressing the ethical implications of these areas and finding a common middle ground, LGBTQ employees like Steve can find comfort within their workplace.
Put yourself in Henrietta’s shoes as the manager of this department:I) Analyze the situation – summarize the scenario, notate the situational facts, and describe the accommodations requested.
II) Consider your personal thoughts and feelings towards Steve’s decision to transition? Should Steve acept the internal position? How do you feel about the other coworkers’ opinions and clients’ opinions regarding the transition?
III) “Put your manager hat on”. Evaluate the situation as the manager – from an unbiased, factual, legislative perspective, what does your department staff need at this time? How can you aid the situation from a social point-of-view?
IV) Now, create three actions that will determine how the company will address the transition, i.e. in-house colleagues, Human Resources policy, and with clients.
School regalia and why understudies wear them has been a subject of concern and discussion for whatever length of time that these garments have been near. In spite of the fact that individuals who contend that wearing regalia in instructive establishments cause individuals to show up all equivalent, give a feeling of network, and show discipline, I accept there are a larger number of impediments to wearing outfits than favorable circumstances. To be specific, requesting understudies to enhance garbs removes opportunity, they are regularly awkward, they are a misuse of cash, they advance congruity over distinction, and kids' mental self view is harmed more when they wear outfits at school. Most created nations, similar to the United States of America, trust in one's entitlement to opportunity of articulation. Making it obligatory for understudies to surrender their entitlement to convey what needs be through dress isn't right. As indicated by ProCon.org, "The First Amendment of the US Constitution ensures that all people reserve the privilege to communicate unreservedly. The US Supreme Court expressed in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (7-2, 1969) that "it can scarcely be contended that either understudies or educators shed their protected rights to the right to speak freely of discourse or articulation at the school building entryway." In the 1970 case Richards v. Thurston (3-0), which spun around a kid declining to have his hair style shorter, the US First Circuit Court of Appeals decided that "constrained adjustment to ordinary principles of appearance" doesn't "appear to be a reasonable piece of the instructive procedure"' ("School Uniforms – ProCon.org"). Along these lines, not exclusively is the interest to wear garbs it might be said unlawful, it additionally conflicts with decisions by the Supreme Court. Along these lines, it very well may be said that creation garbs in schools required is un-American. In favor of common sense, outfits are frequently observed as less agreeable than ordinary garments. They can be tight and not flexible to various climate conditions. The temperatures in winter and summer can be intolerable in a standard school uniform. Numerous understudies have communicated through reviews that they don't feel great in their regalia, and they this sort of garments doesn't change well to shifting climate conditions ("Research on School Uniforms – It's Clear, They Disadvantage Girls"). Another useful concern is that paying for outfits squanders the cash of guardians, when their youngsters can basically wear the garments they have. Additionally, schools could be selling outfits for more than should be expected. In the United Kingdom, for example, the Guardian reports that, "Guardians could be burning through a large number of pounds more than they have to on school outfits as a result of selective arrangements among schools and providers, the administration's opposition guard dog has cautioned. Headteachers and school overseeing bodies were told by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) on Thursday that they should let guardians "look around" for reasonable regalia for their kids, utilizing general stores on the off chance that they wish instead of be compelled to purchase progressively costly things in select game plans with providers" (Smithers, Rebecca). This implies in addition to the fact that parents have to spend additional cash on an outfit, yet in addition the garbs schools are selling are overrated. Inclining more into the theoretical, regalia advance congruity rather than independence. A feeling of uniqueness is key in equitable social orders, and it ought to be sustained when youthful. As indicated by ProCon.org, "when schools are empowering an energy about assorted variety, upholding institutionalized dress sends an opposing message. In schools where regalia are explicitly gendered (young ladies must wear skirts and young men must wear pants), transgendered, sexual orientation liquid, and sex nonconforming understudies can feel segregated" ("School Uniforms – ProCon.org"). In this way, all together for every individual to not feel the weight of cultural congruity, it is significant that schools keep a feeling of decent variety. In conclusion, numerous understudies feel they don't put their best self forward in garbs. This is because of the way that garbs fit the form of certain body types, and curvier or hefty size people regularly feel strange and awkward in regalia. Wearing garbs fits more examination, and kids who don't fit the form of an "ordinary" understudy as far as body type are usually mocked by schoolmates (Flam, Lisa). In spite of the fact that there are a few advantages to wearing garbs in school, I accept there are a bigger number of burdens than focal points to utilizing them. This is on the grounds that they strip away opportunity, they are awkward, it is a misuse of cash to get them, they praise congruity over distinction, and the mental self view of kids is harmed more when they wear garbs. Let us keep our schools sacred by permitting understudies to wear what they consider communicates their one of a kind character, inside the points of confinement of suitability. Works Cited "School Uniforms – ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines, school-uniforms.procon.org/. "Research on School Uniforms – It's Clear, They Disadvantage Girls." Girls' Uniform Agenda, 27 July 2017, girlsuniformagenda.org/2017/06/14/inquire about young ladies school-outfits clear-separate/.>GET ANSWER