Unions mustAY LBERATION fight for rights

Scan page 10

OUR LIBERANNON

LABOUR CAMPAIGN FOR GAY RIGHTS Queen's Walk Community Centre, Meadows. Workshops document "The Rights 'Is it enough?', plenary session and LCGR AGM. to members and supporters of the Labour Party For more information write to LCGR, 21 De onshire THE number of local authorities with Equal Opportunities policies providing protection for gays could almost .be counted on one hand. (Lothian Region,, Greater Manchester, GLC, Nottinghamshire, Hackney, Tower Hamlets and Lambeth).

Only seven out of 517 are known to have added those two important words, "Sexual orientation" to the attributes listed in Equal Opportunities policies as tree from negative discrimination in employment.

On the positive side, all seven are Labour controlled and there are prospects of others amending their policies in the coming year, as a result of the leftward moves in the composition of some Labour Groups following the local elec: tions in May. Manchester City and Islington come immediately to mind. • Nottinghamshire County Council is the latest to approve a new employment policy, and so became the first authority with teaching functions to protect its employees from anti-gay discrimination. In this it is in advance of the Inner London Education Authority where, it is alleged, the lawyers are worried about conceding equal opportunity to gay teachers.

Indeed, Nottinghamshire Tories objected to the inclusion of sexual orientation in the statement of Employment Policy on the depressingly familiar grounds - that children would be 'at risk' from gay teachers.

'Human morals would be debased to the lowest possible level' declared Tory Councilor Madg Whittaker, during the Committee debate.

And whilst Labour councillors rebutted Tory attacks on this and other points relating to gays, on Chris Richardson and Richard McCance, Labour Party members and gay activists in Nottingham, examine the campaign for gay rights in employment with particular reference to Nottingham shire, where the activitie: of the Gay, trade union, and labour movements have secured a notable local advance their position was essentially a defensive one. They hadn't mentioned sexual orientation until the Tories raised it.

Similarly, Frank Higgins, Labour Chair of the Resources Committee responsible for the Policy, made no reference to sexual orientation when interviewed a few hours later on local radio. More curiously, neither did Tory spokesperson Fred Woodward, in spite of making gays their main target in the half hour committee debate, and despite having said that they would accept an Equal Opportunities Policy - providing job protection for gays was left out.

Ultra-positive

Tories are not alone in objecting to employment protection for gays. Some Labour authorities have done so too; though, of course, with our own best interests at heart.

The ultra-positive view is advanced that since they don't discriminate against anyone it is unnecessary to single out minority groups, such as gays, which might consider themselves in need of protection.

To single out groups would; so the argument goes, be a furm of discrimination. This was the attitude of Barking Council's Director of Social Services in 1977, replying to a National Council for Civil Liberties questionnaire, and sums up the attitude of many of the local authorities which took the trouble torespond:

"The situation in Barking is that there is no laid down policy regarding the employment of homosexual women and men. Every applicant to the Department for vacant posts receives the same consideration and an appointment is made by the Committee who select the person they feel is most competent to carry out the duties of the vacant post. The Committee have no strong views on employees' activities outside working hours and to my knowledge there has never been a dismissal on the grounds of homosexuality. I know this does not cover all the points of your questionnaire but I trust it will at least give you some indication that there are no prejudices operating within my Department or, for that matter, within the Authority."

Yet it was Barking's Labour Council which dismissed Care Assistant susan Shell last year, solely for being a lesbian, and which ignored the approaches of the trade unions and the hundreds of postcard objections sent to the Leader of the Council in a campaign organised by Gay Rights at Work.

Like women and blacks, the gay movemert has learned from. cases like Barking the need for positive written commitments to non-discrimination as an essential first step towards equality in all aspects ofemployment.

Few of us are so naive as to believe that a small change in the fine print of an employer's policy statement is, in itself, going to make any dramatic change in the work situation and quality of life for gays, but it is a necessary campaign to wage.

Raising the issues becomes an educational event for both sides; often positive responses conceal strong underlying prejudices. In Nottinghamshire the controlling Labour Group recently accepted an offer by the local Campaign for Homosexual Equality to be shown the tape/slide kit "Homosexuality: A Fact of Life" prior monthly Group meeting.

Held early on a Monday moming it was perhaps not surprising that only 15 ofthe 55 Labour councillors turned up to seeit, but the really unfortunate aspect of their response was that So many believed that showing the kit in schools would 'lead youngsters at an impressionable age into a life of homosexuality' borrow a familiar cliche.

They still saw gayness as, at best, a temporary abberration or, at worst, an unfortunate accident to be tolerated among those hom "that way' . And they still believed that homosexuality could be passed on like some contagious and incurable disease to those who were naturally, healthily heterosexual.

Perhaps it is therefore significant that the Nottinghamshire change in policy came about primarily as a result of trade union initiative. Eight years have elapsed since Nottinghamshire gay trade unionists began their campaign for job protection in the County branch of NALGO, which resulted in their Equal Opportunities Committee taking up gay rights as a relevant issue.

Gay activists in CHE meanwhile kept NALGO infurmed of research into anti-gay discrimination at the workplace.

With NUPE also committed by national conference decision to support the rights of it gay members the situation was ripe for a joint approach to the County Council, and this also took place last year in the context of a re-negotiation of employment policies.

The County's policy includes some useful clauses which must be pursued by the gay and labour movements locally. Firstly, all employees are to be informed of the Statement. Secondly, "more detailed research in consultation with the trade unions, ethnic minorities and other minority groups" on aspects of employment discrimination is to be undertaken.

Kinnock shitted his posi-

----- pull-quotes -----

Saturday 24 July, 1982 on LCGR,

* Creche. *Facilities for disabled Chris Richardson, 0602 780124.

I WANT TO HOLD HER HAND