Lesbian and Gay Population, Work Experience, and Well-Being: A Ten-Year Systematic Review

Despite an increase in the promotion of equal opportunities at work, there is still persistent discrimination against lesbian and gay (LG) workers. In this vein, this study aimed to systematically review the research investigating the peculiarities of the work experience of LG people, particularly considering the theoretical frameworks in the approach to sexual minorities' work-related issues, as well as individual and contextual variables influencing the work experience and the impact they may have on health and well-being. We explored the PsycArticles, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic databases and the EBSCOHost (PsycInfo, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection) scholarly search engine, between 01/01/2013 to 01/03/2023, with regards to the search terms "lgb*", "gay*", "lesbian*", "homosexual*", and "sexual minorit*", associated with "employee*", "personnel", "worker*", and "staff", and with "workplace", "work", "job", "occupation", "employment", and "career". Data were narratively synthesized and critically discussed. Of the 1584 potentially eligible articles, 140 papers contributed to this systematic review. Five main theoretical frameworks were identified: (a) minority stress, (b) sexual prejudice and stigma, (c) queer and Foucauldian paradigms, (d) social identity theories, and (e) intersectionality. Furthermore, significant individual (e.g., outness, disclosure, and work-family conflict) and contextual (e.g., heterosexist and heteronormative workplace climate and culture) variables influencing LG people's work experience were identified. This review highlights the need to develop a unified theoretical model for the construction of specific measurement tools to assess the work experience of LG people and for the implementation of interventions aimed at minimizing the effects of stigma in work contexts.

Axes and fluidity of oppression in the workplace: Intersectionality of race, gender, and sexuality

Our research explores how the historically institutionalized and authoritarian discriminatory South African context continues to affect the experiences of LGBT mid-level managers in the workplace. South Africa provides a rich environment to explore “axes of oppression” (heteronormativity/homophobia, race/racism, gender/sexism), and how these manifest and impact on participants’ work experience. Bringing together intersectionality as an analytical strategy with identity work allows us to examine the interaction between identities and the institutionalized processes by which they are shaped. Our findings show a multifaceted fluidity of oppression where individuals can move between continuums of advantage and disadvantage. We demonstrate the importance of historically embedded modes of oppression within the theory of intersectionality and how this manifests in institutional and organizational practices. As a result, organizations, institutions, and individuals play a role in reproducing inequality through intricate systems of oppression at micro, meso, and macro levels. This affects how individuals draw on their intersecting identities to respond to and decipher encounters with others.

Diversity and inclusion in the legal profession: disclosure of cancer and other health conditions by lawyers with disabilities and lawyers who identify as LGBTQ +

PURPOSE

Given the training and experience of lawyers, we assumed that a study of lawyers' willingness to disclose disability in the workplace would provide an example of the actions of a group knowledgeable about disability law. The current study accounts for the effect of visibility of disability, onset and type of disability, and whether the lawyer has made an accommodation request. We also investigate the role of other individual characteristics, such as sexual orientation, gender identity, race/ethnicity, age, and job-related characteristics, in willingness to disclose.

METHODS

We use data from the first phase of a longitudinal national survey of lawyers in the USA to estimate the odds of disclosing disability to co-workers, management, and clients using proportional odds models.

RESULTS

Lawyers with less visible disabilities, those with mental health disabilities, and those who work for smaller organizations have lower odds of disclosing to co-workers, management, and clients as compared to their counterparts. Attorneys who have requested accommodations are more willing to disclose as compared to those who have not, but only to co-workers and management. Women are less likely than men to disclose to management and clients. However, gender is not a significant determinant of disclosure to co-workers. Older attorneys are more likely to disclose to clients, whereas attorneys with children are less likely to disclose to co-workers. Lastly, lower perceived prejudice and the presence of co-workers with disabilities are associated with higher disclosure scores, but not for all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals who acquired a disability at a relatively early point in life and those with more visible disabilities are more likely to disclose. However, such willingness is affected by the intersection of disability with other individual and firm-level characteristics.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

The findings imply that those with less visible disabilities and with health conditions acquired later in life are less likely to disclose. The relevance of the findings is heightened by the altered work conditions and demands imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic for cancer survivors.