OUT IN THE MOUNTAINS — MARCH 1999 —' 15 The Ilntriemllv Skies? llllilflll Airlines EIIIIIIIWEG HESIIIIIIIIS I0 "B0 BIWGDII BY STEVEN KOPSTEIN s a current board member “of United with Pride, United Airline’s gay, les- bian, transgendered, employee and supporters group, I was dis- tressed to hear about HRC’s decision to boycott United. Like the prejudice HRC battles, the decision to boycott seems based on a misunderstanding of the facts, because it unfairly targets United. In 1996, the city of San Francisco passed an ordinance that required all companies doing business with the city to offer benefits to all domestic partners of all American employees. The following year, the Air Transport Association —— an organization representing more than two dozen air carriers — filed a lawsuit against the city. Its contention was that San Francisco was trying to enforce a local ordinance on a national industry. In April, 1998, a federal dis- trict court judge decided the domestic partner benefits ordi- nance was largely invalid, at least in relation to airlines. She reserved judgment on issues such as travel benefits, bereave- ment leave, and family. and medical leave. Last August, United and the ATA asked a federal district court for a preliminary injunc- tion to keep the city from inter- fering with United’s lease rights on facilities at -San Francisco International Airport. The injunction was granted. On January 22 of this year, there was another hearing before the court on the case; a , decision has not yet been made. Statement from the President ‘ As I prepared to write this article, United President Jerry Greenwald issued a statement that outlines the company’s position better than I could. . I-Iere’s the pertinent excerpt from his February 15 statement: “I believe much of the back- ' lash against United is due to misunderstanding about the company’s position. As hard as we try to make our point clear, it seems to get lost in the midst of this emotional issue. In fact, our own employees, particular- ly those 20 thousand employees living and working in the Bay Area, still may be confused about United’s position on the matter. “It remains our position that a local government cannot tell a national industry what to do at all its locations, and that’s real- ly what our legal interest in contesting the ordinance is all about —— not about whether a company should offer domestic partner benefits to its employ- ees. We believe that the City of San Francisco is asking us to comply with a local ordinance that has national implications, and we are not willing to set that precedent. ' “Other US carriers aren’t either. The ATA, which repre- sents 25 air carriers, including United, filed the lawsuit chal- lenging the city’s attempt to enforce the local ordinance on a national industry. It is an indus- try-wide action. People who tell us that they plan to take their “We l>elieve that the City of San Francisco is asking us to comply with a local ordinance that has "national implications, and we are not willing to set that precedent." — United President, Jerry Green walzf business to a carrier that offers domestic-partner benefits and is not part of the ATA will find that no US airline currently pro- vides these benefits and that all major US carriers are parties to the same_ lawsuit. United, as well as Federal Express, only became named plaintiffs when ‘we filed a preliminary injunc- tion against the city ’_s attempt to interfere with our lease rights at San Francisco International Airport. “None of the US carriers serving San Francisco is in compliance with the domestic partner ordinance, but United is being singled out by certain members of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors — even though we have several policies and practices in place regarding gay and lesbian employees, such as our zero tolerance for harassment and discrimination, our extensive employee train- ing on that issue and our com- panion pass travel program. Also, United supports more than 80 charitable causes and organizations of interest to the gay and lesbian community and was the first airline to advertise in gay and lesbian media. “The decision to offer part- ner benefits needs. to be made by the company, not the courts. That decision needs to consider the interests of all our union and non-union employees across the system — not just in San Francisco; therefore, it deserves careful considera- tion.” What does all this mean? ' The bottom line is that the company is not fighting the issue of domestic partnership benefits per se. Along with every other major US airlines it is fighting the authority of : the city of San Francisco to force compliance with a local ordinance on an international airline. By choosing to fly an air- line other than United, you will be supporting another airline fighting the very same ordinance —— and perhaps an airline that doesn’t treat its LGBT employees as well as United. I know that United has been very supportive of my efforts in the LGBT com- munity —— whether it has been sponsoring film festi- vals, gay and lesbian chorus- es, the RBA, Vermont Cares and many other organiza- tions. The company has heard from the radical right regard- ing its support of LGBT orga- nizations and events. I was proud to read its strongly worded response that clearly stated its support for diversity and its disdain for discrimina- tion in society. Will United be the first US airline to ‘offer domestic partner benefits? I hope so. Can the boycott spur the company to do it? Perhaps. But then again, what effect did the Baptist boy- cott of Disney have? Not much, as far as I can tell. I think the best way to encourage United to offer The GRAFTON, VERMON domestic partner benefits is to write to senior management of the company and let them know that, as a customer, you feel better supporting an airline that provides fair benefits to all employees. Should you support the boy- cott? That’s your call. Just be sure you have all the facts before you make it. V Inn Particular. We expect things to be just so, just perfect, and in particular, just as you'd imagine Vermont to be. Fortunately for all of us, we’ve had a bit of practice. Since 1801, The Old Tavern at Grafton has set about the business of getting it right. From the warmth of our greeting to the warmth of the hearth; from the extraordinary meals in our dining room, to the snugness of the tavern and the unparalleled comfort of our guest rooms, our goal is not to meet your expectations, butlito exceed them. In all areas, in no uncertain terms. The New York Times has called The Old Tavern at Grafton “...the choicest inn of all." We've made up rooms for Ulysses S. Grant, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Emerson, Kipling, and Henry David Thoreau. May we turn down the bed for you? Reservations: 800-843-1801 Old Taver 1nnl