You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #16: Proposal 9 - this is what they voted on [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
cosmicdot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-12-06 02:54 AM
Response to Original message
16. Proposal 9 - this is what they voted on
PROPOSAL 9

Dr. Robert E. Hurley of 5017 Foxland Court, Alton, Illinois 62002, owner of 674 shares of common stock, has informed the Company that he plans to present the following proposal at the meeting:

Whereas, it would be inappropriate, and possibly illegal to ask job applicants or employees about private matters such as their sexual interests, inclinations and activities, and

Whereas, it is likewise inappropriate and legally problematic for employees to discuss personal sexual matters on the job, and

Whereas, unlike the attributes of race, age, gender and certain physical disabilities, it would be impossible to discern a person’s sexual orientation from his appearance, and

Whereas, there is a perceived link between a specific sexual orientation non-discrimination policy and what have been termed domestic partner benefits. The Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the largest national lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender political organization states on its website, “an inclusive non-discrimination policy (one that refers to sexual orientation) is a key facet of the rationale for extending domestic partner benefits.” The HRC adds, “Establishing a benefits policy that includes your company’s gay and lesbian employees is a logical outgrowth of your company’s own non-discrimination policy...,” and

Whereas, domestic partner benefit policies pay people who engage in homosexual acts, which have been illegal in this country for hundreds of years, and have been proscribed by the major traditions of Judaism, Christianity and Mohammedanism well over a thousand years, and

Whereas, our company does not discriminate in employment against smokers, despite the fact that they are not protected by any specific clause; however, the company does not pay them to engage in this behavior which is hazardous to themselves and others, and

Whereas, those who engage in homosexual sexual activity are at significantly higher risk for developing HIV/ AIDS and associated opportunistic infections and malignancies, and

Whereas, marriage between heterosexuals has been protected and encouraged for its societal benefits by a wide range of cultures and faiths over the ages,

Resolved: The shareholders request that Ford Motor Company amend its written equal employment opportunity policy to exclude any reference to privacy issues related to sexual interests, activities or orientation.

Statement: While the legal institution of marriage should be protected for its community and generational benefits, the sexual interests, inclinations and activities of all employees should be a private matter and not a corporate concern.

The Board of Directors recommends a Vote “against” Proposal 9.

The Board of Directors opposes this proposal because it is not in the best interests of shareholders or the Company. Ford, and numerous other leading companies, believe that a diverse workforce, free of discrimination, is the most advantageous environment to attract and retain talented employees and to allow them to excel in their jobs. Implementing the proposal would adversely affect Ford’s ability to attract and retain talented employees. For example, Ford recruits potential employees at the best universities and colleges across the United States. Many of these institutions require that employers who wish to recruit on their campuses have non-discrimination policies that include non-discrimination based on sexual orientation. If the proposal were implemented, Ford would be excluded from recruiting at many of the country’s finest institutions. Such a decision would prevent Ford from recruiting the best potential employees regardless of sexual orientation.

Ford is in the business of manufacturing, selling and financing motor vehicles. The Company strongly believes that its employment policies regarding non-discrimination are extremely beneficial to its business, its employees, and its shareholders.

The Board of Directors recommends a Vote “against” Proposal 9.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/37996/000095012406001797/x01694def14a.htm#115

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC