<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: DiversityInc Names Top 10 Companies for LGBT Employees</title>
	<atom:link href="http://outfrontblog.com/2008/05/diversityinc-names-top-10-companies-for-lgbt-employees.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://outfrontblog.com/2008/05/diversityinc-names-top-10-companies-for-lgbt-employees.html</link>
	<description>The Full Spectrum of LGBT Communications</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2010 12:29:42 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Finzel</title>
		<link>http://outfrontblog.com/2008/05/diversityinc-names-top-10-companies-for-lgbt-employees.html/comment-page-1#comment-271</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Finzel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 15:27:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outfrontblog.com/2008/05/diversityinc-names-top-10-companies-for-lgbt-employees/#comment-271</guid>
		<description>Thanks Mary and Dana. You both make good points and I agree. These lists are a good start, but they should not be the only resource we consider in evaluating companies. As you point out, it&#039;s a more complex picture that we must consider and the rather simplistic ranking is not always the best, or most accurate, depiction of a company&#039;s true nature.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Mary and Dana. You both make good points and I agree. These lists are a good start, but they should not be the only resource we consider in evaluating companies. As you point out, it&#8217;s a more complex picture that we must consider and the rather simplistic ranking is not always the best, or most accurate, depiction of a company&#8217;s true nature.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dana</title>
		<link>http://outfrontblog.com/2008/05/diversityinc-names-top-10-companies-for-lgbt-employees.html/comment-page-1#comment-270</link>
		<dc:creator>Dana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 23:37:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outfrontblog.com/2008/05/diversityinc-names-top-10-companies-for-lgbt-employees/#comment-270</guid>
		<description>I think these lists are a good general guideline, but only that. There can be a big difference between corporate policy and what life is like in a specific office or department of a multinational corporation. One also needs to consider that the list should be cross-referenced with those rating companies for various races, women, working mothers, the disabled, etc., since many of us cross those categories (and, as the previous commenter noted, being good in one area doesn&#039;t require being good in another).
Also, it&#039;s important to review the requirements for each list. In 2006, the Advocate dropped Fannie Mae from its list of the Best Companies for LGBT Workers. Despite its perfect 100 score on the HRC Corporate Equality Index, Fannie Mae contributed money from its corporate foundation to anti-gay causes, including $50,000 to the Traditional Values Coalition. (Here&#039;s my post about it: http://www.mombian.com/2006/09/26/the-advocates-…with-hrc-indexthe-advocates-best-companies-list-includes-discrepancy-with-hrc-index/
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think these lists are a good general guideline, but only that. There can be a big difference between corporate policy and what life is like in a specific office or department of a multinational corporation. One also needs to consider that the list should be cross-referenced with those rating companies for various races, women, working mothers, the disabled, etc., since many of us cross those categories (and, as the previous commenter noted, being good in one area doesn&#8217;t require being good in another).<br />
Also, it&#8217;s important to review the requirements for each list. In 2006, the Advocate dropped Fannie Mae from its list of the Best Companies for LGBT Workers. Despite its perfect 100 score on the HRC Corporate Equality Index, Fannie Mae contributed money from its corporate foundation to anti-gay causes, including $50,000 to the Traditional Values Coalition. (Here&#8217;s my post about it: <a href="http://www.mombian.com/2006/09/26/the-advocates-…with-hrc-indexthe-advocates-best-companies-list-includes-discrepancy-with-hrc-index/" rel="nofollow">http://www.mombian.com/2006/09/26/the-advocates-…with-hrc-indexthe-advocates-best-companies-list-includes-discrepancy-with-hrc-index/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mary Earley</title>
		<link>http://outfrontblog.com/2008/05/diversityinc-names-top-10-companies-for-lgbt-employees.html/comment-page-1#comment-269</link>
		<dc:creator>Mary Earley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 18:17:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outfrontblog.com/2008/05/diversityinc-names-top-10-companies-for-lgbt-employees/#comment-269</guid>
		<description>I think that these lists are fantastic and have a really good amount of detail, but also feel that overall HR policies should be looked at very carefully. I once worked for a company that with great fanfare rolled out its same-sex partner benefits, while at the same time it quietly gutted its maternity leave. In this case, I strongly believe that the same-sex partner benefits were an easy way for the company to look good while cutting costs.
Cynicism is my normal state of mind, I&#039;m afraid, because I don&#039;t believe that my former employer is the only one that has pulled this kind of stunt.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that these lists are fantastic and have a really good amount of detail, but also feel that overall HR policies should be looked at very carefully. I once worked for a company that with great fanfare rolled out its same-sex partner benefits, while at the same time it quietly gutted its maternity leave. In this case, I strongly believe that the same-sex partner benefits were an easy way for the company to look good while cutting costs.<br />
Cynicism is my normal state of mind, I&#8217;m afraid, because I don&#8217;t believe that my former employer is the only one that has pulled this kind of stunt.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

