A staple in holiday shopping, the Macy’s store in San Antonio, Texas is wrapped with controversy this Christmas. Retail employee, Natalie Johnson was fired recently sparking a lawsuit that has strong opinions flaring on both sides of the debate.
Shortly after Thanksgiving Natalie was attending to the dressing rooms when a transgender customer approached the women’s dressing room. Johnson described the patron as a man in makeup and woman’s clothes and refused admittance to the changing room which goes against the LGBT-friendly environment and non-discrimination policies Macy’s has set in place.
A manager stepped in and Johnson informed her supervisor that her religious beliefs prohibited her to permit a biological male in a female only area. Despite protests Johnson was ordered to allow the customer access to the dressing room and when she refused her employment was terminated. Although Macy’s does not comment on personal matters or pending litigation, regional spokeswoman Melissa Goff said, “At Macy’s we recognize and appreciate the diversity of our customers and associates,” about the incident at its San Antonio Rivercenter store involving Johnson.
Liberty Counsel which describes itself as an "international nonprofit litigation, education, and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family” feels that by firing Johnson Macy’s is being hypocritical and discriminating against her because of religious views. Johnson quoted the same policy the manager used to defend the customer to defend herself. Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mathew Staver commented: “Macy’s policy which allows men to use the women’s dressing room is fraught with problems. This policy will cause significant problems and will alienate the majority of Macy’s customers.”
From extreme right to extreme left the internet is buzzing with debate on the matter. Conservatives and Christians speculate about the level of influence a company has over its employees. What if a female Muslim employee was asked to help in a male dressing room, would that be different? They also have concerns for the comfort and safety of the female customers in the store. Non-transgender people with less than desirable intentions could use the policy to peep on unsuspecting people.
On the flip side, if a biological man wants to purchase pricy women’s clothing, they should be able to try it on in an area where they feel comfortable. It’s not up to the store to determine the gender an individual identifies with and no one should have to be embarrassed in public because of another person’s beliefs.
So where is the line between customer and employee consideration in this matter? Should the manager have assisted the customer and sent Johnson to a different section until they were finished shopping? That way Johnson could have kept her job. Once things cooled down she and the manager could have come up with better way to handle similar situations in the future. Maybe Macy’s should have specified transgender changing rooms or strip them of sexual segregation altogether.
Who do you think is in the right or in the wrong? How would you handle a similar situation on the job?
By Heather Fairchild - Heather is a multimedia developer with experience in web, film, photography and animation as well as traditional fine arts like painting and sculpting. In addition to writing for Nexxt, she is co-founder of design and promotion company. Heather’s spare time consists of making puppets, teaching Sunday School, building Legos and doing science experiments with her children.
Become a member to take advantage of more features, like commenting and voting.
Register or sign in today!