CORPORATEEQUALITY INDEX

09
A Report Card on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Equality in Corporate America

49540x3_Final.indd 1.1

10/1/08 12:45:20 PM

Human Rights Campaign Foundation
1640 Rhode Island Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036
phone 202/628-4160 TTY 202/216-1572 fax 866/369-3348
website www.hrc.org/workplace e-mail workplace@hrc.org
The Human Rights Campaign Foundation believes that all Americans should have theopportunity to care for their families, earn a living, serve their country and live open, honest
and safe lives at home, at work and in their community.
Through pioneering research, advocacy and education, the HRC Foundation pursues
practices and policies that support and protect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgenderindividuals and their families in education, healthcare, corporate, public and privateorganizations across the country.
The HRC Foundation also provides accurate, timely research and information vital to theLGBT community, straight allies and policymakers on a wide range of issues, including:family law, senior health and housing, parenting, schools, workplace policies and law,religion, civil unions, marriage, adoption, financial planning and healthcare.
Our programs, which include the Workplace Project, the Religion and Faith Program, theComing Out Project, the Family Project, Youth and Campus Outreach and the Center for
the Study of Equality, are possible through the generous gifts of individual donors andcorporate and private philanthropic foundations. Contributions to the HRC Foundation are
tax-deductible to the fullest extent of the law. See www.hrc.org for more.
© 2008 by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation. The HRC Foundation grants
permission for the reproduction and redistribution of this publication only when reproduced
in its entirety and distributed free of charge. The Human Rights Campaign name and theEquality logo are trademarks of the Human Rights Campaign.

ISBN 10: 1-934765-05-8
ISBN 13: 978-1-934765-05-0

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 1.2

www.hrc.org/cei

10/1/08 12:45:20 PM

CONTENTS
LETTER FROM THE HRC FOUNDATION PRESIDENT | 1
OVERVIEW OF FINDINGS | 2
Performance by Geography | 4
Performance by Industry | 6
CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATING SYSTEM AND METHODOLOGY | 8
Methodology | 10
FINDINGS | 12
Non-Discrimination Policies and Diversity Training/Awareness | 12
Sexual Orientation | 12
Gender Identity or Expression | 13
Health Insurance Benefits | 14
Transgender-Inclusive Benefits | 14
Partner Benefits | 18
LGBT Employee Resource Groups and Diversity Councils | 20
External Engagement | 21
Other Emerging Best Practices in LGBT Workplace Issues | 22
Supplier Diversity Programs | 22
Anti-Harassment Policies | 22
Self-Identification | 22
APPENDICES 23 – 80
Appendix A. Employers with Ratings of 100 Percent | 23
Appendix B. Corporate Equality Index Ratings and Breakdown | 31
Appendix C. Corporate Equality Index Ratings by Industry, Descending Score | 48
Appendix D. HRC Corporate Equality Index Survey | 65

ABOUT THE HRC FOUNDATION’S WORKPLACE PROJECT
Project Staff

82

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS83

HRC BUSINESS COUNCIL
www.hrc.org/cei

49540x3_Final.indd 1.3

82

84
CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

10/1/08 12:45:20 PM

1.449540x3_Final.indd 1.4

CORPORATECORP ORATE E
EQUALITYQUALITY IINDEXN D E X 2009
200 9

www.hrc.org/cei

10/1/08 12:45:20 PM

LETTER

FROM THE HRC FOUNDATION PRESIDENT

I am thrilled to share the 2009 Corporate
Equality Index with you.
It is hard to believe that this is just the seventh yearof the report. Originally designed as a roadmap
for creating fair workplaces for lesbian, gay,bisexual and transgender employees at a time whendiscrimination against LGBT employees persisted
and businesses lacked concrete guidance on LGBT
inclusion, the CEI has burgeoned into the premierebenchmarking tool for gauging workplace equality.
Since that first report in 2002, the rates at which
corporate America has expanded policies, practices
and benefits to include LGBT employees havebeen faster than perhaps many thought possible.
The progress has been vast in its reach and deep in
its impact. LGBT employees and consumers canrecognize the hallmarks of an inclusive employer —from fully inclusive non-discrimination polices anddiversity programming to equal benefits. As morebusinesses participate in the annual survey, LGBT
Americans and our allies can make more informed
decisions about where to work and spend money.
Senior partners and CEOs have taken note of thesechoices and the competition for LGBT talent andconsumer dollars is at an all-time high.

beyond the minimum benchmarks. The Human
Rights Campaign Foundation continues to seek out
the expertise of private-sector diversity leaders, LGBT
workplace advocates and employees to build on the
success of the CEI to date.
A record-breaking number of businesses submitted
surveys this year. While not all of those areamong the top-tier percentage-wise, we commend
these businesses for engaging with the Human
Rights Campaign Foundation and committing totransparency in their progress. I look forward toushering more businesses into our 100-percent tierand having the opportunity to work side-by-side withthese businesses as they move toward equality.
We hope that you find this report useful and that the
information contained herein can better inform yourdaily actions, because advancing LGBT equality must
rest with all of us. From choosing a particular business
in which to invest or buy goods or services, to sparking
conversation at your workplace about LGBT issues, we
can work together to move our colleagues, employers
and communities toward change.

Thank you,

In step with the CEI’s trend line of upward growth,

the number of top-rated
businesses reached an
unprecedented 260 this year

Joe Solmonese
President, Human Rights Campaign Foundation— 65 more than last year, totaling over 9.3 million
full-time employees working for 100 percent rated
businesses. Many businesses are also seeking out
practices to further distinguish their workplaces

www.hrc.org/cei

49540x3_Final.indd 1

CORPORATECORP ORATE E
EQUALITYQUALITY IINDEXN D E X 2009
200 9

1

10/1/08 12:45:20 PM

260

businesses achieved the top rating of 100 percent this year, comparedwith 195 businesses that received perfect ratings in the previous year.
Collectively, these businesses employ 9,345,581 full-time U.S. workers.
The total number of businesses at 100 percent represent an increase of
one-third over the previous year’s total number of 195 businesses. When
the Human Rights Campaign Foundation Corporate Equality Index was
launched in 2002, only 13 companies received 100 percent.
A complete list of employers that achieved a perfect rating is available as
Appendix A on p. 23.

260

195

138
101
56
26
13
2002
2

49540x3_Final.indd 2

2003

2004

2005

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 9

2006

2008

2009

www.hrc.org/cei

10/1/08 12:45:20 PM

A total of 584 businesses were rated this year, an
increase of 13 percent over the 2008 CEI. The
average rating across the entire index was 83,
compared to 81 percent last year.
Other businesses showed tremendous progress fromlast year’s rating. Four businesses had improvements
of at least 50 percentage points: American
International Group Inc., Bayer Corp., Nestle
Purina PetCare Co. and Omnicom Group.
Two companies continued to get a rating of zero,
Exxon Mobil Corp. and Perot Systems Corp.

Neither company has taken steps to improve its
rating; ExxonMobil has resisted mounting shareholderpressure to amend its non-discrimination policies.
In a sign of improvement, Meijer, a grocery chainthat received a rating of zero in 2008, added sexual
orientation to its non-discrimination policy and raised
its score to 15 percent.
Two other companies opposed shareholder
resolutions to amend their non-discrimination policies
to include gender identity, Verizon Communications
Inc. and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Their scores were 70
and 40, respectively.

2007
FORTUNE
RANK

2009
CEI
RATING

Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

1

40

Exxon Mobil Corp.

20

Progress at the Fortune-Ranked Companies
This year marked the third time the Fortune
1000 list of the largest publicly traded
companies was invited to take part in the
Corporate Equality Index survey. The Fortune
500 list has been invited each year since 2002.
Of the 255 Fortune 500-ranked businesses
that the CEI rated, 120 received 100 percent
ratings. The average CEI rating of Fortune
500 companies was 83. Of the 54 Fortuneranked businesses between 500 and 1000,
17 received 100 percent ratings. The averagerating of these companies was 72.
Ten of the top 20 Fortune-ranked companies
received 100 percent ratings, including newly
rated Cardinal Health.

General Motors Corp.

3

100

Chevron Corp.

4100

ConocoPhillips

560

General Electric Co.

680

Ford Motor Co.

7

100

Citigroup Inc.

8

100

Bank of America Corp.

9100

American International Group Inc.

10

85

J.P. Morgan Chase & Co

11

100

Berkshire Hathaway*

12—

Verizon Communications Inc.

13

70

Hewlett-Packard Co.

14

100

International Business Machines Corp.

15

100

Valero Energy*

16—Home Depot Inc.

17

85

McKesson Corp.

18

68

Cardinal Health

19

100

Morgan Stanley

20

100

* The HRC Foundation does not have sufficient information
to provide a rating for this company.

www.hrc.org/cei

49540x3_Final.indd 3

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 93

10/1/08 12:45:21 PM

FINDINGS / PERFORMANCE BY

GEOGRAPHY

449540x3_Final.indd 4

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 9

Number of Businesses
Rating 100 Percent
on the CEI by
Headquarters Location
Alabama*—

Alaska*—Arizona1

Arkansas—

California

43

Colorado

1

Connecticut

6

Delaware*1

District of Columbia

9

Florida3

Georgia

11

Hawaii*

—

Idaho

—

Illinois

22

Indiana

3

Iowa*

—

Kansas*1

Kentucky1

Louisiana—

Maine*—

Maryland5

Massachusetts

16

Michigan

8

Minnesota

12

Mississippi*—

Missouri

4Montana*—

Nebraska—

Nevada1

New Hampshire*—

New Jersey

15

New Mexico—

New York

52

North Carolina

5

North Dakota*

—

Ohio

9

Oklahoma—

Oregon*1

Pennsylvania

1

Rhode Island—

South Carolina*—

South Dakota*—

Tennessee

—

Texas

17

Utah*

—

Vermont—

Virginia

3

Washington

7

West Virginia*—

Wisconsin

2

Wyoming*—* State has fewer than 5 Fortune 500-ranked business.

California and New York continue to accelerate aheadof other states, each adding at least seven new top-rated
businesses to its list. However, 25 other states and theDistrict of Columbia have at least one 100 percent rated
business with its headquarters located there. Adding
two businesses, Illinois continued to house many toprated businesses and Texas added eight top-percent
rated businesses. The location of top-rated Corporate
Equality Index employers resembles the number of Fortune
500-ranked companies in each state.

www.hrc.org/cei

10/1/08 12:45:21 PM

NUMBER OF BUSINESSES IN EACH STATE
WITH CEI RATINGS OF 100 PERCENT■ 1-3 businesses■ 4-8 businesses■ 9-12 businesses■ 13 or more businesses
www.hrc.org/cei

49540x3_Final.indd 5

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 9510/1/08 12:45:21 PM

FINDINGS / PERFORMANCE BY

INDUSTRY
Several industries saw improvement in both the average rating and the number of top-rated
businesses: airlines; computer hardware and office equipment; food, beverages and groceries;
insurance; law firms; and, retail and consumer products.
Improvements made by Alaska Airlines and Continental Airlines Inc. brought them to 100 percent
alongside US Airways and seventh time top-rated business, American Airlines. Within computer
hardware and office equipment, CDW Corp.’s expansion of equal benefits and workplace protections
raised this industry’s overall ratings. The growth in the food, beverages and groceries industry is
attributed to both newcomers to the 100 percent tier such as Diageo North America, as wellas significant positive changes at businesses like Food Lion LLC — which added gender identity
protections to its non-discrimination policy, and H.J. Heinz Co. — which implemented domestic
partner benefits. Within the insurance industry, New York Life Insurance Co. and The Progressive
Corp. both added gender identity protections, among other changes, further elevating the industry
rating. In retail and consumer products, Barnes & Noble Inc. joined Borders Group Inc. at 100
percent while Target Corp., Unilever and Kimberly-Clark Corp. reached the 100 percent tier thisyear as well.
In 2006, the first year law firms were invited to participate, 12 achieved a score of 100 percent. That
figure has leaped to an unprecedented industry high of 64 businesses occupying the 100 percent
tier, eclipsing banking and financial services. Law firms are highly competitive in their recruitment
efforts for law school graduates, and are also held to increasing standards of diversity by theircorporate clients. LGBT equality is an integral part of these efforts to recruit and retain top talentand cultivate clients. Beyond the LGBT community, many allies look to CEI ratings as a bellwether
for a potential employer’s commitment to diversity.
Of the 35 industries represented on the HRC Foundation Corporate Equality Index, five have no toprated companies: engineering and construction; forest and paper products; mining and metals;
residential real estate; and waste management.

649540x3_Final.indd 6

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009www.hrc.org/cei

10/1/08 12:45:21 PM

Industry

Avg.

Advertising, Marketing

73

Aerospace and Defense

85

Airlines

92

Apparel, Fashion, Textiles,
Department Stores

84

Automotive

75

Banking and Financial Services

89

Chemicals and Biotechnology

81

Computer and Data Services

68

Computer Hardware/Office Equip.

85

Computer Software

91

Consulting, Business Services

95

Education, Child Care

100

Energy and Utilities

68

Engineering and Construction

52

Entertainment/Electronic Media

85

Food, Beverages and Groceries

74

Forest and Paper Products

73

Healthcare

77

High-Tech/Photo/Science Equip.

84

Hotels, Resorts and Casinos

92

Insurance

89

Internet Services and Retailing88

Law Firms

92

Mail and Freight Delivery

58

Manufacturing

59

Mining and Metals

85

Oil and Gas

72

Pharmaceuticals

93

Publishing and Printing

71

Real Estate, Residential

80

Retail and Consumer Products

82

Telecommunications

86

Tobacco100

Transportation, Travel

85

Waste Management

88

www.hrc.org/cei

49540x3_Final.indd 7

Number of Businesses at 100 Percent

1
5
4

9
8
30
5
1
11
6
11
1
5
0
5
13
0
3
6
7
18
4
64
1
3
0
3
11
2
0
16
4
1
2
0

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 20097

10/1/08 12:45:21 PM

Since its inception in 2002, the Human Rights Campaign Foundation Corporate Equality Index has
provided businesses with a blueprint for establishing and maintaining inclusive workplaces for lesbian,gay, bisexual and transgender employees. Beyond modeling success, the resources that supplement
the CEI equip businesses with the tools they need to effect change throughout their organization.
With an ever-increasing response rate, the extent to which businesses rely on the CEI has solidified
its status as the benchmark by which businesses and their employees can gauge their successagainst competitors on LGBT inclusion.
The HRC Foundation offers continually updated resources for employers on each of the criteria on
its website at www.hrc.org/workplace.

THE EVOLUTION OF THE CRITERIAThe HRC Foundation is committed to maintaining rigorous, transparent and achievable criteria for
the Corporate Equality Index and, just as importantly, providing the tools for employers to meet them.
Changes to the criteria are made with input from expert LGBT workplace advocates and leaders at
the most advanced firms, taking into consideration the changing landscape of legal protections forLGBT employees and their families from state to state.
In 2002, the first CEI rated employers on seven criteria that remain the basis for today’s rating
system. The original criteria were guided in part by the Equality Principles —- 10 key practices forbusinesses committed to equal treatment of LGBT employees, consumers and investors. For more
information, visit www.equalityproject.org/principles/en.html.
Just 13 businesses achieved top ratings in that first year; by 2005, more than 100 businesses had
achieved perfect ratings, with many establishing the next best practices such as spousal-equivalent
partner benefits and transgender-inclusive benefits.
In 2006, the HRC Foundation rolled out the second and current version of the CEI criteria, withgreater weight given to spousal-equivalent partner benefits and to transgender inclusion; thesecriteria remain in effect for the 2009 report. Future changes to the criteria will be announced at least
12 months before going into effect.

THE ‘BEST PLACES TO WORK’ DISTINCTION
Businesses that are recognized in this report with a rating of 100 percent are further recognized as“Best Places to Work for LGBT Equality.” Such businesses are invited to use this distinction and theaccompanying trademark in their recruitment and advertising efforts.

▼

THE CURRENT CRITERIAThe following rating system has been in effect since the 2006 CEI report, and remains effective
through this and the 2010 report.

849540x3_Final.indd 8

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 9

www.hrc.org/cei

10/1/08 12:45:22 PM

▼& METHODOLOGYPOINTSPOSSIBLE

1.

Non-discrimination policy, diversity training — sexual orientation
a. Equal Employment Opportunity policy includes sexual orientationb. Diversity training covers sexual orientation

15
5

2.

Non-discrimination policy, diversity training & benefits — gender identity or expression
a. Equal Employment Opportunity policy includes gender identity
or expression
15
b. Gender identity diversity training offered OR
supportive gender transition guidelines in place*5c. Offers transgender-inclusive insurance coverage for at least
one type of benefit* At least one: Counseling by a mental health professional;
pharmacy benefits covering hormone therapy; medical visits to monitor theeffects of hormone therapy and other associated lab procedures; medicallynecessary surgical procedures such as hysterectomy; or short-term disability
leave for surgical procedures
5

3.

Partner benefits
a. Partner health insurance
b. Partner COBRA, dental, vision and legal dependent coverage*c. Other partner benefits* At least three: FMLA-like leave; †bereavement leave;† employer-provided supplemental life insurance for a partner;
relocation/travel assistance; adoption assistance; qualified joint and survivor
annuity for partners; qualified pre-retirement survivor annuity for partners;
retiree healthcare benefits; or employee discounts

15
5

5

4.

LGBT employee resource group / diversity council, or(half credit) Would support a LGBT employee resource group with
employer resources if employees expressed an interest

15

5.

Positively engages the external LGBT community

15

6.

Employer exhibits responsible behavior toward the LGBT community;
does not engage in action that would undermine LGBT equality

—**

100

*

Criterion was added to the Corporate Equality Index in 2006.

**

Employers found engaging in activities that would undermine LGBT equality
will have 15 points removed from their scores.

†

Benefit provided to the employee on behalf of the employee’s same-sex partner.

www.hrc.org/cei

49540x3_Final.indd 9

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 9910/1/08 12:45:22 PM

HRC CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATING SYSTEM &METHODOLOGY
WHAT BUSINESSES ARE RATEDThe Human Rights Campaign Foundation utilizes lists of the largest and most successful U.S.
employers as a basis for inviting businesses to participate in the Corporate Equality Index, including
Fortune magazine’s 1,000 largest publicly traded businesses (the 2007 Fortune 1000) and American
Lawyer magazine’s top 200 revenue-grossing law firms (the 2007 AmLaw 200). Additionally, any
private-sector, for-profit employer with 500 or more full-time U.S. employees can request to participate
by e-mailing workplace@hrc.org.

HOW WE OBTAIN THE INFORMATION / THE HRC CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
The primary source of information for the CEI rating is the CEI survey (see Appendix D on page 65).
While many questions on the survey are required for participation in the CEI, others are informationalquestions that help gauge trends and best practices among all businesses or particular industries.
Invitations for the 2009 CEI survey were mailed in March 2008. If a business had not previously
participated in the CEI, surveys were sent to the chief executive officer or managing partner of the firm,
as well as the highest level executive responsible for human resources or diversity when it was possible
to obtain their information. If a business had previously participated in the CEI, surveys were first sent to
the individuals responsible for previous submissions.
The web-based survey included links to sample policies and other guidance on the HRC Foundation
Workplace Project website. HRC Foundation staff provided additional assistance and advice throughout
the process and reviewed submitted documentation for appropriate language and consistency withsurvey answers. Businesses were able to check their preliminary ratings as they progressed throughthe online survey and were invited to provide HRC Foundation staff with any additional information or
updates before this report went to print.
The HRC Foundation may occasionally rate businesses that have not submitted a survey this year if thebusiness had submitted a survey in previous years and the information is determined to be accurate orif the HRC Foundation has obtained sufficient information to provide an individual rating. In both cases,
the HRC Foundation notifies the business of the rating and asks for any updates or clarification.
A total of 1,567 businesses received invitations to take part in the survey. Of that number, 466
submitted surveys and 584 were ultimately rated. Last year, a total of 1,806 businesses were sent
invitations, 416 submitted surveys and 519 were rated. Fewer businesses received invitations this year
to better focus on the primary target pool of businesses, namely the Fortune 1000 and AmLaw 200 as
well as businesses that have pro-actively reached out to the Human Rights Campaign Foundation.
The information required to generate CEI ratings for businesses is largely considered proprietary andis difficult to ascertain from public records alone. In addition to the self-reporting provided through the
CEI survey, the HRC Foundation employs several methods to rate businesses. A team of researchersinvestigates and cross-checks the policies and practices of the rated businesses and the implicationsof those policies and practices for LGBT workers, including any connections with organizations thatengage in anti-LGBT activities. Employers are not rated until all appropriate information has beengathered and verified to the extent possible.

1049540x3_Final.indd 10

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 9

www.hrc.org/cei

10/1/08 12:45:22 PM

In total, the sources used include:■ The HRC Foundation Corporate Equality Index survey;■ Securities and Exchange Commission filings to track connections between publiccompanies’ significant shareholders and any organizations or activities that engage inanti-LGBT activities (such connections are footnoted in this report, but do not necessarilychange a business’s rating);■ Internal Revenue Service 990 tax filings for business foundation gifts to anti-LGBT groups;■ Case law and news accounts for allegations of discrimination on the basis of sexual
orientation and/or gender identity or expression that have been brought against any ofthese businesses;■ Individuals or unofficial LGBT employee groups that report information to the HRC
Foundation; and■ The HRC Foundation Workplace Project, which since 1995 has collected information on
U.S. employers and today maintains the most accurate and extensive database of business
policies that affect LGBT workers and their families.
If a business was found to have a connection with an anti-LGBT organization or activity, the HRC
Foundation contacted the business and gave them an opportunity to respond and ensure, to the bestof its ability, that no such action would occur in the future. Businesses unwilling to do so lose 15 points
from their overall rating through criterion 6, with a minimum possible total rating of zero points.

A NOTE ABOUT BUSINESSES’ RATINGS
Recognizing that many of the businesses rated in the CEI employ thousands of employees thatspan most, if not all, of the 50 states, each business’s rating should be viewed as a snapshot of its
activity. A CEI rating cannot convey all the nuances of a business’s particular approach to LGBT
workplace issues. Furthermore, some businesses’ ratings dropped from the previous year; thebulk of these businesses lost points because some data was no longer reliable and/or businesses
experienced fluctuations in their external engagement efforts.

www.hrc.org/cei

49540x3_Final.indd 11

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 911

10/1/08 12:45:22 PM

FINDINGS
Non-Discrimination Policies and Diversity Training/AwarenessA clear and defined non-discrimination policy with respect to conditions of employment including hiring,promotions, termination and compensation that includes “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” or “gender
identity or expression” — in addition to federally protected classes such as age, race, sex, religion, national origin
and disability — is an essential baseline policy for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender inclusion.
To read more about Equal Opportunity Employment Issues for LGBT Workers, please visit www.hrc.org/
issues/about_equal_opportunity.asp.
Diversity awareness or employee training programs are important vehicles through which an employer
communicates its expectations of fair treatment to employees. Rather than isolating diversity issues, an increasing
number of employers are integrating lessons on diversity with other standard trainings that are skills or policybased. Each employer handles diversity training differently; some require all employees to attend, while others
might only require managers or supervisors to attend.
SEXUAL ORIENTATION
Sexual orientation is generally defined as an individual’s enduring physical, romantic, emotional
and/or spiritual attraction to another person.

99%of CEI-rated employers provide employment protections on the basis of sexual orientation (criterion 1a). A total of 92 percent of rated employers cover“sexual orientation” as a topic of diversity training, though not all employees
may be required to attend (criterion 1b).

Criterion 1a (See Appendix B. on p. 31 for individual employer ratings)
Businesses That Prohibit Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation
575
509

%

+ 13

Criterion 1b (See Appendix B. on p. 31 for individual employer ratings)
Businesses That Provide Diversity Training Covering Sexual Orientation
539
466

2009

12

49540x3_Final.indd 12

%

+ 16

2008

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 9

www.hrc.org/cei

10/1/08 12:45:22 PM

GENDER IDENTITY
Gender identity is generally defined as an individual’s internal, personal sense of being a man or awoman. For transgender people, their birth-assigned sex and their own internal sense of gender identity do not match. Gender expression refers to all of the external characteristics and behaviors that aresocially defined as either masculine or feminine, such as dress, grooming, mannerisms, speech patterns
and social interactions. It is worth noting that social or cultural norms can vary widely and some characteristics that may be accepted as masculine, feminine or neutral in one culture may not be assessedsimilarly in another.
Gender identity and gender expression are distinct from sexual orientation — transgender people may beheterosexual, lesbian, gay or bisexual.
Employers that revise their non-discrimination policies should examine internal policies and procedureswith an eye toward how employees express their gender. This includes things such as personnel records
and directories, restroom and changing facilities, as well as dress codes and harassment policies. Gendertransition guidelines help ensure consistent treatment with regard to these matters when an employeetransitions on the job. The Human Rights Campaign Foundation provides resources to address theseissues on its website at www.hrc.org/workplace/transgender.

66%of CEI-rated employers provide employment protections on the basis of gender identity or expression, the highest figure to date. The expansion of these
protections has been remarkable; growth from the 2002 CEI has been 12-foldwhen just 5 percent of CEI-rated employers included gender identity protections in 2002 (criterion 2a).

Seventy-two percent of this year’s rated businesses have written gender transition guidelines and/or
cover gender identity as a topic of diversity training, up from 68 percent last year (criterion 2b). A total of
115 employers have transition guidelines, up from 90 last year.

Criterion 2a (See Appendix B. on p. 31 for individual employer ratings)
Businesses That Prohibit Discrimination Based on Gender Identity or Expression
383

%

+ 28

300

Criterion 2b (See Appendix B. on p. 31 for individual employer ratings)
Businesses That Provide Diversity Training Covering Gender Identity OR
Have Supportive Gender Transition Guidelines
419
351

2009

+ 19

2008

www.hrc.org/cei

49540x3_Final.indd 13%

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 913

10/1/08 12:45:22 PM

FINDINGS
Health Insurance Benefits
On average, roughly 20 percent of employees’ overall compensation is provided in the form of healthinsurance benefits for themselves and often, for their families. For employees with partners and/or
children not eligible for those benefits, this disparity in compensation is profound. Since the 1990s,
domestic partner benefits have become the norm — the majority of Fortune 500 companies now
provide them. More recently, employers have started to address health insurance discrimination against
transgender individuals.

TRANSGENDER-INCLUSIVE BENEFITS
Most transgender people are categorically denied health insurance coverage for necessary medical treatment, often irrespective of whether treatment is related to sex reassignment. Up until the last few years,
nearly all health insurance plans in the United States excluded coverage for sex reassignment or related
treatment, and sometimes a plan’s exclusion is worded broadly to exclude many other necessary treatments. While not all transgender people have the same medical needs, ending this discrimination against
transgender people in benefits is a critical goal that the Human Rights Campaign Foundation is working
with employers to achieve. For more information, please visit www.hrc.org/issues/9568.htm.
In 2001, the city and county of San Francisco made history by becoming the first U.S. municipalities toremove transgender access exclusions from their employee health plans. A 2006 statement from the
San Francisco’s Human Rights Commission proclaimed, “Despite actuarial fears of over-utilization anda potentially expensive benefit, the Transgender Health Benefit Program has proven to be appropriately
accessed and undeniably more affordable than other, often routinely covered, procedures.” Employeesof the city and county of San Francisco, as well as their dependents, may now access necessary medical treatments without needing to pay additional premiums, as they did the first few years the program
was available.
Since 2006, CEI survey participants have been asked to examine their insurance policies for transgender
exclusions, and to ensure that at least one of the five general types of medically necessary treatment wasavailable without exclusion. If treatment was generally available without exclusion (e.g.: if a plan covered
medically necessary surgical procedures), the business was asked to provide supporting documentation.
The original intent of this criterion was not just to educate employers about these exclusions but also to
encourage employers to remove them. Through our conversations and educational efforts with participating employers over the years, the Human Rights Campaign Foundation has helped spotlight these discriminatory insurance exclusions, and we have seen tremendous progress in removing them.
Some major insurers now provide limited options for employers to provide inclusive coverage.
Nonetheless, based on feedback given to the HRC Foundation, employers that do not self-insure are ata disadvantage in being able to obtain comprehensive coverage. For self-insured plans, the employer
assumes the risk of providing the benefits and paying all the claims and so it generally has greater control over what treatment is covered by the plan. These plans often involve a health insurance company orother third party to administer the plan. Smaller employers are much less likely to self-fund, and are thus
limited to commercial health insurance options.

1449540x3_Final.indd 14

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 9

www.hrc.org/cei

10/1/08 12:45:22 PM

75%of this year’s rated businesses have examined their transgender
exclusions to determine that coverage is available for at least one of fivecategories of treatment (criterion 2c).

Criterion 2c (See Appendix B. on p. 31 for individual employer ratings)
Businesses That Offer at Least One Transgender-Inclusive Benefit
437
407

2009

+8

%

2008

Of the employers that met this criterion:■ 71 percent
provide mental health benefits for counseling by a mental health professional.
■ 26 percent
provide pharmacy benefits for hormone therapy.
■ 21 percent
cover medical visits and lab procedures related to hormone therapy.
■ 12 percent
provide health benefits for surgical procedures.
■ 72 percent
provide short-term leave for surgical procedures.

www.hrc.org/cei

49540x3_Final.indd 15

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 915

10/1/08 12:45:23 PM

FINDINGS
ENDING BENEFITS DISCRIMINATION AGAINSTTRANSGENDER EMPLOYEESThis year, in order to verify the information submitted for this criterion, the Human Rights Campaign
Foundation asked survey participants to submit documentation to support that various medicallynecessary treatments would be covered by the insurance plan. Such documentation included:■ a complete list of exclusions (typically found only in the plan contract itself) that
does not indicate a transgender exclusion;■ clinical guidelines and/or contract language indicating that treatment would beconsidered medically necessary (usually under circumstances resembling current
or previous versions of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health); or■ other plan documents or employee communications indicating medically necessary
treatments would be covered.
While the Human Rights Campaign Foundation cannot attest that insurance coverage would ultimately
be applied equally from business to business or even between multiple insurance plans used by thesame business, our review suggests that a number of businesses have taken significant and substantial
steps to remove discrimination from at least one of their health insurance plans for employees and theirdependents.

1649540x3_Final.indd 16

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009www.hrc.org/cei

10/1/08 12:45:23 PM

49businesses had insurance plans that indicated that most medically necessary treatments would be covered. These businesses are highlighted inAppendices B & C with a “+” under column 2c.

Some of the first businesses to implement inclusive coverage placed a maximum financial amountof insurance coverage available to transgender-specific treatment over an individual’s lifetime. Of
the 49 businesses that indicated most medically necessary treatments would be covered, only six
reported a maximum financial cap, ranging from $10,000 to $75,000, with most reporting more than
$50,000. Similar to the city and county of San Francisco, the Human Rights Campaign Foundation
anticipates that businesses will eventually increase or eliminate these caps entirely.

%

The vast majority of employers that obtain credit for criterion 2c have done so through short-term
leave coverage — which generally does not fall under health insurance and its exclusions — or mental health counseling — which can also fall outside of the health insurance plan or, if covered by thehealth insurance plan, can fall outside the scope of more limited transgender exclusions.
Where the Human Rights Campaign Foundation has seen detailed documentation of coverage,
it has generally been limited to specific procedures or treatments; such limitations could eventually be viewed as insufficient. Because there has not been a plan that clearly outlines coverage forthe variety of possible treatments that could increase the likelihood of a successful transition andsuch plans are relatively new to insurers and employers, a top research goal of the Human Rights
Campaign Foundation is to issue a more detailed report of the types of coverage generally available
at these employers, as well as identified best and worst practices of such plans.
Although not all transgender people have the same medical needs, standards of medical care fortransgender people are maintained by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health,which can be found online at www.wpath.org.

www.hrc.org/cei

49540x3_Final.indd 17

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200917

10/1/08 12:45:23 PM

FINDINGSPARTNER BENEFITS
Partner benefits are a low-cost, high-value employment benefit and are now the norm among employers
committed to their LGBT employees. A 2005 Hewitt Associates study found that the majority of
employers offering the benefits — 64 percent — experience a total financial impact of less than 1 percent
of total benefits cost, 88 percent experience financial impacts of 2 percent or less and only 5 percent
experience financial impacts of 3 percent or greater of total benefits cost. The HRC Foundation Corporate
Equality Index looks to employers to provide equal benefits to LGBT employees and their families anddoes not penalize an employer if a particular benefit is not offered to any employees.

92%of CEI-rated employers provide partner health coverage to employees (criterion3a), up 16 percent from the previous year. Of these employers, 67 percent
provide them to both same and opposite-sex partners of employees (just a one
percentage point increase from last year).

Criterion 3a (See Appendix B. on p. 31 for individual employer ratings)
Businesses That Offer Partner Health Insurance
537
463

2009

%

+ 16

2008

The Human Rights Campaign Foundation provides resources relating to domestic partner benefits
on its website at www.hrc.org/issues/domestic_partner_benefits.htm.
Beyond the extension of basic health insurance coverage, growth continues in the entire set ofcomprehensive health benefits made available to partners (criterion 3b), with 82 percent of rated
employers providing equal dental, vision, dependent medical and Consolidated Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act (COBRA)-like continuation coverage, up 19 percent from the previous year. COBRAlike benefits continuation is the area that prevents many employers from obtaining credit on this criterion,
which requires that all health benefits be offered equally to opposite-sex spouses and domestic partnersof current employees; however, this gap is closing, as 83 percent of rated businesses now have parity in
COBRA-like benefits.
Where last year’s CEI saw significant growth in comprehensive health benefits but less so in the
promotion of parity in “soft” benefits (criterion 3c), such as Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)-likeleave benefits, bereavement leave, retirement benefits and employee discounts, this year the increase is
18 percent for a total of 89 percent.

1849540x3_Final.indd 18

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 9

www.hrc.org/cei

10/1/08 12:45:23 PM

The CEI requires that at least three benefits be offered equally to opposite-sex spouses and domestic
partners. Those ”soft” benefits most often extended to domestic partners include bereavement leave(86 percent of rated employers), employee assistance programs (83 percent), relocation assistance (75percent) and FMLA-like leave (74 percent).

Criterion 3b (See Appendix B. on p. 31 for individual employer ratings)
Businesses That Offer Partners Dental, Vision, COBRA and Dependent Coverage Benefits
476

%

+ 19

401

Criterion 3c (See Appendix B. on p. 31 for individual employer ratings)
Businesses That Offer at Least Three Other ‘Soft’ Benefits for Partners
522
445

2009

%

+ 18

2008

RETIREMENT BENEFITS
Until the passage of the federal Pension Protection Act of 2006, same-sex partners listed as
beneficiaries to retirement plans were prohibited from rolling those retirement plans into their own
individual retirement accounts, as opposite-sex spouses were able to do. The Internal Revenue Service
issued guidance to employers on how to provide the retirement rollover option in early 2007, but that
guidance came too late for the HRC Foundation to include the question on an informational basis in its
2008 CEI survey. To read more about the Pension Protection Act, please visit www.hrc.org/1342.htm.
This year, businesses were asked about their retirement plan distribution options for informational
purposes only. Forty-seven percent of CEI-rated businesses reported offering the rollover option tosame-sex partners and 24 percent reported that the hardship distribution within their retirement plans
was offered to same-sex partners.
The HRC Foundation continued to survey employers with defined benefit plans (pensions) on whether
they provided survivor options for domestic partners of employees, either in the form of Qualified
Joint and Survivor Annuities or Qualified Pre-retirement Survivor Annuities. A total of 43 percent ofparticipating employers indicated that they offer QJSAs to their employees’ domestic partners, while 27
percent offer QPSAs. To read more, please visit www.hrc.org/issues/8813.htm.

www.hrc.org/cei

49540x3_Final.indd 19

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 919

10/1/08 12:45:23 PM

FINDINGSLGBT Employee Resource Groups and Diversity Councils
The support of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender employee resource groups (also known as
employee network groups or affinity groups) is a crucial step toward workplace equality — these groups
foster a sense of community and team cohesion as well as provide leadership opportunities for LGBT
employees to better their own work environments. Businesses usually provide these groups with a budget
and access to resources such as meeting rooms and e-mail networks. The groups provide a clear lineof communication between employees and management, ensuring that policies and practices havetheir intended effect. LGBT ERGs have been involved in policy-making, providing input on marketing
and workplace protection policies, attracting and retaining talented individuals, leadership development,
cultural change and representation at external events. In addition to giving guidance and input on LGBTspecific workplace policies and practices, LGBT ERGs also help to provide a sense of safety andacceptance for LGBT employees within the workplace.
Recognizing the differences in businesses rated in the CEI, criterion 4 can also be met with anorganization-wide diversity council or working group with a mission that specifically includes LGBT
diversity. However, most businesses garner credit in this section for having an ERG.
More information on ERGs and helpful tips on forming them are available at the HRC Foundation’s
website at www.hrc.org/issues/GLBT_employee_groups.htm.

78%

of CEI-rated employers have an employee resource group or diversity council that includes LGBT issues (criterion 4). Of those businesses that have an
employee resource group, 90 percent of the groups are sponsored by an executive champion — someone in upper management who connects the group to thesenior decision makers of the company.

Criterion 4 (See Appendix B. on p. 31 for individual employer ratings)
Businesses That Have Employer-Supported Employee Resource Groups OR
Firm-Wide Diversity Councils
454
404

2009

20

49540x3_Final.indd 20

%

+ 13

2008

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 9

www.hrc.org/cei

10/1/08 12:45:23 PM

External Engagement
The HRC Foundation Corporate Equality Index rewards employers that demonstrate their commitment tolesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender workers through engaging with and supporting the broader LGBT
community. Such efforts include positive, targeted marketing and advertising, philanthropic activities andevent sponsorships.
Many employers engage LGBT consumers directly through local or national marketing or advertising
campaigns in LGBT media. Consumer-facing businesses are vying to capture a portion of the evergrowing LGBT market, projected by Witeck-Combs Communications and Harris Interactive to growfrom $723 billion in 2008 to $831 billion by 2011, while other businesses may engage in recruitment orawareness campaigns.
Philanthropic activities in the form of cash grants or in-kind donations of products or services may include
contributions to such causes as LGBT health, education or political organizations or projects. These gifts
often have a strategic long-term approach to a business’s bottom line; for example, official sponsors of theInternational Gay and Lesbian Travel Association include various airlines, travel and car rental operators,
hotels and tourism associations.
Similarly, event and conference sponsorships can provide businesses with targeted audiences that can
assist their bottom line. For example, businesses that support LGBT pride celebrations in particular cities
can establish local connections with LGBT consumers.

82%of CEI-rated businesses report some form of external engagement with
the LGBT community, through marketing efforts, advertisements in LGBT
media, sponsorship of LGBT events or financial or in-kind contributions toLGBT organizations (criterion 5).

Criterion 5 (See Appendix B. on p. 31 for individual employer ratings)
Businesses That Positively Engage the External LGBT Community
476
409

2009

%

+ 16

2008

Increasingly, CEI-rated businesses are engaged with professional recruiting events, such as the annual
Lavender Law conference and Reaching Out MBA Career Expo, which are a win-win for LGBT job-seekers
and employers. A new generation is entering the work force with more expectations of fairness aroundLGBT policies and practices than previous cohorts. Professional job fairs such as these provide attendees
the opportunity to interact with employers that are very clearly interested in hiring LGBT professionals.
A total of 178 businesses, or 38 percent of businesses that garnered credit for criterion 5 reported at least
one effort with the primary purpose of recruiting LGBT job candidates.

www.hrc.org/cei

49540x3_Final.indd 21

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 921

10/1/08 12:45:23 PM

FINDINGS
Other Emerging Best Practices in LGBT Workplace Issues
Each year, the Human Rights Campaign Foundation’s Corporate Equality Index surveys employers on
a variety of issues that are not included in the CEI rating to stay on the vanguard of LGBT workplace
inclusion efforts.

SUPPLIER DIVERSITY PROGRAMS
Supplier diversity programs help firms identify smaller businesses owned primarily by minorities,
including lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. The National Gay and Lesbian Chamber ofCommerce has certified LGBT-owned businesses since 2002 at www.nglcc.org.

15%of CEI-rated employers use LGBT-owned suppliers up from 12% last year. Of
the 583 rated employers, 342 have supplier diversity programs, of which 26
percent include LGBT-owned suppliers.

ANTI-HARASSMENT POLICIESIn lieu of federal protections for LGBT employees, many businesses take more pro-active steps to ensure
clear and robust policies to protect LGBT workers from discrimination or hostility. For the first time, the Human
Rights Campaign Foundation asked informational questions about the inclusion of “sexual orientation” and“gender identity” or “gender identity or expression” in anti-harassment policies. While EEO/non-discrimination
policies are typically considered the primary legal safety net for workers, anti-harassment policies can further
elaborate on behavior that is not tolerated in the workplace. In addition, the inclusion of the terms helps humanresource professionals, managers and other potential mediators fully grasp the issues involved should a conflictarise. Seventy-two percent of CEI-rated businesses include “sexual orientation” in their anti-harassment policies
and 54 percent include “gender identity” or “gender identity or expression.”

SELF-IDENTIFICATION
Unlike other diversity categories, such as race and gender, employers are not required to collect statistics
on the number of LGBT people they employ. Employers have sought to determine the number of theiremployees who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender while balancing privacy concerns. Some
employers use their LGBT employee group numbers to provide estimates, but this method is limited by
the scope of such voluntary groups over a highly dispersed workforce.
More recently, employers have gathered statistics through anonymous employee engagement or
satisfaction surveys.

36

%

22

49540x3_Final.indd 22of CEI-rated employers, 211 of all rated employers, use surveys or other toolsthat allow employees to voluntarily disclose their sexual orientation or gender
identity, compared with 27 percent in the previous year.

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 9

www.hrc.org/cei

10/1/08 12:45:23 PM

EMPLOYERS WITH RATINGS OF 100 PERCENT 23 – 30

www.hrc.org/cei

49540x3_Final.indd 23▼

APPENDIX A

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 923

10/1/08 12:45:24 PM

APPENDIX A. EMPLOYERS WITH RATINGS OF 100 PERCENT

Employer

Headquarters Location

No. of Years at 100 Percent
1

24

3M Co.

St. Paul, MN

AAA Northern California, Nevada and Utah

San Francisco, CA

Abercrombie & Fitch Co.

New Albany, OH

Accenture Ltd.

New York, NY

Aetna Inc.

Hartford, CT

Agilent Technologies Inc.

Santa Clara, CA

Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld LLP

Washington, DC

Alaska Airlines

Seattle, WA

Alcatel-Lucent

Murray Hill, NJ

Allianz Life Insurance Co. of North America

Minneapolis, MN

Allstate Corp., The

Northbrook, IL

Alston & Bird LLP

Atlanta, GA

American Express Co.

New York, NY

Ameriprise Financial Inc.

Minneapolis, MN

AMR Corp. (American Airlines)

Fort Worth, TX

Anheuser-Busch Companies Inc.

St. Louis, MO

Aon Corp.

Chicago, IL

Apple Inc.

Cupertino, CA

Arent Fox LLP

Washington, DC

Arnold & Porter LLP

Washington, DC

7

2
1
7
3
2
4
5
3
7
3
2
7
1
3

Indianapolis, IN

Bank of America Corp.

Charlotte, NC

Bank of New York Mellon Corp., The

New York, NY

1

Barnes & Noble Inc.

New York, NY

1

BASF Corp.

Florham Park, NJ

1

Bausch & Lomb Inc.

Rochester, NY

Houston, TX

Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Ridgefield, CT

Boeing Co.

Chicago, IL

Borders Group Inc.

Ann Arbor, MI

Boston Consulting Group

Boston, MA

BP America Inc.

Houston, TX

4
3
1
3

6
5
2
1
2
3
4
2
4

Bright Horizons Family Solutions Inc.

Watertown, MA

3Brinker International Inc.

Dallas, TX

3

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 24

7

5

Baker & Daniels LLP

BMC Software Inc.

6

2

San Antonio, TX

Richfield, MN

5

3

Boston, MA

Boston, MA

4

4Bain & Co. Inc. (& Bridgespan Group Inc.)Best Buy Co. Inc.

3

1

AT&T Inc.

Bingham McCutchen LLP

2w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:24 PM

APPENDIX A. EMPLOYERS WITH RATINGS OF 100 PERCENT

Employer

Headquarters Location

No. of Years at 100 Percent
1

Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.

New York, NY

Brown Rudnick LLP

Boston, MA

Bryan Cave LLP

St. Louis, MO

Campbell Soup Co.

Camden, NJ

Capital One Financial Corp.

McLean, VA

Cardinal Health

Dublin, OH

Cargill Inc.

Wayzata, MN

Carlson Companies Inc.

Minnetonka, MN

Carmax Inc.

Richmond, VACharles Schwab Corp., The

San Francisco, CA

Chevron Corp.

San Ramon, CA

ChoicePoint Inc.

Alpharetta, GA

3

4

5

6

7

3
1
2
1
6
1
5
3
1
5
4
5

Chrysler LLC

Auburn Hills, MI

Chubb Corp.

Warren, NJ

5

Cisco Systems Inc.

San Jose, CA

5

Citigroup Inc.

New York, NY

5

Clear Channel Communications Inc.

San Antonio, TX

Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton LLPNew York, NY

Clifford Chance US LLPNew York, NY

Clorox Co.

Oakland, CA

3

CNA Insurance

Chicago, IL

3

Coca-Cola Co., The

Atlanta, GA

3

Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc.

Atlanta, GA

1Constellation Energy Group Inc.

Baltimore, MD

1Continental Airlines Inc.

Houston, TX

1Coors Brewing Co.

Denver, CO

Corning Inc.

Corning, NY

Covington & Burling LLP

Washington, DC

1

Cox Enterprises Inc./Cox Communications Inc.

Atlanta, GA

1

Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLPNew York, NY

1

Credit Suisse USA Inc.

New York, NY

4

Cummins Inc.

Columbus, IN

4

Debevoise & Plimpton LLPNew York, NY

Dell Inc.

Round Rock, TX

Deloitte LLPNew York, NY

Deutsche BankNew York, NY

Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP

New York, NY

1

Diageo North America

Norwalk, CT

1w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 25

2

4

3
2
1

5
4

1
5
3
6

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200925

10/1/08 12:45:24 PM

APPENDIX A. EMPLOYERS WITH RATINGS OF 100 PERCENT

Employer

Headquarters Location

No. of Years at 100 Percent
1

26

Dickstein Shapiro LLP

Washington, DC

DLA Piper

Baltimore, MD

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Minneapolis, MN

Dow Chemical Co.

Midland, MI

2

3

4

3
4

Wilmington, DE
Rochester, NY

eBay Inc.

San Jose, CA

1

Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge LLP

Boston, MA

1

3
7Electronic Arts Inc.

Redwood City, CA

Eli Lilly & Co.

Indianapolis, IN

Ernst & Young LLPNew York, NY

4

Estee Lauder Companies

New York, NY

4

2
3

Esurance Inc.

San Francisco, CA

Faegre & Benson LLP

Minneapolis, MN

Fannie Mae

Washington, DC

Foley & Lardner LLP

Milwaukee, WI

2
2

Boston, MA
Dearborn, MI

Freescale Semiconductor Inc.

Austin, TX

Fried, Frank, Haris, Shriver & Jacobson LLPNew York, NY

2
5
3

5
4
1

GameStop Corp.

Grapevine, TX

Gap Inc.

San Francisco, CA

Genentech Inc.

South San Francisco, CA

General Motors Corp.

Detroit, MI

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP

Los Angeles, CA

GlaxoSmithKline plc

Philadelphia, PA

4

Global Hyatt Corp.

Chicago, IL

4Goldman Sachs Group Inc., The

New York, NY

2
4
2
3
1

5

Google Inc.

Mountain View, CA

Harrah’s Entertainment Inc.

Las Vegas, NV

2

Hartford Financial Services Co.

Hartford, CT

2Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Inc.

Wellesley, MA

Haynes and Boone LLP

Dallas, TX

Heller Ehrman LLP

San Francisco, CA

Herman Miller Inc.

Zeeland, MI

Hewitt Associates

Lincolnshire, IL

Hewlett-Packard Co.

Palo Alto, CA

Hoffmann-La Roche Inc.

Nutley, NJ

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 26

72

DuPont (E.I. du Pont de Nemours)

Foley Hoag LLP

6

1

Eastman Kodak Co.

Ford Motor Co.

5

3

3
1
3
2
3
6
1

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:24 PM

APPENDIX A. EMPLOYERS WITH RATINGS OF 100 PERCENT

Employer

Headquarters Location

No. of Years at 100 Percent
1

3

Holland & Knight LLP

Miami, FL

Honeywell International Inc.

Morristown, NJ

3

Hospira Inc.

Lake Forest, IL

3

Howrey LLP

Washington, DC

4

5

6

7

2

1

HSBC - North America

Mettawa, IL

Husch Blackwell Sanders LLP

Kansas City, MO

IndyMac Bancorp Inc.

Pasadena, CA

ING North America Insurance Corp.

Atlanta, GA

2
1
2
3

Intel Corp.

Santa Clara, CAInternational Business Machines Corp. (IBM)Armonk, NY

Intuit Inc.

Mountain View, CA

J.C. Penney Co. Inc.

Plano, TX

76
42

J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.

New York, NY

Jenner & Block LLP

Chicago, IL

4Johnson & Johnson

New Brunswick, NJ

4

Kaiser Permanente

Oakland, CA

4

7

KeyCorp

Cleveland, OH

Kimberly-Clark Corp.

Irving, TX

Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group Inc.

San Francisco, CA

Kirkland & Ellis LLP

Chicago, IL

2
1
5
2

KPMG LLPNew York, NY

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP

New York, NY

2

Latham & Watkins LLP

New York, NY

2

Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.

New York, NY

Levi Strauss & Co.

San Francisco, CA

Lexmark International Inc.

Lexington, KY

Littler Mendelson PC

San Francisco, CA

Liz Claiborne Inc.

New York, NY

Lockheed Martin Corp.

Bethesda, MD

Macy’s Inc.

Cincinnati, OH

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP

Los Angeles, CA

Marriott International Inc.

Bethesda, MD

Marsh & McLennan Companies Inc.

New York, NY

Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co.

Springfield, MA

2

MasterCard Inc.

Purchase, NY

2

McDermott Will & Emery LLP

Chicago, IL

McKinsey & Co. Inc.

New York, NY

3

Merck & Co. Inc.

Whitehouse Station, NJ

3w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 27

2

4

6
6
4
1
3
1
2
1
2
1

3

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200927

10/1/08 12:45:24 PM

APPENDIX A. EMPLOYERS WITH RATINGS OF 100 PERCENT

Employer

Headquarters Location

No. of Years at 100 Percent
1

28

Merrill Lynch & Co.

New York, NY

MetLife Inc.

New York, NY

Microsoft Corp.

Redmond, WA

Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky & Popeo PC

Boston, MA

Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams

Taylorsville, NC

Morgan Stanley

New York, NY

Morrison & Foerster LLP

San Francisco, CA

Motorola Inc.

Schaumburg, IL

National Grid USA

Brooklyn, NY

Nationwide

Columbus, OH

NCR Corp.

Dayton, OH

New York Life Insurance Co.

New York, NY

New York Times Co.

New York, NY

Newell Rubbermaid Inc.

Atlanta, GA

Nielsen Co., The

Schaumburg, IL

Nike Inc.

Beaverton, OR

2

3

6

7

6
4
2
6
3
6
5
2
5
7
1
5
2
1
7

Nixon Peabody LLP

New York, NY
Seattle, WA

Northern Trust Corp.

Chicago, IL

3

Northrop Grumman Corp.

Los Angeles, CA

3

Novartis Pharmaceutical Corp.

East Hanover, NJ

O’Melveny & Myers LLP

Washington, DC

2

Oracle Corp.

Redwood City, CA

2Orbitz Worldwide Inc.

Chicago, IL

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

San Francisco, CA

Owens Corning

Toledo, OH

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

New York, NY

Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP

Los Angeles, CA

Pepsi Bottling Group Inc., The

Somers, NY

PepsiCo Inc.

Purchase, NY

Perkins Coie

Seattle, WA

Pfizer Inc.

New York, NY

PG&E Corp.

San Francisco, CA

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

San Francisco, CA

3Powell Goldstein LLP

Atlanta, GA

3

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

New York, NY

3

Progressive Corp., The

Mayfield Village, OH

1

Proskauer Rose LLPNew York, NY

149540x3_Final.indd 28

54

Nordstrom Inc.

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

4

3
4

1

1
3
5
1
2
1
5
1
5
6

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:25 PM

APPENDIX A. EMPLOYERS WITH RATINGS OF 100 PERCENT

Employer

Headquarters Location

No. of Years at 100 Percent
1

Prudential Financial Inc.

Newark, NJ

Raymond James Financial Inc.

St. Petersburg, FL

Raytheon Co.

Waltham, MA

Recreational Equipment Inc.

Kent, WA

3

4

5

6

7

6
1
4
2

Replacements Ltd.

McLeansville, NC

Reynolds American Inc.

Winston-Salem, NC

1

Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi LLP

Minneapolis, MN

1

Ropes & Gray LLP

Boston, MA

1

Sabre Holdings Inc.

Southlake, TX

1

S. C. Johnson & Son Inc.

Racine, WI

Schering-Plough Corp.

Kenilworth, NJ

Sears Holdings Corp.

Hoffman Estates, IL

Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold LLP

San Francisco, CA

1

Sempra Energy

San Diego, CA

1

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Chicago, IL

1

Shell Oil Co.

Houston, TX

1

7

6
3
4

Sidley Austin LLP

Chicago, IL

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

New York, NY

Sodexho Inc.

Gaithersburg, MD

2

Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal LLP

Chicago, IL

2Southern California Edison Co.

Rosemead, CA

Sprint Nextel Corp.

Overland Park, KS

Squire, Sanders & Dempsey LLP

Cleveland, OH

Starbucks Corp.

Seattle, WA

Starcom MediaVest Group

Chicago, IL

3

Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide

White Plains, NY

3State Street Corp.

Boston, MA

3Subaru of America Inc.

Cherry Hill, NJ

Sullivan & Cromwell LLP

New York, NY

1

Sun Life Financial Inc. (U.S.)

Wellesley Hills, MA

1

Sun Microsystems Inc.

Santa Clara, CA

4

SunTrust Banks Inc.

Atlanta, GA

4

2
1

1
4
1
2

2

Supervalu Inc.

Eden Prairie, MN

Symantec Corp.

Cupertino, CA

1Target Corp.

Minneapolis, MN

1Tech Data Corp.

Clearwater, FL

Texas Instruments Inc.

Dallas, TX

1Thompson Coburn LLP

St. Louis, MO

1Time Warner Inc.

New York, NYw w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 29

2

2

4

2

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200929

10/1/08 12:45:25 PM

APPENDIX A. 2009 EMPLOYERS WITH RATINGS OF 100 PERCENT

Employer

Headquarters Location

No. of Years at 100 Percent
1

30

2

3

4

5

TJX Companies, Inc., The

Framingham, MA

1

Toyota Financial Services Corp.

Torrance, CA

1Toyota Motor Sales USA Inc.

Torrance, CA

Travelport Inc.

Parsippany, NJ

Troutman Sanders LLP

Atlanta, GA

U.S. Bancorp

Minneapolis, MN

UBS AG

Stamford, CT

UnileverEnglewood Cliffs, NJ

1

United Business Media LLC

Manhasset, NY

1

United Parcel Service Inc. (UPS)

Atlanta, GA

US Airways Group Inc.

Tempe, AZ

4

Viacom Inc.

New York, NY

4

Vinson & Elkins LLP

Houston, TX

Visa

Foster City, CA

Visteon Corp.

Van Buren Township, MI

Volkswagen of America Inc.

Herndon, VA

Wachovia Corp.

Charlotte, NC

Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz LLPNew York, NY

Walgreen Co.

Deerfield, IL

Walt Disney Co.

Burbank, CA

Washington Mutual Inc.

Seattle, WA

Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP

New York, NY

Wells Fargo & Co.

San Francisco, CA

5

Whirlpool Corp.

Benton Harbor, MI

5White & Case LLPNew York, NY

1

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP

Washington, DC

1

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati PC

Palo Alto, CA

1Winston & Strawn LLP

Chicago, IL

1

Wyndham Worldwide Corp.

Parsippany, NJ

Xerox Corp.

Norwalk, CT

Yahoo! Inc.

Sunnyvale, CA

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 30

6

7

3
2
1
2
4

2

1
3
1
3
3
1
4
3
3
1

3
7
2

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:25 PM

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWN 32 – 47
Criterion 1a

Prohibits Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation (15 points)

Criterion 1b

Provides Diversity Training Covering Sexual Orientation (5 points)▼

APPENDIX B
Criterion 2a Prohibits Discrimination Based on Gender Identity or Expression (15 points)
Criterion 2b Provides Diversity Training Covering Gender Identity OR
Has Supportive Gender Transition Guidelines (5 points)

Criterion 2cOffers Transgender-Inclusive Insurance Coverage for at Least One Type of Benefit (5 points)(+ Offers Transgender-Inclusive Insurance Coverage, Including Surgical Procedures)

Criterion 3a Offers Partner Health Insurance (15 points)
Criterion 3b Offers Partner Dental, Vision, COBRA and Dependent Coverage Benefits (5 points)
Criterion 3cOffers at Least Three Other “Soft” Benefits for Partners (5 points)

Criterion 4

Has Employer-Supported Employee Resource Group OR
Firm-Wide Diversity Council (15 points)(/ Would Support ERG if Employees Express Interest, half-credit)Criterion 5

Positively Engages the External LGBT Community (15 points)

Criterion 6

Exhibits Responsible Behavior Toward the LGBT Community; Does Not Engage in Action
That Would Undermine LGBT Equality. Employers Found Engaging in Such Activities Will
Have 15 Points Removed From Their Scores. (—)

www.hrc.org/cei

49540x3_Final.indd 31

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 931

10/1/08 12:45:25 PM

75

Abercrombie & Fitch Co.

New Albany, OH

602

100

100

Accenture Ltd.

New York, NY

100

100

Acer Inc.

Irvine, CA

50

65

Adecco North America LLC

Melville, NY

Adobe Systems Inc.

San Jose, CA

727

95

100

Advanced Micro Devices Inc.

Sunnyvale, CA

407

80

80

32

529

AEGON USA Inc.

Cedar Rapids, IA

40

40

Hartford, CT

85

100

100

Affiliated Computer Services

Dallas, TX

424

60

80

Agilent Technologies Inc.

Santa Clara, CA

387

100

100

78

78

275

75

75

100

100

Ahold USA Inc.

Quincy, MA

Air Products & Chemicals Inc.

Allentown, PA

Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer& Feld LLP

Washington, DC

Alaska Airlines

Seattle, WA

596

100

95

Alcatel-Lucent

Murray Hill, NJ

282

100

100

Alcoa Inc.

New York, NY

71

85

Allegheny Energy

Greensburg, PA

630

45

30

25

Alliant Energy Corp.

Madison, WI

587

85

80

Alliant Techsystems

Edina, MN

617

65

65

Allianz Life Insurance Co.
of North America

Minneapolis, MN

100

100

Allstate Corp., The

Northbrook, IL

61

100

100

256

ALLTEL Corp.

Little Rock, AR
Atlanta, GA

Amazon.com Inc.

Seattle, WA

AMC Entertainment Inc.

80

80

100

100

237

80

80

Kansas City, MO

935

63

Ameren Corp.

St. Louis, MO

339

45

American Express Co.

New York, NY

79

100

100

American Family Insurance Group

Madison, WI

338

95

90

American International Group Inc.

New York, NY

10

85

30

55

American Power Conversion Corp.

West Kingston, RI

63

58

Ameriprise Financial Inc.

Minneapolis, MN

297

100

100

Amgen Inc.

Thousand Oaks, CA

171

70

85

AMR Corp. (American Airlines)

Fort Worth, TX

101

100

100

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 32+

85

Aetna Inc.

Alston & Bird LLP

6

80

5

102

4

Abbott Park, IL

3c

Abbott Laboratories

3b

100

3a

100

2c

San Francisco, CA

2b

AAA Northern California,
Nevada and Utah

2a

80

85

1b

Chicago, IL

100

Criterion (see page 31)
1aA.T. Kearney Inc.

2008 CEI Rating

97

2009 CEI Rating

St. Paul, MN

2007 AmLaw 200

2007 Fortune 1000

3M Co.

Employer

Headquarters
Location

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS

+

+

+

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:25 PM

Applied Materials Inc.

Santa Clara, CA

274

88

93

AquilaKansas City, MO

891

35

35

Aramark Corp.

Philadelphia, PA

214

75

80

Archer Daniels Midland Co.

Decatur, IL

59

15

15

Arent Fox LLP

Washington, DC

139

100

75

Arnold & Porter LLP

Washington, DC

51

100

100

AstraZeneca PLC

Wilmington, DE

80

85

AT&T Inc.

San Antonio, TX

100

100

Austin Radiological Assn.

Austin, TX

53

53

Automatic Data Processing Inc.

Roseland, NJ

272

95

95

AutoZone Inc.

Memphis, TN

384

25

25

Avaya Inc.

Basking Ridge, NJ

440

85

85

Avis Budget Group Inc.

Parsippany, NJ

405

80

60

27

Avnet Inc.

Phoenix, AZ

172

30

30

Avon Products Inc.

New York, NY

283

60

60

100

100

Bain & Co. Inc. (& Bridgespan Group Inc.) Boston, MA
Baker & Botts LLP

Houston, TX

48

80

85

Baker & Daniels LLP

Indianapolis, IN

172

100

95

Baker & McKenzie

Chicago, IL

375

Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell& Berkowitz PC

Memphis, TN

128

35

Baldor Electric Co.

Fort Smith, AR
348

20

25

58

58

80

80

Ball Corp.

Broomfield, CO

Ballard, Spahr, Andrews & Ingersoll LLP

Philadelphia, PA

Bank of America Corp.

Charlotte, NC

9

100

100

Bank of New York Mellon Corp., The

New York, NY

358

100

100

90

90

430

100

63

100

Barclays Capital

New York, NY

Barnes & Noble Inc.

New York, NY

BASF Corp.

Florham Park, NJ

100

95

Bausch & Lomb Inc.

Rochester, NY

100

100

Baxter International Inc.

Deerfield, IL

Bayer Corp.

Pittsburgh, PA

BB&T Corp.

Winston-Salem, NC

Best Buy Co. Inc.

Richfield, MNw w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 33

245

80

73

80

15

265

48

25

72

100

100

6

100

5

100

4

121

Apple Inc.

3c

Cupertino, CA

Chicago, IL

3b

100

St. Louis, MO

Aon Corp.

3a

100

100

Anheuser-Busch Companies Inc.

103

2c

100

247

Houston, TX

2b

146

Andrews Kurth LLP

2a65

Cleveland, OH

1b

70

AmTrust Bank

Criterion (see page 31)
1a2008 CEI Rating
75

Headquarters
Location

83

Employer2009 CEI Rating2007 AmLaw 200

2007 Fortune 1000

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS++CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200933

10/1/08 12:45:26 PM

34

Towson, MD

BMC Software Inc.

Houston, TX

BNSF Railway Co.

Fort Worth, TX

Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Ridgefield, CT

Boeing Co.

Chicago, IL

356

100

70

30

30

100

100

28

100

100

80

80

516

100

100

157

Booz Allen Hamilton Inc.

McLean, VA
Ann Arbor, MI

Boston Consulting Group

Boston, MA

100

100

BP America Inc.

Houston, TX

100

100

Bridgestone Americas Holding Inc.

Nashville, TN

80

80Bright Horizons Family Solutions Inc.

Watertown, MA

100

100

Brinker International Inc.

Dallas, TX

502

100

100

Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.

New York, NY

129

100

100

Brown Rudnick LLP

Boston, MA

Brown-Forman Corp.

Louisville, KY

Bryan Cave LLP

St. Louis, MO

C&S Wholesale Grocers Inc.

Keene, NH

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLPNew York, NY

95

95

Calpine Corp.

San Jose, CA

344

48

48

Campbell Soup Co.

Camden, NJ

311

100

95

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce

New York, NY

95

95

Capital One Financial Corp.

McLean, VA

154

100

100

Cardinal Health

Dublin, OH

19

100

Cargill Inc.

Wayzata, MN

100

100

Carlson Companies Inc.

Minnetonka, MN

100

100

Carlton Fields

Tampa, FL

Carmax Inc.

Richmond, VA

365

100

Caterpillar Inc.

Peoria, IL

55

55

45

CBRL Group Inc. (Cracker Barrel)

Lebanon, TN

711

15

15

168

342

88

58

65

65

80

80

90

70

828

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

100
20

61

39

188

100

100

40

40

CDW Corp.

Vernon Hills, IL
Kansas City, MO

CH2M HILL Companies Ltd.

Englewood, CO

Chadbourne & Parke LLPNew York, NY

Chamberlin Edmonds & Associates Inc.

Atlanta, GA

68

68

Charles Schwab Corp., The

San Francisco, CA

389

100

100

Chevron Corp.

San Ramon, CA

4

100

100

ChoicePoint Inc.

Alpharetta, GA

100

100

526
97

+

90

Cerner Corp.

49540x3_Final.indd 34

2c55

Borders Group Inc.

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

2b

100

2a

100

1b

26

Criterion (see page 31)
1a2008 CEI Rating

Black & Decker Corp., The

2009 CEI Rating

Boston, MA

2007 AmLaw 200

Bingham McCutchen LLP

2007 Fortune 1000

Headquarters
Location

Employer

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:26 PM

77

100

100

Citigroup Inc.

New York, NY

8

100

100

Clear Channel Communications Inc.

San Antonio, TX

330

100

100

Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton LLPNew York, NY

100

100

Clifford Chance US LLPNew York, NY

Clorox Co.

Oakland, CA

CNA Insurance

Chicago, IL

Coca-Cola Co., The

Atlanta, GA

94

Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc.

Atlanta, GA

Colgate-Palmolive Co.

New York, NY

19

100
475

100

100

100

100

100

118

100

70

200

73

58

Comcast Corp.

Philadelphia, PA

84

80

80

Comerica Inc.

Dallas, TX

487

80

80

Compass Group USA Inc.

Charlotte, NC

65

65Compuware Corp.

Detroit, MI

93

ConAgra Foods Inc.

Omaha, NE

173

90

ConocoPhillips

Houston, TX

5

60

63

Consolidated Edison Co.

New York, NY

204

95

80

Constellation Energy Group Inc.

Baltimore, MD

119

100

73
80

Continental Airlines Inc.

Houston, TX

186

100

Convergys Corp.

Cincinnati, OH

684

80

Cooper Tire & Rubber

Findlay, OH

701

33

33

Coors Brewing Co.

Denver, CO

386

100

100

Corbis Corp.

Seattle, WA

80

80Corning Inc.

Corning, NY

439

100

100

Costco Wholesale Corp.

Issaquah, WA

32

93

93

Covington & Burling LLP

Washington, DC

100

80

Cox Enterprises Inc./Cox
Communications Inc.

Atlanta, GA

100

95

Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLPNew York, NY

100

95

Credit Suisse USA Inc.

New York, NY

100

100

Crowell & Moring LLP

Washington, DC

95

100

CSX Corp.

Jacksonville, FL

261

75

85

Cummins Inc.

Columbus, IN

221

100

100

CUNA Mutual Insurance Group

Madison, WI

667

65

65

CVS Corp.

Woonsocket, RI

51

90

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 35

40

122

+

+

+

100

63

6

San Jose, CA

5Cisco Systems Inc.

4

55

3c

85

55

3b

95

215

Circuit City Stores Inc.

3a

139

Richmond, VA

CIGNA Corp.

2c

Philadelphia, PA

Warren, NJ

2b

100

Chubb Corp.

2a

100

Auburn Hills, MI

1b

176

Chrysler LLC

Criterion (see page 31)
1a2008 CEI Rating
100

Headquarters
Location100

Employer2009 CEI Rating2007 AmLaw 200

2007 Fortune 1000

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS++CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200935

10/1/08 12:45:26 PM

121

85

New York, NY

29

95

Dean Foods Co.

Dallas, TX

Debevoise & Plimpton LLPNew York, NY

Deere & Co.

Moline, IL

98

33

33

Dell Inc.

Round Rock, TX

34

100

100

Deloitte LLPNew York, NY

100

100

Delphi Corp.

Troy, MI

83

45

45

Delta Air Lines Inc.

Atlanta, GA

136

85

85

Deutsche BankNew York, NY

100

100

Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP

New York, NY

100

Diageo North America

Norwalk, CT

100

95

Dickstein Shapiro LLP

Washington, DC

100

100

Discover Financial Services

Riverwoods, IL

DLA Piper

Baltimore, MD

Dole Food Co. Inc.

Westlake Village, CA

Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group Inc.

Tulsa, OK

958

83

Dominion Resources Inc.

Richmond, VA

140

90

95

Domino’s Pizza Inc.

Ann Arbor, MI

60

60

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Minneapolis, MN

100

100

Dow Chemical Co.

Midland, MI

40

100

100

Dow Jones & Co. Inc.

New York, NY

896

30

30

DPR Construction Inc.

Redwood City, CA

30

30

Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Philadelphia, PA

95

95

DTE Energy Co.

Detroit, MI

Duane Morris LLP

Philadelphia, PA

Duke Energy Corp.

Charlotte, NC

Dun & Bradstreet Corp., The

Short Hills, NJ

DuPont (E.I. du Pont de Nemours)

Wilmington, DE

Dykema Gossett P, LLC

Detroit, MI

E*TRADE Financial Corp.

New York, NY

EarthLink Inc.

Atlanta, GA

Eastman Kodak Co.

Rochester, NY

eBay Inc.

San Jose, CA

Edison International

Rosemead, CA

192

35

35

Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge LLP

Boston, MA

100

90

36

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 36

246
38

82

73

73

100

90

6

Seattle, WA

Davis, Polk & Wardwell

5

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

4

80

3c

80

3b

404

3a

Orlando, FL

2cDarden Restaurants

2b

20

2a

20

1b

2008 CEI Rating

255

Criterion (see page 31)
1a2009 CEI Rating

Toledo, OH

2007 AmLaw 200

2007 Fortune 1000

Dana Holding Corp.

Employer

Headquarters
Location

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS

+

+

58
11

100
45

72

99
279

45

75

75

95

80

75

60

35

35

100

100

80

80

93

93

88

88

182

100

100

383

100

70
143

74
149
545

75

+

+

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:26 PM

2009 CEI Rating2008 CEI Rating

Redwood City, CA

658

100

100

Electronic Data Systems Corp.

Plano, TX

111

95

90

Eli Lilly & Co.

Indianapolis, IN

149

100

100

EMC Corp.

Hopkinton, MA

224

95

45

Emerson Electric Co.

St. Louis, MO

115

45

45

Entergy Corp.

New Orleans, LA

225

95

88

Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co.

St. Louis, MO

80

85

Ernst & Young LLPNew York, NY

100

100

+

Estee Lauder Companies

New York, NY

100

100

+

Esurance Inc.

San Francisco, CA

100

100

Exelon Corp.

Chicago, IL

150

95

95

Expedia Inc.

Bellevue, WA

800

50

Exxon Mobil Corp.

Irving, TX

2

0

0

Faegre & Benson LLP

Minneapolis, MN

100

100

Fannie Mae

Washington, DC

100

100

FedEx Corp.

Memphis, TN

55

55

Fenwick & West LLP

Mountain View, CA

95

90

Fifth Third Bancorp

Cincinnati, OH

75

60

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow,
Garrett & Dunner LLP

Washington, DC

85

40

40

Fish & Richardson PC

Boston, MA

80

80

75

Fisher Scientific International

Hampton, NH

40

40

Foley & Lardner LLP

Milwaukee, WI

27

100

100

Foley Hoag LLP

Boston, MA

161

100

100

Food Lion LLC

Salisbury, NC

95

80

Ford Motor Co.

Dearborn, MI

7

100

100

Franklin Resources Inc.

San Mateo, CA

445

50

Freddie Mac

McLean, VA

50

Freescale Semiconductor Inc.

Austin, TX

Fried, Frank, Haris, Shriver& Jacobson LLPNew York, NY

53

100

Frost Brown Todd LLC

Cincinnati, OH

167

85

Fulbright & Jaworski LLP

Houston, TX

34

85

80

GameStop Corp.

Grapevine, TX

426

100

100

Gannett Co. Inc.

McLean, VA

302

65

65

Gap Inc.

San Francisco, CA

144

100

100

Genentech Inc.

South San Francisco, CA

100

100

General Dynamics Corp.

Falls Church, VA

92

40

40

General Electric Co.

Fairfield, CT

6

80

75

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 37

352

98

68
141
299

85

85

100

100

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2b

2a

1b

Criterion (see page 31)
1a2007 AmLaw 200

2007 Fortune 1000

Electronic Arts Inc.

Employer

Headquarters
Location

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS

+

+

+

+

+

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200937

10/1/08 12:45:27 PM

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP

Los Angeles, CA

100

80

GlaxoSmithKline plc

Philadelphia, PA

20

100

100

Global Hyatt Corp.

Chicago, IL

100

100

Goldman Sachs Group Inc., The

New York, NY

100

100

Goodwin Procter LLP

Boston, MA

Google Inc.

Mountain View, CA

Gordon & Rees LLP

San Francisco, CAGroup Health Cooperative

Seattle, WA

H&R BlockKansas City, MO

H.E. Butt Grocery Co.

San Antonio, TX

H.J. Heinz Co.

Pittsburgh, PA

Hain Celestial Group Inc.

24
47
241
171

100

95

85

6

5

+

78
459

65
40

68

48

Melville, NY

55

30

269

Hallmark Cards Inc.

Kansas City, MO

90

90

Hannaford Brothers

Portland, ME

83

93

Harrah’s Entertainment Inc.

Las Vegas, NV

100

100

Harris Bankcorp Inc.

Chicago, IL

90

95Harris Interactive Inc.

Rochester, NY

93

93

Harry & David Holdings Inc.

Medford, OR

83

43

Hartford Financial Services Co.

Hartford, CT

100

100

Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Inc.

Wellesley, MA

100

100

50

50

100

75

254

82

Hasbro Inc.

Pawtucket, RI

Haynes and Boone LLP

Dallas, TX

Health Care Service Corp.

Chicago, IL

Health Net Inc.

Woodland Hills, CA

Heller Ehrman LLP

San Francisco, CA

Herman Miller Inc.

Zeeland, MI

940

Hershey Co., The

Hershey, PA

Hewitt Associates

Lincolnshire, IL

Hewlett-Packard Co.
Hilton Hotels Corp.
Hoffmann-La Roche Inc.

Nutley, NJ

Hogan & Hartson LLP

Washington, DC

Holland & Knight LLP

Miami, FL

Holme Roberts & Owen LLP

Denver, COHome Depot Inc.

Atlanta, GA

17

85

85

Honeywell International Inc.

Morristown, NJ

69

100

100

49540x3_Final.indd 38

+

75
100

40

626
105

95
93

93

100

100

100

100

453

70

70

673

100

100

Palo Alto, CA

14

100

100

Beverly Hills, CA

296

90

95

100

80

23

95

80

32

100

100

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

4

100

3c

100

3b

3

3a

Detroit, MI

2c

General Motors Corp.

2b

100

2a

95

1b

2008 CEI Rating

213

Criterion (see page 31)
1a2009 CEI Rating2007 AmLaw 200

Minneapolis, MN

Headquarters
Location

General Mills Inc.

Employer38

2007 Fortune 1000

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS

189
46

+

60

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:27 PM

85

85

Kalamazoo, MI

48

48

Howrey LLP

Washington, DC

100

85

HSBC - North America

Mettawa, IL

100

100
40

58

Humana Inc.

Louisville, KY

110

45

Huntington Bancshares

Columbus, OH

714

75

Hunton & Williams LLP

Richmond, VA

41

75

75

Husch Blackwell Sanders LLP

Kansas City, MO

179

100

80

IKON Office Solutions

Malvern, PA

507

65

Illinois Tool Works Inc.

Glenview, IL

175

68

68

Imation Corp.

Oakdale, MN

995

88

93

IndyMac Bancorp Inc.

Pasadena, CA

722

100

100

ING North America Insurance Corp.

Atlanta, GA

100

100

Intel Corp.

Santa Clara, CA

62

100

100

International Business Machines Corp.
(IBM)

Armonk, NY

15

100

100

International Paper Co.

Memphis, TN

93

70

70

Interpublic Group of Companies Inc.

New York, NY

368

60

60

Intuit Inc.

Mountain View, CA

776

100

100

ITT Industries Inc.

White Plains, NY

295

75

90

J.C. Penney Co. Inc.

Plano, TX

116

100

100

J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.

New York, NY

11

100

100

Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.

Pasadena, CA

322

40

Jenner & Block LLP

Chicago, IL

JetBlue Airways Corp.

Forest Hills, NYJohn Hancock Financial Services Inc.

Boston, MA

Johnson & Johnson

73

100

100

775

80

80

88

93

New Brunswick, NJ

36

100

100

Jones Apparel Group Inc.

New York, NY

470

45

Kaiser Permanente

Oakland, CA

100

Chicago, IL

60

85

85

Kaye Scholer LLP

New York, NY

59

80

80

KB HomeLos Angeles, CA

75

75

Keane Inc.

Boston, MA

50

50

Kelley Drye & Warren LLPNew York, NY

95

85

Kellogg Co.

Battle Creek, MI

60

35

Kenneth Cole Productions Inc.

New York, NY

KeyCorp

Cleveland, OHw w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 39

111
232

+

+

100

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

228

6Dallas, TX

Howard & Howard Attorneys PC

5Hotels.com LP

4

45

3c

45

3b

452

3a

Bethesda, MD

2c

Host Hotels & Resorts

2b

100

2a

100

1b

2008 CEI Rating

697

Criterion (see page 31)
1a2009 CEI Rating

Lake Forest, IL

2007 AmLaw 200

2007 Fortune 1000

Hospira Inc.

Employer

Headquarters
Location

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS

+

95
319

100

100

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200939

10/1/08 12:45:27 PM

40

7

KLA-Tencor Corp.

San Jose, CA

837

KPMG LLPNew York, NY

100

100

Kraft Foods Inc.

Northfield, IL

95

100

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP

New York, NY

100

100

Kroger Co., The

Cincinnati, OH

75

75

91
26

L.L. Bean Inc.

Freeport, ME

73

73

Laclede Group Inc.

St. Louis, MO

860

5

5

Land O’Lakes

Arden Hills, MN

329

53

53

LaSalle Bank Corp.

Chicago, IL

95

95Latham & Watkins LLP

New York, NY

100

100

Lauren Manufacturing Co.

New Philadelphia, OH

5

5

Lear Corp.

Southfield, MI

130

20

20

Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.

New York, NY

47

100

100

Levi Strauss & Co.

San Francisco, CA

510

100

100

Lexmark International Inc.

Lexington, KY

442

100

100

Lillian Vernon Corp.

White Plains, NY

40

55

Limited Brands Inc.

Columbus, OH

240

80

70

Lincoln National Corp.

Radnor, PA

277

Littler Mendelson PC

San Francisco, CA

Liz Claiborne Inc.

New York, NY

Lockheed Martin Corp.

Bethesda, MD

2

95

95

100

95

451

100

100

57

100

85

101

Lord, Bissell & Brook

Chicago, IL

147

80

80

Luce Forward Hamilton & Scripps LLP

San Diego, CA

193

80

70

Macy’s Inc.

Cincinnati, OH

100

100

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP

Los Angeles, CA

100

93

100

100

76
112

Marriott International Inc.

Bethesda, MD

Mars Inc.

Mt. Olive, NJ

Marsh & McLennan Companies Inc.

New York, NY

207

100

78

Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co.

Springfield, MA

90

100

100

MasterCard Inc.

Purchase, NY

601

100

100

Mattel Inc.

El Segundo, CA

406

93

88

Mayer Brown LLP

Chicago, IL

McAfee Inc.

Santa Clara, CA

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 40

203

6

73

Chicago, IL

558

Kirkland & Ellis LLP

4

100

36

3c

100

Atlanta, GA

3b

95

San Francisco, CA

King & Spalding LLP

3a

100

95

Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group Inc.

137

2c

100

Irving, TX

2b

85

Kimberly-Clark Corp.

2a2008 CEI Rating

100

Atlanta, GA

1b2009 CEI Rating

90

Kilpatrick Stockton LLP

Criterion (see page 31)
1a2007 AmLaw 200

95

Headquarters
Location88

Employer2007 Fortune 1000

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS

+

+

+

+

+

48

8

95
53

53

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:28 PM

108

85

85

McGraw-Hill Companies Inc., The

New York, NY

366

80

80

McGuireWoods LLP

Richmond, VA

67

95

McKenna, Long & Aldridge LLP

Atlanta, GA

107

90

McKesson Corp.

San Francisco, CA

McKinsey & Co. Inc.

New York, NY

100

100

MeadWestvaco Corp.

Glen Allen, VA

350

60

80

Medtronic Inc.

Minneapolis, MN

222

95

85

Meijer Inc.

Grand Rapids, MI

15

0

Men’s Wearhouse Inc., The

Houston, TX

892

50

35

Merck & Co. Inc.

Whitehouse Station, NJ

99

100

100

Merrill Lynch & Co.

New York, NY

22

100

100

MetLife Inc.

New York, NY

37

100

100

MGM Mirage

Las Vegas, NV

315

85

85

Microsoft Corp.

Redmond, WA

49

100

100

Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP

New York, NY

18

42

Milwaukee, WI

90

90

Boston, MA

100

100

Mirant Corp.

Atlanta, GA

45

45

Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams

Taylorsville, NC

100

100

Mohawk Industries Inc.

Calhoun, GA

Monsanto Co.

St. Louis, MO

304

65

65

323

85

Moody’s Corp.

New York, NY

850

83

Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP

Philadelphia, PA

Morgan Stanley

New York, NY

Morningstar Inc.

Chicago, IL

Morrison & Foerster LLP

San Francisco, CA

Motorola Inc.

Schaumburg, IL

52

Mutual of Omaha Insurance

Omaha, NE

489

80

75

National City Corp.

Cleveland, OH

188

80

58

National Grid USA

Brooklyn, NY

100

100

Nationwide

Columbus, OH

104

100

100

NCR Corp.

Dayton, OH

374

100

100

Nestle Purina PetCare Co.

St. Louis, MO

75

15

New York Life Insurance Co.

New York, NY

78

100

85

New York Times Co.

New York, NY

583

100

100

92
474

12
20

22

+

85

Miller Brewing Co.

49540x3_Final.indd 41+

68

Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky& Popeo PC

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

6

Oak Brook, IL

5

McDonald’s Corp.

4

100

3c

100

3b

16

3a

Chicago, IL

2c

McDermott Will & Emery LLP

2b

90

2a

90

1b

2008 CEI Rating120

Criterion (see page 31)
1a2009 CEI Rating

Newark, NJ

Headquarters
Location

McCarter & English LLP

Employer2007 AmLaw 200

2007 Fortune 1000

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS

80
100

100

58

65

100

100

100

100

+

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200941

10/1/08 12:45:28 PM

42Seattle, WA

Nortel Networks Corp.

Richardson, TX

Northeast Utilities

Berlin, CT

Northern Trust Corp.

Chicago, IL

Northrop Grumman Corp.
Northwest Airlines Corp.
Novartis Pharmaceutical Corp.

East Hanover, NJ

Office Depot Inc.

Delray Beach, FL

156

OfficeMax Inc.

Naperville, IL

280

O’Melveny & Myers LLP

Washington, DC

Omnicom GroupNew York, NY

Oracle Corp.

Redwood City, CA

Orbitz Worldwide Inc.

Chicago, IL

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

San Francisco, CA

Owens & Minor Inc.

Mechanicsville, VA

Owens Corning

50

50

100

100

85

85

337

65

80

490

100

100

Los Angeles, CA

73

100

100

Eagan, MN

195

85

85

100

95

60

60

286

80

75

100

100

220

80

30

167

100

100

15

100

418

55

85

Toledo, OH

355

100

100

Pacific Mutual Holding Co.

Newport Beach, CA

437

65

PacifiCorp

Portland, OR

85

85

Palm Management Corp.

Washington, DC

78

40

Pathmark Stores Inc.

Carteret, NJ

53

53

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

New York, NY

159

100

Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP

Los Angeles, CA

18

100

Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLPNew York, NY

35

80

Pepco Holdings Inc.

Washington, DC

Pepper Hamilton LLP

Philadelphia, PA

Pepsi Bottling Group Inc., The

Somers, NY

191

100

80

PepsiAmericas Inc.

Minneapolis, MN

531

95

80

PepsiCo Inc.

Purchase, NY

63

100

100

Perkins & Will Group, Ltd.,The

Chicago, IL

Perkins Coie

Seattle, WA

Perot Systems Corp.

Plano, TX

Pfizer Inc.

New York, NY

49540x3_Final.indd 42

+

+

100
100

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 20096

Nordstrom Inc.

100

5Irving, TX

100

65

4

Nokia

50

3c

New York, NY

100

50

3b

Nixon Peabody LLP

100

158

3a

Nashville, TN

2c

Beaverton, OR

Nissan North America Inc.

85

2b

Nike Inc.

100

2aSchaumburg, IL

100

1b

Nielsen Co., The

100

Criterion (see page 31)
1a343

2008 CEI Rating2007 Fortune 1000

Atlanta, GA

2009 CEI Rating

Headquarters
Location

Newell Rubbermaid Inc.

2007 AmLaw 200

Employer

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS

28

530

290

100

65
95

90

55

55

100

85

788

0

0

39

100

100

69

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:28 PM

PNC Financial Services Group Inc.

Pittsburgh, PA

231

80

80

PNM Resources Inc.

Albuquerque, NM

749

43

43

Polaroid Corp.

Waltham, MA

60

60

Polsinelli Shalton Welte Suelthaus PC

Kansas City, MO

80

Powell Goldstein LLP

Atlanta, GA

100

100

PPG Industries Inc.

Pittsburgh, PA

226

45

60

PPL Corp.

Allentown, PA

336

65

60

Praxair Inc.

Danbury, CT

291

25

25

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

New York, NY

100

100

Principal Financial GroupDes Moines, IA

250

95

100

Procter & Gamble Co.

Cincinnati, OH

25

85

85

Progress Energy Inc.

Raleigh, NC

238

68

68

Progressive Corp., The

Mayfield Village, OH

159

100

65

Proskauer Rose LLPNew York, NY

100

85

Prudential Financial Inc.

Newark, NJ

66

100

100

QUALCOMM Inc.

San Diego, CA

317

95

95

168

44

Quarles & Brady LLP

Milwaukee, WI

80

80

Quest Diagnostics Inc.

Madison, NJ

364

123

85

80

Qwest Communications International Inc.

Denver, CO

178

80

55

R.R. Donnelley & Sons Co.

Chicago, IL

271

55

20
40

RadioShack Corp.

Fort Worth, TX

466

40

Raymond James Financial Inc.

St. Petersburg, FL

712

100

Raytheon Co.

Waltham, MA

96

100

Realogy Corp.

Parsippany, NJ

354

80

Recreational Equipment Inc.

Kent, WA

100

100

Reebok International

Canton, MA

68

68

Reed Smith LLP

Pittsburgh, PA

Reliant Energy Inc.

Houston, TX

Replacements Ltd.

McLeansville, NC

Reynolds American Inc.

Winston-Salem, NC

288

Rite Aid Corp.

Camp Hill, PA

134

Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi LLP

Minneapolis, MN

30
229

130

75

50

100

100

100

80

85

85

100

93

Cedar Rapids, IA

542

75

73

Philadelphia, PA

292

80

60

Ropes & Gray LLP

Boston, MA

49540x3_Final.indd 43

6

5

4

75

Rockwell Collins Inc.

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i+

100

Rohm and Haas Co.

31

3c

85

3b

85

3a

395

2c

100

2b

Stamford, CT

100

37

2a

Pitney Bowes Inc.

100

1b

San Francisco, CA

100

Criterion (see page 31)
1aPillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

2008 CEI Rating196

2009 CEI Rating

San Francisco, CA

2007 AmLaw 200

2007 Fortune 1000

PG&E Corp.

Employer

Headquarters
Location

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS

+

+

100

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200943

10/1/08 12:45:29 PM

44

Ryder System Inc.

Miami, FL

Ryland GroupCalabasas, CA

Sabre Holdings Inc.

Southlake, TX

678

100

SAFECO Corp.

Seattle, WA

363

75

75

Safeway Inc.

Pleasanton, CA

56

75

75

Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC

Bridgewater, NJ

65

80

90

90

75

70

SAP America Inc.

Newton Square, PA

Sara Lee Corp.

Downers Grove, IL

Saul Ewing LLP

Philadelphia, PA

S. C. Johnson & Son Inc.

Racine, WI

Schering-Plough Corp.

Kenilworth, NJ

Schiff Hardin LLP

Chicago, IL

Scholastic Corp.

New York, NY

Schulte, Roth & Zabel LLP

New York, NY

Seagate Technology LLC

Scotts Valley, CA

Sears Holdings Corp.

Hoffman Estates, IL

Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold LLP

San Francisco, CA

Selective Insurance Group

Branchville, NJ

919

85

210

100

80

65

65

100

95

100

85

125
177

242
124
790
68

38
136

100

100

100

100

50

50

80

80

60

75

100

100

100

San Diego, CA
Fort Washington, PA

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Chicago, IL

Shell Oil Co.

Houston, TX

Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP

Los Angeles, CA

76

95

75

Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP

Kansas City, MO

82

85

85

Sidley Austin LLP

Chicago, IL

5

100

100

Sierra Health Services Inc.

Las Vegas, NV

88

88

80

58

100

95

60

60

Sirius Satellite Radio Inc.

New York, NY

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher& Flom LLP

New York, NY

SLM Corp. (Sallie Mae)

Reston, VA

Sodexho Inc.

Gaithersburg, MD

100

100

Software House International

Somerset, NJ

40

40

Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal LLP

Chicago, IL

100

100

Southern California Edison Co.

Rosemead, CA

100

95

1
284

57

Southern Co.

Atlanta, GA

168

48

48

Southwest Airlines Co.

Dallas, TX

276

90

90

Sprint Nextel Corp.

Overland Park, KS

53

100

100

Squire, Sanders & Dempsey LLP

Cleveland, OH

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 44

54

6

80

Sempra Energy

943

5

68

Severn Trent Services Inc.

66

4

30

3c

30

3b

467

3a

93

2c

93

2b

362

2a

55

1b

55

Criterion (see page 31)
1a2007 AmLaw 200

2008 CEI Rating

Miami, FL2009 CEI Rating

Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd.

2007 Fortune 1000

Headquarters
Location

Employer

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS+

100w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:29 PM

80

80

Boston, MA

263

100

100

Steelcase Inc.

Grand Rapids, MI

670

Steptoe & Johnson LLP

Washington, DC

79

85

85

Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP

Kansas City, MO

173

95

80

Stoel Rives LLP

Portland, OR

143

95

95

Subaru of America Inc.

Cherry Hill, NJ

100

100

Sullivan & Cromwell LLP

New York, NY

100

90

Sun Life Financial Inc. (U.S.)

Wellesley Hills, MA

Sun Microsystems Inc.

Santa Clara, CA

187

100

100

State Farm Group

Bloomington, IL

State Street Corp.

13

100

SunTrust Banks Inc.

Atlanta, GA

183

100

100

Eden Prairie, MN

117

100

100

Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP

Atlanta, GA

95

85

Symantec Corp.

Cupertino, CA

515

100

85
80

94

Target Corp.

Minneapolis, MN

33

100

Teachers Insurance and Annuity
Association - College Retirement
Equities FundNew York, NY

80

78

Tech Data Corp.

Clearwater, FL

109

100

Tenet Healthcare

Dallas, TX

258

35

Texas Instruments Inc.

Dallas, TX

162

100

75

Thelen Reid Brown Raysman& Steiner LLP

San Francisco, CA

102

95

70

Thompson Coburn LLP

St. Louis, MO

173

100

85

+

100

Tiffany & Co.

New York, NY

709

68

73

Time Warner Inc.

New York, NY

48

100

100

TJX Companies, Inc., The

Framingham, MA

133

100

Toyota Financial Services Corp.

Torrance, CA

Toyota Motor Sales USA Inc.

Torrance, CA

Toys ‘R’ Us Inc.

Wayne, NJ

Travel Impressions, Ltd.

Farmington, NY

Travelers Companies Inc., The

St. Paul, MN

Travelport Inc.

Parsippany, NJ

Troutman Sanders LLP

Atlanta, GA

U.S. Bancorp

Minneapolis, MN

49540x3_Final.indd 45+

60

Supervalu Inc.

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

6

31

381

5

100

White Plains, NY

4

100

100

Chicago, IL

Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide

3c

100

Starcom MediaVest Group

3b

100

Seattle, WA

3a

100

Starbucks Corp.

2c

310

Framingham, MA

2b

93

Staples Inc.

2a93

Fairfax, VA

1b

126

SRA International Inc.

Criterion (see page 31)
1a2008 CEI Rating
75

Headquarters
Location75

Employer2009 CEI Rating2007 AmLaw 200

2007 Fortune 1000

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS

100

202

100

100

65

45

93
89

74
123

50

50

100

100

100

90

100

100

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200945

10/1/08 12:45:29 PM

46

UnileverEnglewood Cliffs, NJ

100

85

Union Pacific Corp.

Omaha, NE

151

58

58

Unisys Corp.

Blue Bell, PA

400

70

70

United Business Media LLC

Manhasset, NY

100

100

United Parcel Service Inc. (UPS)

Atlanta, GA

43

100

100

United Technologies Corp.

Hartford, CT

42

65

40

UnitedHealth Group Inc.

Minnetonka, MN

21

95

University Hospitals of Cleveland

Cleveland, OH

50

Unum Group

Chattanooga, TN

236

88

73

Tempe, AZ

216

100

100

Verizon Communications Inc.

New York, NY

13

70

85

Vertis Inc.

Baltimore, MD

30

30

Viacom Inc.

New York, NY

100

100

Vinson & Elkins LLP

Houston, TX

100

80

Visa

Foster City, CA

100

100

Vision Service Plan

Rancho Cordova, CA

65

65

Visteon Corp.

Van Buren Township, MI 219

100

95

VivendiNew York, NY

35

35

Volkswagen of America Inc.

Herndon, VA

100

100

Vorys, Sater, Seymour & Pease LLP

Columbus, OH

Wachovia Corp.

Charlotte, NC

Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz LLPNew York, NY

Walgreen Co.

Deerfield, IL

Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

43

146

100

100

75

44

100

100

Bentonville, AR

1

40

40

Walt Disney Co.

Burbank, CA

64

100

100

Washington Mutual Inc.

Seattle, WA

81

100

100

Waste Management Inc.

Houston, TX

181

85

100

Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP

New York, NY

100

95

WellPoint Inc.

Indianapolis, IN

35

95

85

Wells Fargo & Co.

San Francisco, CA

41

100

100

West

Eagan, MN

95

95

Weyerhaeuser Co.

Federal Way, WA

105

75

75

Whirlpool Corp.

Benton Harbor, MI

127

100

100

White & Case LLPNew York, NY

100

80

Whole Foods Market Inc.

Austin, TX

90

9049540x3_Final.indd 46

52

9

6
411

6

5

4

80
100

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

46

3c

65

US Airways Group Inc.

218

3b

100

3a

100

2c

88

2b

88

2a

Stamford, CT

50

1b

UBS AG

120

58

Criterion (see page 31)
1a

Chicago, IL

2008 CEI Rating

UAL Corp. (United Airlines)

2009 CEI Rating

Rosemont, IL

2007 AmLaw 200

Headquarters
Location

U.S. Foodservice Inc.

2007 Fortune 1000

Employer

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS++

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:29 PM

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP

Washington, DC

14

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati PC

Palo Alto, CA

56

100

85

Winston & Strawn LLP

Chicago, IL

33

100

85

Wisconsin Energy Corp.

Milwaukee, WI

55

55

Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice LLC

Winston-Salem, NC

65

65

WPP Group USA

New York, NY

93

93

Wyeth

Madison, NJ

113

80

80

Wyndham Worldwide Corp.

Parsippany, NJ

546

100

100

Xcel Energy

Minneapolis, MN

251

60

60

Xerox Corp.

Norwalk, CT

145

100

100

XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc.

Washington, DC

93

88

Yahoo! Inc.

Sunnyvale, CA

357

100

100

YRC Worldwide Inc.

Overland Park, KS

249

30

30

Yum! Brands Inc.

Louisville, KY

262

65

Zurich North America

Schaumburg, IL

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 47

211

525
89

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

55

Tulsa, OK

2c

55

Williams Companies Inc.

2b

80

2a

2008 CEI Rating

80

Chicago, IL

1b2009 CEI Rating

200

Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon LLP

Criterion (see page 31)
1a2007 AmLaw 200

2007 Fortune 1000

Headquarters
Location

Employer

APPENDIX B. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS AND BREAKDOWNS

100

65

50

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200947

10/1/08 12:45:30 PM

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGSBY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCORE

49 – 64▼

APPENDIX C
Criterion 1a

Prohibits Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation (15 points)

Criterion 1b

Provides Diversity Training Covering Sexual Orientation (5 points)

Criterion 2a Prohibits Discrimination Based on Gender Identity or Expression (15 points)
Criterion 2b Provides Diversity Training Covering Gender Identity OR
Has Supportive Gender Transition Guidelines (5 points)

Criterion 2cOffers Transgender-Inclusive Insurance Coverage for at Least One Type of Benefit (5 points)(+ Offers Transgender-Inclusive Insurance Coverage, Including Surgical Procedures)

Criterion 3a Offers Partner Health Insurance (15 points)
Criterion 3b Offers Partner Dental, Vision, COBRA and Dependent Coverage Benefits (5 points)
Criterion 3cOffers at Least Three Other “Soft” Benefits for Partners (5 points)

Criterion 4

Has Employer-Supported Employee Resource Group OR
Firm-Wide Diversity Council (15 points)(/ Would Support ERG if Employees Express Interest, half-credit)Criterion 5

Positively Engages the External LGBT Community (15 points)

Criterion 6

Exhibits Responsible Behavior Toward the LGBT Community; Does Not Engage in Action
That Would Undermine LGBT Equality. Employers Found Engaging in Such Activities Will
Have 15 Points Removed From Their Scores. (—)

48

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 949540x3_Final.indd 48

www.hrc.org/cei

10/1/08 12:45:30 PM

APPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCORE

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2a

1b

2b

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer

ADVERTISING AND MARKETING
Starcom MediaVest Group100

WPP Group USA

93

Omnicom Group80

Interpublic Group of Companies Inc.

60

Vertis Inc.

30

AEROSPACE AND DEFENSE
Boeing Co.

100

Honeywell International Inc.

100

Lockheed Martin Corp.

100

Northrop Grumman Corp.

100

Raytheon Co.

100

Rockwell Collins Inc.

75

Alliant Techsystems

65

General Dynamics Corp.

40

AIRLINES
Alaska Airlines

100

AMR Corp. (American Airlines)

100

Continental Airlines Inc.

100

US Airways Group Inc.

100

Southwest Airlines Co.

90

UAL Corp. (United Airlines)

88

Delta Air Lines Inc.

85

Northwest Airlines Corp.

85

JetBlue Airways Corp.

80

APPAREL, FASHION, TEXTILES, DEPT. STORES
Abercrombie & Fitch Co.

100

Gap Inc.

100

J.C. Penney Co. Inc.

100

Levi Strauss & Co.

100

Liz Claiborne Inc.

100

Nike Inc.

100

TJX Companies, Inc., The

100

Macy’s Inc.

100

Nordstrom Inc.

100

Kenneth Cole Productions Inc.

95

L.L. Bean Inc.

73

Reebok International

68

Tiffany & Co.

68

Men’s Wearhouse Inc., The

50

Jones Apparel Group Inc.

45

Lillian Vernon Corp.

40

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 49+

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200949

10/1/08 12:45:30 PM

APPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCORE

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2a

1b

2b

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer

AUTOMOTIVE
Carmax Inc.

100

Chrysler LLC

100+

Ford Motor Co.

100+

General Motors Corp.

100+

Subaru of America Inc.

100

Toyota Motor Sales USA Inc.

100

Visteon Corp.

100

Volkswagen of America Inc.

100

Bridgestone Americas Holding Inc.

80

Nissan North America Inc.

50

Delphi Corp.

45

Cooper Tire & Rubber

33

Dana Holding Corp.

20

Lear Corp.

20

BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES

50

American Express Co.

100+

Ameriprise Financial Inc.

100+

Bank of America Corp.

100

Bank of New York Mellon Corp., The

100

Capital One Financial Corp.

100

Charles Schwab Corp., The

100

Citigroup Inc.

100

Credit Suisse USA Inc.

100

Deutsche Bank

100

Fannie Mae

100

Goldman Sachs Group Inc., The

100

HSBC - North America

100

IndyMac Bancorp Inc.

100

J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.

100

KeyCorp100

Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.

100

MasterCard Inc.

100

Merrill Lynch & Co.

100

Morgan Stanley

100+

Northern Trust Corp.

100+

Raymond James Financial Inc.

100

State Street Corp.

100

SunTrust Banks Inc.

100

Toyota Financial Services Corp.

100

U.S. Bancorp

100

UBS AG

100

Visa

100

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 50

+

+

+

+

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:30 PM

APPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCORE

Wachovia Corp.

100

Washington Mutual Inc.

100

Wells Fargo & Co.

100

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce

95

LaSalle Bank Corp.

95

E*TRADE Financial Corp.

93

Barclays Capital

90

Harris Bankcorp Inc.

90

Freddie Mac

85

AmTrust Bank

83

Moody’s Corp.

83

Comerica Inc.

80

National City Corp.

80

PNC Financial Services Group Inc.

80

Fifth Third Bancorp

75

Huntington Bancshares

75

Chamberlin Edmonds & Associates Inc.

68

H&R Block65

SLM Corp. (Sallie Mae)60

Discover Financial Services

58

Morningstar Inc.

58

Franklin Resources Inc.

50

BB&T Corp.

48

Dun & Bradstreet Corp., The

35

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2a

1b

2b

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer+

CHEMICALS AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
3M Co.

100

BASF Corp.

100

Dow Chemical Co.

100

DuPont (E.I. du Pont de Nemours)

100+

Genentech Inc.

100+

Monsanto Co.

85

Bayer Corp.

80

Rohm and Haas Co.

80

Air Products & Chemicals Inc.

75

PPG Industries Inc.

45

Praxair Inc.

25+

COMPUTER AND DATA SERVICES
ChoicePoint Inc.

100

Automatic Data Processing Inc.

95

Electronic Data Systems Corp.

95

SRA International Inc.

75

Unisys Corp.

70

Affiliated Computer Services

60

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 51

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200951

10/1/08 12:45:31 PMAPPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCORE

Keane Inc.

50

Perot Systems Corp.

0

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2a

1b

2b

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer

COMPUTER HARDWARE AND OFFICE EQUIPMENTApple Inc.

100

Cisco Systems Inc.

100

Dell Inc.

100

Herman Miller Inc.

100

Hewlett-Packard Co.

100

International Business Machines Corp. (IBM)100

Lexmark International Inc.

100

NCR Corp.

100

Sun Microsystems Inc.

100

Tech Data Corp.

100

Xerox Corp.

100

EMC Corp.

95

CDW Corp.

88

Imation Corp.

88

Avaya Inc.

85

Pitney Bowes Inc.

85

IKON Office Solutions

65

Seagate Technology LLC

60

Acer Inc.

50

Software House International

40

Avnet Inc.

30

+

+

+

+

+

COMPUTER SOFTWAREBMC Software Inc.

100

Electronic Arts Inc.

100

Intuit Inc.

100

Microsoft Corp.

100

Oracle Corp.

100

Symantec Corp.

100

Adobe Systems Inc.

95

Compuware Corp.

93

SAP America Inc.

90

Cerner Corp.

65

McAfee Inc.

53+

CONSULTING, BUSINESS SERVICES

52

Accenture Ltd.

100

Bain & Co. Inc. (& Bridgespan Group Inc.)

100

Boston Consulting Group100

Deloitte LLP

100+

Ernst & Young LLP

100+

Hewitt Associates

100

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 52

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:31 PMAPPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCOREKPMG LLP

100

Marsh & McLennan Companies Inc.

100

McKinsey & Co. Inc.

100

Nielsen Co., The

100

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

100Harris Interactive Inc.

93

Adecco North America LLC

85

A.T. Kearney Inc.

80

Booz Allen Hamilton Inc.

80

Convergys Corp.

80

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2a

1b

2b

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer+

EDUCATION, CHILD CARE
Bright Horizons Family Solutions Inc.

100

ENERGY AND UTILITIES
Constellation Energy Group Inc.

100

National Grid USA

100

PG&E Corp.

100

Sempra Energy

100Southern California Edison Co.

100

Consolidated Edison Co.

95

Entergy Corp.

95

Exelon Corp.

95

Dominion Resources Inc.

90

Alliant Energy Corp.

85

PacifiCorp

85

DTE Energy Co.

75

Duke Energy Corp.

75

Reliant Energy Inc.

75

Progress Energy Inc.

68

Northeast Utilities

65

Pepco Holdings Inc.

65

PPL Corp.

65

Severn Trent Services Inc.

65

Xcel Energy

60

Williams Companies Inc.

55

Wisconsin Energy Corp.

55

Calpine Corp.

48

Southern Co.

48

Allegheny Energy

45

Ameren Corp.

45

Mirant Corp.

45

PNM Resources Inc.

43

Aquila35

Edison International

35w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 53++

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200953

10/1/08 12:45:31 PMAPPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCORE

Laclede Group Inc.

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2a

1b

2b

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer

5

ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION
CH2M HILL Companies Ltd.

80

KB Home75

Perkins & Will Group, Ltd.,The

55

Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.

40

DPR Construction Inc.

30

Ryland Group30

ENTERTAINMENT AND ELECTRONIC MEDIA
Clear Channel Communications Inc.

100

Cox Enterprises Inc./Cox Communications Inc.

100

Time Warner Inc.

100

Viacom Inc.

100

Walt Disney Co.

100

XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc.

93

Corbis Corp.

80

Comcast Corp.

80

Sirius Satellite Radio Inc.

80

AMC Entertainment Inc.

63

Vivendi35+

FOOD, BEVERAGES AND GROCERIES

54

Anheuser-Busch Companies Inc.

100

Brinker International Inc.

100

Campbell Soup Co.

100

Cargill Inc.

100

Coca-Cola Co., The

100

Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc.

100

Coors Brewing Co.

100

Diageo North America

100

Pepsi Bottling Group Inc., The

100

PepsiCo Inc.

100

Sodexho Inc.

100

Starbucks Corp.

100

Supervalu Inc.

100

Food Lion LLC

95General Mills Inc.

95

Kraft Foods Inc.

95

PepsiAmericas Inc.

95

ConAgra Foods Inc.

90

Miller Brewing Co.

90

Whole Foods Market Inc.

90

McDonald’s Corp.

85

Hannaford Brothers

83

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 54++

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:31 PMAPPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCORE

Darden Restaurants

80

Ahold USA Inc.

78

Palm Management Corp.

78

Aramark Corp.

75

Kroger Co., The

75

Nestle Purina PetCare Co.

75

Safeway Inc.

75

Sara Lee Corp.

75

Dean Foods Co.

73

Hershey Co., The

70

H.J. Heinz Co.

68

Compass Group USA Inc.

65

Yum! Brands Inc.

65

Domino’s Pizza Inc.

60

Kellogg Co.

60

U.S. Foodservice Inc.

58

Hain Celestial Group Inc.

55

Land O’Lakes

53

Pathmark Stores Inc.

53

Mars Inc.

48

Dole Food Co. Inc.

45

C&S Wholesale Grocers Inc.

40

H.E. Butt Grocery Co.

40

Brown-Forman Corp.

20

Archer Daniels Midland Co.

15

CBRL Group Inc. (Cracker Barrel)

15

Meijer Inc.

15

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2a

1b

2b

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer

FOREST AND PAPER PRODUCTS
Weyerhaeuser Co.

75

International Paper Co.

70

HEALTHCARE
Bausch & Lomb Inc.

100

Cardinal Health100

Kaiser Permanente

100

CIGNA Corp.

95

Health Care Service Corp.

95

UnitedHealth Group Inc.

95

Health Net Inc.

93

Sierra Health Services Inc.

88

Quest Diagnostics Inc.

85

Abbott Laboratories

80

Baxter International Inc.

80

Group Health Cooperative78

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 55

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200955

10/1/08 12:45:32 PM

APPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCORE

McKesson Corp.

68

Vision Service Plan

65

Owens & Minor Inc.

55

Austin Radiological Assn.

53

University Hospitals of Cleveland

50

Humana Inc.

45

Tenet Healthcare

35

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2a

1b

2b

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer

HIGH-TECH/PHOTO/SCIENCE EQUIP.
Agilent Technologies Inc.

100

Corning Inc.

100

Eastman Kodak Co.

100

Freescale Semiconductor Inc.

100

Intel Corp.

100

Texas Instruments Inc.

100

Medtronic Inc.

95

Applied Materials Inc.

88

Advanced Micro Devices Inc.

80

ITT Industries Inc.

75

Polaroid Corp.

60

KLA-Tencor Corp.

58

Fisher Scientific International

40+

HOTELS, RESORTS AND CASINOS
Carlson Companies Inc.

100

Global Hyatt Corp.

100

Harrah’s Entertainment Inc.

100

Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group Inc.

100

Marriott International Inc.

100

Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide

100

Wyndham Worldwide Corp.

100

Hilton Hotels Corp.

90

MGM Mirage

85

Host Hotels & Resorts

45+

INSURANCE56

AAA Northern California, Nevada and Utah

100

Aetna Inc.

100

Allianz Life Insurance Co. of North America

100

Allstate Corp., The

100

Aon Corp.

100

Chubb Corp.

100

CNA Insurance

100

Esurance Inc.

100

Hartford Financial Services Co.

100

Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Inc.

100

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 56

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:32 PM

APPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCOREING North America Insurance Corp.

100

Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co.

100

MetLife Inc.

100

Nationwide

100

New York Life Insurance Co.

100

Progressive Corp., The

100

Prudential Financial Inc.

100

Sun Life Financial Inc. (U.S.)

100

American Family Insurance Group95

Lincoln National Corp.

95

Principal Financial Group95

WellPoint Inc.

95

John Hancock Financial Services Inc.

88

Unum Group88

American International Group Inc.

85

Selective Insurance Group85

Mutual of Omaha Insurance

80

State Farm Group80

Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association -

78

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2a

1b

2b

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer+

College Retirement Equities Fund
SAFECO Corp.

75

CUNA Mutual Insurance Group

65

Pacific Mutual Holding Co.

65

Zurich North America

65

Travelers Companies Inc., The

50

AEGON USA Inc.

40

INTERNET SERVICES AND RETAILING
eBay Inc.

100

Google Inc.

100

Orbitz Worldwide Inc.

100

Yahoo! Inc.

100

Amazon.com Inc.

80

Expedia Inc.

50

LAW FIRMS
Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld LLP

100

Alston & Bird LLP

100

Arent Fox LLP

100

Arnold & Porter LLP

100

Baker & Daniels LLP

100

Bingham McCutchen LLP

100

Brown Rudnick LLP

100Bryan Cave LLP

100

Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton LLP

100w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 57

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200957

10/1/08 12:45:32 PM

APPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCORE

58

Clifford Chance US LLP

100+

Covington & Burling LLP

100+

Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP

100

Debevoise & Plimpton LLP

100

Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP

100

Dickstein Shapiro LLP100

DLA Piper

100

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

100

Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge LLP

100

Faegre & Benson LLP

100

Foley & Lardner LLP

100

Foley Hoag LLP

100

Fried, Frank, Haris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP

100

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP

100

Haynes and Boone LLP

100

Heller Ehrman LLP

100

Holland & Knight LLP

100

Howrey LLP

100

Husch Blackwell Sanders LLP

100

Jenner & Block LLP

100

Kirkland & Ellis LLP

100

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP

100

Latham & Watkins LLP

100

Littler Mendelson PC

100

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP

100

McDermott Will & Emery LLP

100

Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky & Popeo PC

100

Morrison & Foerster LLP

100

Nixon Peabody LLP

100

O’Melveny & Myers LLP

100

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

100

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

100

Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP

100Perkins Coie

100

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

100

Powell Goldstein LLP

100

Proskauer Rose LLP

100Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi LLP

100

Ropes & Gray LLP

100

Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold LLP

100

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

100

Sidley Austin LLP

100

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

100

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 58

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2a

1b

2b

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer

+

+

+

+

+

+

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:32 PM

APPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCORE

Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal LLP

100

Squire, Sanders & Dempsey LLP

100

Sullivan & Cromwell LLP

100

Thompson Coburn LLP

100

Troutman Sanders LLP

100

Vinson & Elkins LLP

100

Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz LLP

100

Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP

100

White & Case LLP

100

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP

100

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati PC

100

Winston & Strawn LLP

100

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP

95

Crowell & Moring LLP

95

Davis, Polk & Wardwell95

Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

95Duane Morris LLP

95

Fenwick & West LLP

95

Gordon & Rees LLP

95

Hogan & Hartson LLP

95Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

95

Kilpatrick Stockton LLP

95King & Spalding LLP

95

Mayer Brown LLP

95

McGuireWoods LLP

95Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP

95

Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP

95

Stoel Rives LLP

95

Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP

95Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner LLP

95Carlton Fields

90

Chadbourne & Parke LLP

90

McCarter & English LLP90

McKenna, Long & Aldridge LLP

90Pepper Hamilton LLP

90Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

85

Frost Brown Todd LLC

85

Fulbright & Jaworski LLP

85

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

85

Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP

85Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP

85

Steptoe & Johnson LLP

85Baker & Botts LLP

80w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 59

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2a

1b

2b

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer++

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200959

10/1/08 12:45:33 PM

APPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCORE

Ballard, Spahr, Andrews & Ingersoll LLP

80

Dykema Gossett P, LLC

80

Fish & Richardson PC

80

Kaye Scholer LLP

80

Lord, Bissell & Brook

80

Luce Forward Hamilton & Scripps LLP

80

Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP

80

Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP

80Polsinelli Shalton Welte Suelthaus PC

80

Quarles & Brady LLP

80

Schiff Hardin LLP

80

Schulte, Roth & Zabel LLP

80

Vorys, Sater, Seymour & Pease LLP

80

Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon LLP

80

Baker & McKenzie

75

Goodwin Procter LLP

75

Hunton & Williams LLP

75

Reed Smith LLP

75Andrews Kurth LLP

70

Saul Ewing LLP

68Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice LLC

65

Holme Roberts & Owen LLP

60

Howard & Howard Attorneys PC

48

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

40

Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz PC

35

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2a

1b

2b

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer

MAIL AND FREIGHT DELIVERY
United Parcel Service Inc. (UPS)100

CSX Corp.

75

Union Pacific Corp.

58

FedEx Corp.

55

BNSF Railway Co.

30

YRC Worldwide Inc.

30

MANUFACTURING

60

Cummins Inc.

100

Owens Corning

100

Whirlpool Corp.

100

Illinois Tool Works Inc.

68

United Technologies Corp.

65

American Power Conversion Corp.

63

MeadWestvaco Corp.

60

Steelcase Inc.

60

Caterpillar Inc.

55

Emerson Electric Co.

45

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 60

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:33 PM

APPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCORE

Baldor Electric Co.

20

Deere & Co.

33

Lauren Manufacturing Co.

5

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2a

1b

2b

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer

MINING & METALS
Alcoa Inc.

85

MISCELLANEOUS
General Electric Co.

80

Mohawk Industries Inc.

65

Ball Corp.

58

Fisher Scientific International40

OIL AND GAS
BP America Inc.

100

Chevron Corp.

100

Shell Oil Co.

100

ConocoPhillips

60

Exxon Mobil Corp.

0

PHARMACEUTICALS
Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals Inc.

100

Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.

100

Eli Lilly & Co.

100

GlaxoSmithKline plc

100

Hoffmann-La Roche Inc.

100

Hospira Inc.

100

Johnson & Johnson

100

Merck & Co. Inc.

100

Novartis Pharmaceutical Corp.

100

Pfizer Inc.

100

Schering-Plough Corp.

100

CVS Corp.

90

AstraZeneca PLC

80

Wyeth

80

Amgen Inc.

70

Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC

65+

PUBLISHING AND PRINTINGNew York Times Co.

100

United Business Media LLC

100

West

95

McGraw-Hill Companies Inc., The

80

Gannett Co. Inc.

65

R.R. Donnelley & Sons Co.

55

Scholastic Corp.

50

Dow Jones & Co. Inc.

30w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 61+

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200961

10/1/08 12:45:33 PM

APPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCORE

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2a

1b

2b

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer

REAL ESTATE, RESIDENTIAL
Realogy Corp.

80

RETAIL AND CONSUMER PRODUCTS
Barnes & Noble Inc.

100

Best Buy Co. Inc.

100

Borders Group Inc.

100

Clorox Co.

100

Estee Lauder Companies

100

GameStop Corp.

100

Kimberly-Clark Corp.

100

Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams

100

Newell Rubbermaid Inc.

100

Recreational Equipment Inc.

100

Replacements Ltd.

100

S. C. Johnson & Son Inc.

100

Sears Holdings Corp.

100

Target Corp.

100

Unilever100

Walgreen Co.

100

Mattel Inc.

93

Staples Inc.

93

Hallmark Cards Inc.

90

Home Depot Inc.

85

Procter & Gamble Co.

85

Rite Aid Corp.

85

Harry & David Holdings Inc.

83

Limited Brands Inc.

80

OfficeMax Inc.

80

Colgate-Palmolive Co.

73

Toys ‘R’ Us Inc.

65

Avon Products Inc.

60

Office Depot Inc.

60

Black & Decker Corp., The

55

Circuit City Stores Inc.

55

Hasbro Inc.

50

RadioShack Corp.

40

Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

40

AutoZone Inc.

25

+

+

TELECOMMUNICATIONS

62

Alcatel-Lucent

100+

AT&T Inc.

100+

Motorola Inc.

100

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 62w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:33 PM

APPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCORE

Sprint Nextel Corp.

100

QUALCOMM Inc.

95

EarthLink Inc.

88

Nortel Networks Corp.

85

ALLTEL Corp.

80

Qwest Communications International Inc.

80

Verizon Communications Inc.

70

Nokia

50

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2c

2a

1b

2b

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer

TOBACCOReynolds American Inc.

100

TRANSPORTATION, TRAVEL
Sabre Holdings Inc.

100

Travelport Inc.

100

Ryder System Inc.

93

Travel Impressions, Ltd.

93

Hotels.com LP

85

Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group Inc.

83

Avis Budget Group Inc.

80

Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co.

80

Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd.

55

WASTE MANAGEMENT
Waste Management Inc.

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 63

85

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200963

10/1/08 12:45:34 PM

64

49540x3_Final.indd 64

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009www.hrc.org/cei

10/1/08 12:45:34 PM

APPENDIX C. CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX RATINGS BY INDUSTRY, DESCENDING SCORE

2009 HRC FOUNDATION CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY 66 – 80

▼

6

5

4

3c

3b

3a

2a

1b

2c

Criterion (see page 48)

2009 CEI Rating
1a

Employer

2b

APPENDIX D

Questions marked with 2009 were used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions were for informational purposes only.

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 65

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 965

10/1/08 12:45:34 PM

APPENDIX D. 2009 CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
Use this document for your information only – surveys must be submitted online. Up-to-date help and additional information
specific to each survey question is available online. The online survey is pre-populated with previous survey answers and/or information
gathered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and can be printed for your use in preparing your answers.
Questions marked with 2009 will be used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions are for informational purposes only. http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/cei_criteria.htm
RESPONSE DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2008. SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE: http://cei.hrc.org

BASIC COMPANY AND CONTACT INFORMATION
HRC will not publish or distribute contact information externally.
Headquarters Information:
Street Address Line 1:
Street Address Line 2:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
Main Phone #:Main Fax #:Web Address:# Full Time U.S. Employees:
Ten Major Brands:
Stock Ticker Symbol:
Primary Industry:

NON-DISCRIMINATION / EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY POLICY
2009

1.

Does your primary non-discrimination or equal employment opportunity policy statement include
the term “sexual orientation”?
❑ Yes, we have this policy firm-wide❑ No, but we have this policy in one or more subsidiaries or labor agreements❑ No, we do not have this policy, but plan to enact in the next one year
❑ No, we do not have this policy❑ Do not know

1a. If YES to Q1, does the policy apply to all global operations, including non-U.S. citizens based abroad?
❑ Yes, we have this policy in all global operations❑ No, but we have this policy in one or more offices outside the U.S.
❑ No, we do not have this policy in any global operations❑ No, we do not have this policy, but plan to enact in the next one year
❑ Do not know
❑ Not applicable, we have no employees based outside the U.S.

66

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 949540x3_Final.indd 66

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:34 PM

APPENDIX D. 2009 CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
Use this document for your information only – surveys must be submitted online. Up-to-date help and additional information
specific to each survey question is available online. The online survey is pre-populated with previous survey answers and/or information
gathered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and can be printed for your use in preparing your answers.
Questions marked with 2009 will be used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions are for informational purposes only. http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/cei_criteria.htm
RESPONSE DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2008. SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE: http://cei.hrc.org

2009

2.

Does your primary non-discrimination or equal employment opportunity policy statement include the terms“gender identity or expression” or “gender identity”?
❑ Yes, we have this policy firm-wide❑ No, but we have this policy in one or more subsidiaries or labor agreements❑ No, we do not have this policy, but plan to enact in the next one year
❑ No, we do not have this policy❑ Do not know

2a. If YES to Q2, does the policy apply to all global operations including non-U.S. citizens based abroad?
❑ Yes, we have this policy in all global operations❑ No, but we have this policy in one or more offices outside the U.S.
❑ No, we do not have this policy in any global operations❑ No, we do not have this policy, but plan to enact in the next one year
❑ Do not know
❑ Not applicable, we have no employees based outside the U.S.
3.

Please attach a copy of your employee and job applicant non-discrimination or equal employment
opportunity policy.

4.

Please provide the public web address where your non-discrimination or equal employment
opportunity policy is posted.
http://

5.

Do you have a primary anti-harassment policy that names protected categories of workers(i.e. explicitly prohibits harassment based on race, religion, disability, etc)?
❑ Yes, we do❑ No, we do not, but plan to in the next one year
❑ No, we do not❑ Do not know / not applicable

5a. If YES to Q5, does the policy include the term “sexual orientation”?
❑ Yes, we have this policy firm-wide❑ No, but we have this policy in one or more subsidiaries or labor agreements❑ No, we do not have this policy, but plan to enact in the next one year
❑ No, we do not have this policy❑ Do not know
5b. If YES to Q5, does the policy include the terms “gender identity or expression” or “gender identity”?
❑ Yes, we have this policy firm-wide❑ No, but we have this policy in one or more subsidiaries or labor agreements❑ No, we do not have this policy, but plan to enact in the next one year
❑ No, we do not have this policy❑ Do not know

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 67

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 967

10/1/08 12:45:34 PM

APPENDIX D. 2009 CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
Use this document for your information only – surveys must be submitted online. Up-to-date help and additional information
specific to each survey question is available online. The online survey is pre-populated with previous survey answers and/or information
gathered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and can be printed for your use in preparing your answers.
Questions marked with 2009 will be used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions are for informational purposes only. http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/cei_criteria.htm
RESPONSE DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2008. SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE: http://cei.hrc.org

Additional Notes to HRC:

BENEFITS
2009

6.

Does your business offer same-sex (or same- and opposite- sex) domestic partner health insurance
coverage to your benefits-eligible U.S. employees?
❑ Yes, we have this policy firm-wide❑ No, but we have this policy in one or more subsidiaries or labor agreements❑ No, we do not have this policy, but plan to enact in the next one year
❑ No, we do not have this policy❑ Do not know

6a. If YES to Q6, in what year did partner health insurance benefits become available?
Year
6b. If YES to Q6, are partner benefits offered to employees in your global operations?
❑ Yes, we have this policy in all global operations❑ No, but we have this policy in one or more offices outside the U.S.
❑ No, we do not have this policy in any global operations❑ No, we do not have this policy, but plan to enact in the next one year
❑ Do not know
❑ Not applicable, we have no employees based outside the U.S.
6c. If YES to Q6, do you “gross up” wages for employees who receive domestic partner health benefits
to offset the additional, imputed income tax?
❑ Yes, we do❑ No, we do not, but plan to in the next one year
❑ No, we do not❑ Do not know / not applicable
7.

68

Do you require employees to provide documentation for enrolling opposite-sex spouses,
children and other dependents in your benefits plan?
❑ Yes, we do❑ No, we do not, but plan to in the next one year
❑ No, we do not❑ Do not know / not applicable

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 9

1w w w. h r c . o r g / c e iIncl ding “se al orientation” in an EEO polic is designed to protect an emplo ee or applicant regardless of se al orientation be it ga lesbian bise al or heterose al

49540x3_Final.indd 68

10/1/08 12:45:34 PM

APPENDIX D. 2009 CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
Use this document for your information only – surveys must be submitted online. Up-to-date help and additional information
specific to each survey question is available online. The online survey is pre-populated with previous survey answers and/or information
gathered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and can be printed for your use in preparing your answers.
Questions marked with 2009 will be used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions are for informational purposes only. http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/cei_criteria.htm
RESPONSE DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2008. SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE: http://cei.hrc.org

7a. If you require documentation for the purpose of enrolling an employee’s partner in your benefits
plan, which of the following forms of documentation are independently sufficient for enrollment
purposes? Select all that apply.
❑ We do not require documentation for the purpose of partner benefits❑ We accept a domestic partnership affidavit❑ We accept a local or state domestic partnership registration❑ We accept a state-issued civil union or marriage certificate❑ We accept a marriage certificate issued in another country
2009

8.

Are the following health benefits offered to same-sex partners of benefits-eligible U.S. employees?
Health/Medical❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners❑ No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses only
❑ No, benefit not offered
Dental❑❑❑❑Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners
Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners
No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses onlyNo, benefit not offered

Vision❑❑❑❑Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners
Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners
No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses onlyNo, benefit not offered

Spouse/partner’s dependent medical coverage❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners❑ No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses only
❑ No, benefit not offered
COBRA/COBRA-like benefits2❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners❑ No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses only
❑ No, benefit not offered
2

These benefits are federally mandated for opposite-sex spouses, but may be extended to same-sex partners.

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 69

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 969

10/1/08 12:45:34 PM

APPENDIX D. 2009 CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
Use this document for your information only – surveys must be submitted online. Up-to-date help and additional information
specific to each survey question is available online. The online survey is pre-populated with previous survey answers and/or information
gathered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and can be printed for your use in preparing your answers.
Questions marked with 2009 will be used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions are for informational purposes only. http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/cei_criteria.htm
RESPONSE DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2008. SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE: http://cei.hrc.org

9.

Are the following soft benefits offered to same-sex partners of benefits-eligible U.S. employees?
FMLA/FMLA-like benefits3❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners❑ No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses only
❑ No, benefit not offered
Bereavement leave4❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners❑ No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses only
❑ No, benefit not offered
Employer-provided supplemental life insurance for the spouse/partner❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners❑ No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses only
❑ No, benefit not offered
Relocation/travel assistance❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners❑ No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses only
❑ No, benefit not offered
Adoption assistance5❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners❑ No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses only
❑ No, benefit not offered
Employee discounts❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners❑ No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses only
❑ No, benefit not offered

70

3

FMLA leave provided to employee on behalf of same-sex partner (equivalent treatment as compared to an employee’s opposite-sex spouse) or partner’s dependents.

4

Bereavement leave taken in the event of a spouse or partner’s death or, if applicable, the death of a spouse or partner’s dependents/ children.

5

Offered if spouse or partner adopts a child or if employee adopts spouse or partner’s children.

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 949540x3_Final.indd 70

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:34 PM

APPENDIX D. 2009 CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
Use this document for your information only – surveys must be submitted online. Up-to-date help and additional information
specific to each survey question is available online. The online survey is pre-populated with previous survey answers and/or information
gathered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and can be printed for your use in preparing your answers.
Questions marked with 2009 will be used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions are for informational purposes only. http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/cei_criteria.htm
RESPONSE DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2008. SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE: http://cei.hrc.org

Employee assistance program❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners❑ No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses only
❑ No, benefit not offered
2009

10. Are the following retirement benefits offered to same-sex partners of benefits-eligible U.S. employees?
Retiree health care benefits❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners❑ No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses only
❑ No, benefit not offered
Defined benefit plan: Qualified joint and survivor annuity (QJSA) for spouse/partner6❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners❑ No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses only
❑ No, benefit not offered
Defined benefit plan: Qualified pre-retirement survivor annuity (QPSA) for spouse/partner7❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners❑ No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses only
❑ No, benefit not offered
11. Are the following retirement benefits offered to same-sex partners of benefits-eligible U.S. employees?
Rollover distribution option❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners❑ No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses only
❑ No, benefit not offered
Hardship distribution option❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same & Opposite-sex partners❑ Yes, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses, Same-sex partners❑ No, benefit offered to Opposite-sex spouses only
❑ No, benefit not offered
6

A QJSA relates to a defined benefit/pension plan. Typically, an employer can create a contingent survivor annuity for which the employee
can designate the individual of his/her choice in the event of the employee’s death.

7

A QPSA relates to a defined benefit/pension plan. Typically, an employer can create a contingent survivor annuity for which the employee
can designate the individual of his/her choice in the event of the employee’s death.

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 71

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 971

10/1/08 12:45:35 PM

APPENDIX D. 2009 CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
Use this document for your information only – surveys must be submitted online. Up-to-date help and additional information
specific to each survey question is available online. The online survey is pre-populated with previous survey answers and/or information
gathered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and can be printed for your use in preparing your answers.
Questions marked with 2009 will be used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions are for informational purposes only. http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/cei_criteria.htm
RESPONSE DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2008. SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE: http://cei.hrc.org

12. Please describe any other benefits offered to an employee’s same-sex partner:

Additional Notes to HRC:

TRANSGENDER BENEFITS
2009

13. Most health insurance policies — through what is referred to as a “transgender exclusion” clause— deny or exclude coverage for commonplace treatments and procedures for transgender
employees that are otherwise covered for most employees.
Do insurance plans available to your work force generally cover the following treatments(benefit offered)?
If so, is there at least one firm-sponsored insurance plan that does not exclude coverage(transgender treatment covered) for medically-necessary treatment related to gender dysphoria
or gender reassignment?8>> This question requires examining your insurance policy’s list of coverage exclusions. Answering“Yes, benefit offered, transgender treatment covered” for the following benefits indicates that
medically necessary care for gender reassignment would be covered under one or more insurance
plans available to your employees, or through some form of self-insurance.
Paid short-term leave for surgical procedures9❑ Yes, benefit offered, transgender treatment covered❑ No, benefit offered, but transgender treatment excluded❑ No, benefit not offered
8 Answering “Benefit offered, transgender treatment covered” for surgical procedures indicates that surgical procedures as related to medically necessary carefor gender reassignment would not be excluded and would apply for standard coverage under on or more insurance plans available to your employees
972

Paid short-term leave

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 949540x3_Final.indd 72

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:35 PM

APPENDIX D. 2009 CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
Use this document for your information only – surveys must be submitted online. Up-to-date help and additional information
specific to each survey question is available online. The online survey is pre-populated with previous survey answers and/or information
gathered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and can be printed for your use in preparing your answers.
Questions marked with 2009 will be used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions are for informational purposes only. http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/cei_criteria.htm
RESPONSE DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2008. SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE: http://cei.hrc.org

Mental health counseling10❑ Yes, benefit offered, transgender treatment covered❑ No, benefit offered, but transgender treatment excluded❑ No, benefit not offered
Pharmacy benefits❑ Yes, benefit offered, transgender treatment covered❑ No, benefit offered, but transgender treatment excluded❑ No, benefit not offered
Medical visits❑ Yes, benefit offered, transgender treatment covered❑ No, benefit offered, but transgender treatment excluded❑ No, benefit not offered
Surgical procedures❑ Yes, benefit offered, transgender treatment covered❑ No, benefit offered, but transgender treatment excluded❑ No, benefit not offered
14. YES for any of the answers in Q13:
14a. Is coverage for any of the benefit(s) self-insured?
❑ Yes, we do❑ No, we do not, but plan to in the next one year
❑ No, we do not❑ Do not know / not applicable14b. If coverage for any of the benefit(s) is capped at a maximum lifetime dollar amount specificto transgender treatments, please indicate that cap amount.
$
14c. What insurance carrier manages or administers the plan?

14d. Please attach documentation that indicates that coverage is available.

10 Employee Assistance Program coverage is not sufficient coveragew w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 73

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 973

10/1/08 12:45:35 PM

APPENDIX D. 2009 CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
Use this document for your information only – surveys must be submitted online. Up-to-date help and additional information
specific to each survey question is available online. The online survey is pre-populated with previous survey answers and/or information
gathered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and can be printed for your use in preparing your answers.
Questions marked with 2009 will be used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions are for informational purposes only. http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/cei_criteria.htm
RESPONSE DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2008. SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE: http://cei.hrc.org

15. Please describe any other benefits or limitations to benefits available to transgender employees:

DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT AND TRAINING
2009

16. Does your business have written gender transition guidelines documenting supportive policy
or practice on issues pertinent to a workplace gender transition?
>> Guidelines submitted to the HRC Foundation will be for internal use only and will be evaluatedfor scoring purposes.
❑ Yes, we do❑ No, we do not, but plan to in the next one year
❑ No, we do not❑ Do not know / not applicable
16a. If YES to Q16, please attach a copy of the policy as a Microsoft Word (.doc)
or Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) file.

2009

17. Does your business have an officially recognized GLBT employee resource group?
❑ Yes, we do❑ No, we do not, but plan to in the next one year
❑ No, we do not❑ Do not know / not applicable2009

17a. If NO to Q17, would your business allow GLBT employees to use its facilities, electronic andother resources to form an officially recognized group, if one expressed interest?
❑ Yes, we do❑ No, we do not, but plan to in the next one year
❑ No, we do not❑ Do not know / not applicable

74

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 949540x3_Final.indd 74

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:35 PM

APPENDIX D. 2009 CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
Use this document for your information only – surveys must be submitted online. Up-to-date help and additional information
specific to each survey question is available online. The online survey is pre-populated with previous survey answers and/or information
gathered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and can be printed for your use in preparing your answers.
Questions marked with 2009 will be used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions are for informational purposes only. http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/cei_criteria.htm
RESPONSE DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2008. SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE: http://cei.hrc.org

17b. If YES to Q10, please provide contact information for the group:
Name of Group:
Primary Contact Name:
Primary Contact ERG Title:
Phone:
E-mail:Website:17c. If YES to Q17, does the group have a senior executive champion or sponsor(e.g.: Vice President or higher)?
❑ Yes, we do❑ No, we do not, but plan to in the next one year
❑ No, we do not❑ Do not know / not applicable
17d. If YES to Q17, are there established chapters of the group in your global operations?
❑ Yes, we have this policy in all global operations❑ No, but we have this policy in one or more offices outside the U.S.
❑ No, we do not have this policy in any global operations❑ No, we do not have this policy, but plan to enact in the next one year
❑ Do not know
❑ Not applicable, we have no employees based outside the U.S.
2009

18. Does your business have a firm-wide diversity council or working group with a missionthat specifically includes GLBT diversity?
❑ Yes, we do❑ No, we do not, but plan to in the next one year
❑ No, we do not❑ Do not know / not applicable
18a. If NO to Q18, does your business have another, non-GLBT specific, company-wide diversity council
or working group?
❑ Yes, we do❑ No, we do not, but plan to in the next one year
❑ No, we do not❑ Do not know / not applicablew w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 75

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 975

10/1/08 12:45:35 PM

APPENDIX D. 2009 CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
Use this document for your information only – surveys must be submitted online. Up-to-date help and additional information
specific to each survey question is available online. The online survey is pre-populated with previous survey answers and/or information
gathered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and can be printed for your use in preparing your answers.
Questions marked with 2009 will be used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions are for informational purposes only. http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/cei_criteria.htm
RESPONSE DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2008. SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE: http://cei.hrc.org

19. Can employees voluntarily disclose their sexual orientation and/or gender identity through humanresource surveys or other data collection systems? Please select “Do not know/ not applicable”
if you do not survey or otherwise collect employee information in aggregate form.
❑ Yes, we do❑ No, we do not, but plan to in the next one year
❑ No, we do not❑ Do not know / not applicable
20. If you provide diversity awareness or employee training, what topics are covered andwho is required to attend? (The topics may be covered as part of a general overview of diversity,
or in topic-specific sessions.)
2009

Sexual Orientation>> Credit on this question is provided for any training that is offered, irrespective of attendance requirements.
❑ Yes, all employees required to attend❑ Yes, all managers/supervisors required to attend❑ Yes, some employees required to attend❑ Yes, no employees required to attend❑ No, not offered

2009

Gender identity and expression>> Credit on this question is provided for any training that is offered, irrespective of attendance
requirements or, alternatively written gender transition guidelines.
❑ Yes, all employees required to attend❑ Yes, all managers/supervisors required to attend❑ Yes, some employees required to attend❑ Yes, no employees required to attend❑ No, not offered

SUPPLY-CHAIN MANAGEMENT
21. Does your business have a supplier diversity program?
❑ Yes, we do❑ No, we do not, but plan to in the next one year
❑ No, we do not❑ Do not know / not applicable
14a. If YES to Q21, does your business seek to include GLBT-owned companies in your supplier
diversity program?
>> GLBT Supplier Diversity Programs: http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/diversity/7012.htm❑ Yes, we do❑ No, we do not, but plan to in the next one year
❑ No, we do not❑ Do not know / not applicable
76

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 949540x3_Final.indd 76

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:35 PM

APPENDIX D. 2009 CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
Use this document for your information only – surveys must be submitted online. Up-to-date help and additional information
specific to each survey question is available online. The online survey is pre-populated with previous survey answers and/or information
gathered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and can be printed for your use in preparing your answers.
Questions marked with 2009 will be used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions are for informational purposes only. http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/cei_criteria.htm
RESPONSE DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2008. SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE: http://cei.hrc.org

21b. If YES to Q21, what dollar amount did you spend with GLBT-owned businesses in yourlast fiscal year ?
$:❑ Do not know
22. Does your business require suppliers to prohibit discrimination consistent with the protections
provided by your EEO or non-discrimination policy?
❑ Yes, we do❑ No, we do not, but plan to in the next one year
❑ No, we do not❑ Do not know / not applicable
Additional Notes to HRC:

EXTERNAL ENGAGEMENT
23. Please provide the public web address for your business that is devoted to GLBT recruitment(if applicable).
http://
2008

24. During the past year, has your business engaged in- marketing or advertising to the GLBT community- providing financial or in-kind support to GLBT health, educational, political or community-relatedorganizations or events, or- targeted recruiting efforts to the GLBT community such as GLBT career fairs?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Do not know / Info not available
24a. If YES to Q24, please describe a maximum of three such efforts.
#1 First Effort
Primary purpose of efforts❑ Marketing and advertising to the GLBT community❑ Financial or in-kind support to GLBT organizations or events❑ Recruitment targeting the GLBT communityw w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 77

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 977

10/1/08 12:45:35 PM

APPENDIX D. 2009 CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
Use this document for your information only – surveys must be submitted online. Up-to-date help and additional information
specific to each survey question is available online. The online survey is pre-populated with previous survey answers and/or information
gathered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and can be printed for your use in preparing your answers.
Questions marked with 2009 will be used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions are for informational purposes only. http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/cei_criteria.htm
RESPONSE DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2008. SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE: http://cei.hrc.org

Name of Campaign

Type of organization or event (if applicable)❑ Political❑ Education❑ Health❑ Community
Location of effort (leave state blank, if national):, United States
Duration of campaign in years# Years:❑ Do not know/ info not available
Creative content: if the effort involved any promotional media referencing your business,
did such media use imagery, language or people to indicate GLBT content?
❑ General Audience, no specific GLBT content❑ GLBT content❑ Not applicable
Recruitment: if this was a recruiting effort, or if this effort had a tracked recruiting component,
how many candidates were formally interviewed as a result?
#:❑ Do not know/ info not available#2 Second Effort
Primary purpose of efforts❑ Marketing and advertising to the GLBT community❑ Financial or in-kind support to GLBT organizations or events❑ Recruitment targeting the GLBT community

Name of Campaign

Type of organization or event (if applicable)❑ Political❑ Education❑ Health❑ Community
78

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 78

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:35 PM

APPENDIX D. 2009 CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
Use this document for your information only – surveys must be submitted online. Up-to-date help and additional information
specific to each survey question is available online. The online survey is pre-populated with previous survey answers and/or information
gathered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and can be printed for your use in preparing your answers.
Questions marked with 2009 will be used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions are for informational purposes only. http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/cei_criteria.htm
RESPONSE DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2008. SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE: http://cei.hrc.org

Location of effort (leave state blank, if national):, United States
Duration of campaign in years# Years:❑ Do not know/ info not available
Creative content: if the effort involved any promotional media referencing your business,
did such media use imagery, language or people to indicate GLBT content?
❑ General Audience, no specific GLBT content❑ GLBT content❑ Not applicable
Recruitment: if this was a recruiting effort, or if this effort had a tracked recruiting component,
how many candidates were formally interviewed as a result?
#:❑ Do not know/ info not available#3 Third Effort
Primary purpose of efforts❑ Marketing and advertising to the GLBT community❑ Financial or in-kind support to GLBT organizations or events❑ Recruitment targeting the GLBT community

Name of Campaign

Type of organization or event (if applicable)❑ Political❑ Education❑ Health❑ Community
Location of effort (leave state blank, if national):, United States
Duration of campaign in years# Years:❑ Do not know/ info not available

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 79

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200979

10/1/08 12:45:36 PM

APPENDIX D. 2009 CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX SURVEY
Use this document for your information only – surveys must be submitted online. Up-to-date help and additional information
specific to each survey question is available online. The online survey is pre-populated with previous survey answers and/or information
gathered by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, and can be printed for your use in preparing your answers.
Questions marked with 2009 will be used in part or in their entirety for scoring purposes this year.
All other questions are for informational purposes only. http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/cei_criteria.htm
RESPONSE DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2008. SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE: http://cei.hrc.org

Creative content: if the effort involved any promotional media referencing your business,
did such media use imagery, language or people to indicate GLBT content?
❑ General Audience, no specific GLBT content❑ GLBT content❑ Not applicable
Recruitment: if this was a recruiting effort, or if this effort had a tracked recruiting component,
how many candidates were formally interviewed as a result?
#:❑ Do not know/ info not available

24b. If YES to Q24, attach an example of creative content.
24c. If YES to Q24, please provide any additional information about your business’s
advertising campaigns.

25. Please include any other information that would illustrate how your business views gay, lesbian,bisexual or transgender employees, consumers or investors.

26. If you have any additional information or supporting documents you would like to submit, please
include it in a Microsoft Word (.doc) or Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) file and attach a copy of the file here.

80

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009

49540x3_Final.indd 80

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:36 PM

www.hrc.org/cei

49540x3_Final.indd 81

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 200981

10/1/08 12:45:36 PM

CORPORATE EQUALITY INDEX 2009:
A Report Card on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Equality in Corporate America
Daryl Herrschaft, Editor
Samir Luther & Deena Fidas, Authors

ABOUT THE HRC FOUNDATION’S WORKPLACE PROJECTThe Human Rights Campaign Foundation’s Workplace Project is a nationally recognized source ofexpert information and advice on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender workplace issues. It provides decision makers with cutting-edge research, expert counsel, online resources, best practices
information and on-site training and education. Project staff serves as trusted consultants to diversity
professionals and other executives seeking to position their business as welcoming workplaces that
respect all employees, regardless of sexual orientation and gender identity or expression. The Project
also makes available the expertise of the HRC Business Council for invaluable peer-to-peer advice.

PROJECT STAFF
Daryl Herrschaft
Director, HRC Workplace Project
Since 1998, Daryl Herrschaft has overseen the Workplace Project of the Human Rights Campaign
Foundation. In this capacity, he monitors and evaluates corporate policies surrounding lesbian,gay, bisexual and transgender employees, consumers and investors. He is the editor of the HRC
Foundation’s annual Corporate Equality Index and The State of the Workplace for Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual and Transgender Americans.
Herrschaft has consulted with dozens of major corporations on the full range of LGBT-related workplace policies. He has presented HRC findings to diverse audiences, including the Conference
Board, the Society for Human Resource Management and the New York City Council. He is frequently called upon by national and local media, including Time and The Wall Street Journal aswell as on CNN, National Public Radio and Voice of America. Before joining HRC, Herrschaft
was a research associate at the Urban Institute. He holds a bachelor’s degree from the George
Washington University.

Eric Bloem
Deputy Director, HRC Workplace Project
Eric Bloem has directly consulted with dozens of major corporations on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender-related workplace policies. Before joining the Human Rights Campaign Foundation’s Workplace
Project in 2005, he spent six years as a manager with Accenture, where he provided change management consulting services to many Fortune 500 companies, including Best Buy, Fidelity, Walgreens andCitigroup. Bloem brings with him notable experience helping companies adapt to strategic change.
Bloem developed the HRC Foundation Corporate Equality Series, a group of workshops designed tohelp human resources and diversity professionals better understand LGBT workplace issues. He conducts these workshops in strategic locations across the country. Bloem holds a bachelor’s degree inbusiness administration from Bucknell University.

82

82

49540x3_Final.indd 82

COR
CORPPORATE
ORATEEEQUALITYQUALITYI N
I NDDEEXX200
20099

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:36 PM

Samir LutherSenior Manager, HRC Workplace ProjectSamir Luther is a trusted expert on employment non-discrimination policies and workplace benefits
in the United States and works with employers to develop model practices and replicate those withother businesses. Luther co-authored the Human Rights Campaign Foundation’s 2009 Corporate
Equality Index report and has authored previous CEI reports, authors The State of the Workplacefor Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Americans, as well as special reports including
Transgender Inclusion in the Workplace, 2nd Edition. Luther holds a bachelor’s degree in businessadministration from Washington University in St. Louis, and he joined the Workplace Project of the
HRC Foundation in 2004 as research coordinator.

Deena Fidas
Coordinator, HRC Workplace Project
Formerly working in political fundraising, Deena Fidas joined the Workplace Project staff in
September 2007. Fidas took over the day-to-day management of the Corporate Equality Index survey administration, co-authorship of the Human Rights Campaign Foundation’s 2009 Corporate
Equality Index report as well as leading forthcoming published research on the workplace climate forLGBT employees in large businesses. Over the spring of 2008, Fidas engaged new businesses totake part in the survey and educated already participating businesses on the importance of expanding LGBT workplace protections, equal benefits and robust diversity and inclusion efforts. Fidas
holds a master’s degree in sociology from American University in Washington, D.C.

Alison Delpercio
Coordinator, HRC Family & Workplace Projects
Alison Delpercio works with employers, healthcare institutions and employees to address workplaceand healthcare concerns for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals. Before joining the
Human Rights Campaign Foundation in 2007, she advocated for GLBT issues in healthcare andhigher education at and around the University of Rochester. She holds a bachelor’s degree in healthand society as well as a Certificate of Management Studies from the university.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Special thanks to HRC Workplace Project staff Alison Delpercio and intern Sarah Turshen for theircrucial assistance to survey participants, survey review, meticulous data collection and research.
Thanks to temporary staff Sarah Schrag for her contributions to the research on anti-LGBT activity
and to Paul Hastings LLP for their research on employment litigation involving LGBT workers.
Thanks also to HRC staff Darrin Hurwitz, Christopher Edelson, Rob Falk and Rebekah DeHaven for
their invaluable outreach to law firms on the AmLaw 200.
Thanks to Tony Frye for design and to HRC staff Janice Hughes and Carolyn Simon for
editorial guidance.

w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 83

COR
CORPPORATE
ORATE EEQUALITYQUALITY I INNDDEEXX 200
20099

83

10/1/08 12:45:36 PM

HRC BUSINESS COUNCIL
The Human Rights Campaign Business Council was founded in 1997. Members provide expert
advice and counsel to the HRC Workplace Project on gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender workplace issues based on their business experience and knowledge.

8449540x3_Final.indd 84

John K. Barry
J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.

Susan McManus
Nationwide

Charles Berardesco
Constellation Energy Group Inc.

Marc Nichols
Copper Irle LLC

Richard P. Clark
Accenture Ltd.

Bryan M. Parsons
Ernst & Young LLP

Wes Combs
Witeck-Combs Communications

Keith Powell
Eastman Kodak Co.

Elaine DeCanio
Shell Oil Co.

Diego Sanchez
AIDS Action Committee of Massachusetts

Troy Greenstreet
PepsiCo Inc.

Rob Shook
International Business Machines Corp.

John P. Isa
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP

Meghan Stabler
BMC Software Inc.

Emily Jones
Eastman Kodak Co. (retired)

Chuck Stephens
Deloitte & Touche USA LLP

J. Kevin Jones Jr.
Citigroup Inc.

David A. Wilson
AKConsulting Services Inc.

Trish Jones
Turner Broadcasting System Inc.

Helga Ying
Levi Strauss & Co.

Mark McLane
Whirlpool Corp.

Louise Young
Raytheon Co.

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 9w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:36 PM

NOTESw w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

49540x3_Final.indd 85

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 985

10/1/08 12:45:36 PM

NOTES

86

49540x3_Final.indd 86

COR P ORATE E QUALITY I N D E X 200 9w w w. h r c . o r g / c e i

10/1/08 12:45:36 PM

Human Rights Campaign Foundation engaged a printer for the production of this piece that is 100% wind powered,and is an EPA Green Power Partner. It was printed on FSC certified paper using vegetable-based inks.

49540x3_Final.indd 87

10/1/08 12:45:36 PM

Human Rights Campaign Foundation
1640 Rhode Island Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
phone 202/628-4160
TTY 202/216-1572 fax 866/369-3348
website hrc.org/workplace e-mail workplace@hrc.org
ISBN 10: 1-934765-05-8
ISBN 13: 978-1-934765-05-049540x3_Final.indd 88

10/1/08 12:45:36 PM