MLB to reportedly add ‘sexual orientation’ to discrimination clause
Billy Bean knows the fear, and the trauma, provoked by hiding his sexual orientation for the sake of his career. Through his own experience, and through conversations with front-office friends forced to keep their private lives secret, Bean understands why no active MLB player, manager or executive has identified himself as gay.
“I have spoken many times with people who work in Major League Baseball, and they are afraid to come out, because they don’t know how their owners and superiors would respond,” said Bean, who played for the Tigers, Dodgers and Padres from 1987-1995.
In his 2003 memoir - “Going the Other Way” - Bean discussed his life as a major leaguer who hid his sexuality until after retirement. When he played, Bean was a not victim of overt discrimination because of one unfortunate fact: after realizing he was gay, he feared what would happen if he came out.
The 47-year-old, who now works in real estate in Miami, was glad to see baseball’s newest collective bargaining agreement address sexual orientation, but did not believe that wording alone would create the necessary changes.
The new CBA, released Tuesday, added the words “sexual orientation” to its section on discrimination. This development was first reported by the Daily News, and later confirmed by a news release, issued jointly by MLB and the Players’ Association, that read, “Non-discrimination based on sexual orientation were added to Article XV.”
Article XV, Section A of MLB’s expiring Basic Agreement, in effect from 2006-2011, states: “The provisions of this Agreement shall be applied to all Players covered by this Agreement without regard to race, color, religion or national origin.”
In the new agreement, the words “sexual orientation” were added to Article XV. Michael Weiner, the union’s executive director, said that the decision was not motivated by requests from his membership, but by “the lawyers on both sides just recognizing that it should be there.”
Bean said he was “happy and thrilled” at the change, and noted that the most significant impact might be in the ability to transfer pensions and other benefits to same-sex partners. But he also noted that the baseball environment still poses significant challenges to gay athletes.
“I don’t know if legislation is going to provide the safety and security that players need,” Bean said. “If you’re a distraction, you’re going to be removed one way or another. They’ll find a way.
“If you’re a marginal player, you fear losing your job at any moment. If you’re a young baseball player who just happens to be gay, you might feel safer keeping it to yourself.”
Although the gay community has not yet seen its Jackie Robinson moment, many events this year in and out of sports have represented incremental progress. The National Football League also included “sexual orientation” in its CBA this year.
Still, there remains disagreement within locker rooms whether an MLB team is ready to accept an openly gay teammate. When news of the same-sex marriage law broke, several Mets said privately they would be uncomfortable with an openly gay teammate (while others said they would be comfortable).
“Most of us are still Neanderthals,” one Met explained.
Edited to fix the wonky title and add tags. Sorry, mods!
source
“I have spoken many times with people who work in Major League Baseball, and they are afraid to come out, because they don’t know how their owners and superiors would respond,” said Bean, who played for the Tigers, Dodgers and Padres from 1987-1995.
In his 2003 memoir - “Going the Other Way” - Bean discussed his life as a major leaguer who hid his sexuality until after retirement. When he played, Bean was a not victim of overt discrimination because of one unfortunate fact: after realizing he was gay, he feared what would happen if he came out.
The 47-year-old, who now works in real estate in Miami, was glad to see baseball’s newest collective bargaining agreement address sexual orientation, but did not believe that wording alone would create the necessary changes.
The new CBA, released Tuesday, added the words “sexual orientation” to its section on discrimination. This development was first reported by the Daily News, and later confirmed by a news release, issued jointly by MLB and the Players’ Association, that read, “Non-discrimination based on sexual orientation were added to Article XV.”
Article XV, Section A of MLB’s expiring Basic Agreement, in effect from 2006-2011, states: “The provisions of this Agreement shall be applied to all Players covered by this Agreement without regard to race, color, religion or national origin.”
In the new agreement, the words “sexual orientation” were added to Article XV. Michael Weiner, the union’s executive director, said that the decision was not motivated by requests from his membership, but by “the lawyers on both sides just recognizing that it should be there.”
Bean said he was “happy and thrilled” at the change, and noted that the most significant impact might be in the ability to transfer pensions and other benefits to same-sex partners. But he also noted that the baseball environment still poses significant challenges to gay athletes.
“I don’t know if legislation is going to provide the safety and security that players need,” Bean said. “If you’re a distraction, you’re going to be removed one way or another. They’ll find a way.
“If you’re a marginal player, you fear losing your job at any moment. If you’re a young baseball player who just happens to be gay, you might feel safer keeping it to yourself.”
Although the gay community has not yet seen its Jackie Robinson moment, many events this year in and out of sports have represented incremental progress. The National Football League also included “sexual orientation” in its CBA this year.
Still, there remains disagreement within locker rooms whether an MLB team is ready to accept an openly gay teammate. When news of the same-sex marriage law broke, several Mets said privately they would be uncomfortable with an openly gay teammate (while others said they would be comfortable).
“Most of us are still Neanderthals,” one Met explained.
Edited to fix the wonky title and add tags. Sorry, mods!
source