Same-Sex Wedding Announcement Gets Lesbian Woman Fired

by Michael Jones · 2010-11-10 06:23:00 UTC

Getting married is supposed to be one of the happiest days in someone's life. There's the flowers, the cake, the partner of your dreams, celebrating with friends and family and neighbors. For Laine Tadlock, an administrator at Benedictine University in Springfield, getting married cost her a job.

Tadlock traveled to Iowa this summer with her life partner, Kae Helstrom, to tie the knot. And it wasn't really much of a secret. Tadlock had been an employee at Benedictine University for five years, and had been out to many of her colleagues since day one. A bunch of them even knew about the same-sex wedding, and were supportive of Tadlock getting married to the woman she loved most in this world.

But when Tadlock and Helstrom came back to Springfield, and included a same-sex wedding announcement in the State Journal-Register, the city's paper, things started to unravel fast. Senior college leaders saw that one of their employees was same-sex married, and promptly called Tadlock into their office. They were disgusted that an employee at Benedictine University, a Catholic school, would not only attend but be the centerpiece of a same-sex wedding. And they moved quickly to get rid of her.

Upset at Tadlock, leaders at the college offered her early retirement as a way to get rid of her. A qualified employee of five years, the college wanted to give her a year's worth of pay, followed by a second year at two-thirds pay, followed by a third year at one-thirds pay. Tadlock said no, believing that her gay wedding announcement wasn't good cause to send someone packing at a job.

Then Tadlock was told that if she didn't accept early retirement, administrators at the University would terminate her employment immediately, citing a conflict with the school's mission. Yes, a paragraph blurb describing your wedding is apparently akin to Judas betraying Jesus.

Then, as if school administrators couldn't dig themselves more of a hole, they backtracked on that idea, and instead told Tadlock that they would offer her a new position at the school, Director of Assessment, Accreditation and Institutional Effectiveness. Nice offer, right? Except that it has nothing to do with Tadlock's skills or capabilities. It would be like telling an astronaut that you'd like to take them off the space shuttle, and assign them to perform open heart surgery.

And then finally, capping off this saga, the school just went back to their plan to terminate Tadlock. Which they did, effective October 28.

Tadlock received a statement from the school's lawyers, saying that she wasn't welcome at Benedictine University any longer, because she violated the morality and integrity that employees at the school are expected to live up to.

"By publicizing the marriage ceremony in which she participated in Iowa she has significantly disregarded and flouted core religious beliefs which, as a Catholic institution, it is our mission to uphold," the letter said.

Just publishing her same-sex wedding announcement, which had absolutely nothing to do with her professional life whatsoever, earned Tadlock a pink slip. Oh, and here's the real kicker: Benedictine University has the following employment non-discrimination policy.

It is the university’s policy to provide equal employment opportunity to all persons without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, handicap, veteran status, marital status, sexual orientation or any basis protected by law.

Notice the sexual orientation line and marital status line up there? How interesting that they'd choose to fire a woman for getting gay married, when at least on paper, the school isn't supposed to pay any attention to an employee's sexual orientation or marital status. Sound like a complete and utter FAIL on the part of Benedictine University?

Sure does, which is why Tadlock now has an attorney, and is exploring legal options to challenge the University.

She told the State Journal-Register that she has absolutely no regrets about publishing her wedding announcement. Love is love, and it deserves to be celebrated.

"We’re not in the dark ages,” she said. “People need to understand that. I have rights as well.”

And proving that administrators at Benedictine University are totally and utterly out of step with their employees, solidarity for Tadlock has come pouring in. One coworker, Maureen Lavin, resigned from the school to protest Tadlock's termination.

“I had told our dean,” said Lavin, “that if Laine was put out of her position for getting married and putting it in the newspaper that I would not stay to support the university.”

These women are pretty awesome, eh? But Benedictine University ... not so much. Send the school a message, as well as the Diocese of Springfield, that the way Tadlock's employment situation was handled was not only contrary to anti-discrimination policies, it was a complete mockery. No employee should be fired or terminated or forced to resign for publishing a wedding announcement. To do so sends a message rooted firmly in intolerance, which is something school administrators ought to be fighting, not fostering.

Photo credit: Benedictine University at Springfield on Facebook

Michael Jones is a Change.org Editor. He has worked in the field of human rights communications for a decade, most recently for Harvard Law School.
PREVIOUS STORY:
Top Ten Things That Never Would Have Happened If I Didn’t Make It Past High School
NEXT STORY:
Bullied high schooler convinces MPAA to change ‘Bully’ rating to “PG-13”

COMMENTS (8)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.