- Steven Johnson
A gay couple that was denied a family membership at a gym owned by Baylor Health Care System has filed a complaint under the city of Dallas’ nondiscrimination ordinance.
Steven Johnson said he filed the complaint last week with the city’s Fair Housing Office, which investigates alleged violations of the 2002 ordinance. The ordinance prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation in housing, employment and public accommodations.
Earlier this month, Johnson tried to sign up his partner of 23 years as a family member at the Baylor Tom Landry Fitness Center. Sales representatives at the gym refused, and the facility’s director later confirmed that it doesn’t offer family memberships to same-sex couples.
“Hopefully out of all this will come some changes in their policy,” Johnson told me today. “It’s just an example of the little things we [gay people] have to face every day.”
The Health Care System’s senior vice president for consumer affairs, Jennifer Coleman, told Dallas Voice she would look into the policy but couldn’t promise that it would be changed. Coleman hasn’t responded to e-mail and phone messages in the two weeks since then.
Johnson said Baylor hasn’t contacted him, either. “They have not reached out at all,” he said.
Johnson said he spoke with a city investigator when he filed the complaint.
“When I talked to him, he said he couldn’t give me anything absolute, but he said it sure sounded like it was a case,” Johnson said. “He indicated that he thought there was a potential violation, but he couldn’t confirm anything yet.”
Beverly Davis, director of the Fair Housing Office, has said it’s “possible” that the gym’s policy violates the ordinance. Davis also indicated that she was surprised to learn that a gym in Dallas would have such a policy in 2010.
If the case proceeds, Baylor will undoubtedly argue that the discrimination is based on “marital status,” not sexual orientation. It’s an argument that the City Attorney’s Office accepted a few years ago when it let a landlord off the hook for not renting to a same-sex couple.
This time, let’s hope the City Attorney’s Office shows some backbone and enforces the ordinance as it was intended, instead of simply carving out loopholes for businesses.
In the meantime, Johnson said he and his partner have signed up for a family membership at LA Fitness. He’ll still have to pay for his membership at the Tom Landry Fitness Center until September, but he said he doesn’t plan to go back there.
“I don’t know that I’d feel comfortable,” he said.
You can’t use marital status as an argument when marriage is not an option. It’s plain, ole everyday bible beater discrimination.
If Texas allowed ‘mos to marry, and Steve hadn’t married his 23 year partner, then maaaybe they’d have an argument.
I hope that Baylor won’t hide behind the law and will step up to ethics plate.
It’s time for them to take a risk and make a change…let’s hope for the best.
Renee
More reason for me to spend my valuable pink healthcare dollars at UT Southwestern!
I am SO happy that Steve had the intelligence to move forward with this! My partner and I both belonged to TL and left due to existing policies……I just never gave it a thought to file a complaint. Kudos to Steve and his partner for standing up and speaking out.
Good for them, hope more people have the the guts to do the same
Thank you and best of luck Mr. Johnson.
@Call The Baptists: good info, but probably not too helpful. You see, if the folks at Baylor cared the least bit about doing the right thing or the PR firestorm this has created, then they would have done the right thing from the get go. It shouldn’t take someone calling the senior officers and directors to get them to act in a morally and ethically responsible manner. The bottom line is that they simply just don’t care. And if/when this case moves forward (which I hope it does, and I hope the “Baylor Bastards” pay dearly for what they are doing), they will most likely dig in their heels, lift their elongated, gold plated “Pinocchio” noses in the air and insist that they did the right thing, regardless. And if they piss off some of their members and lose business in the process, they will simply chalk it up as a cost of doing business. Their whole reaction so far literally screams “WE DON’T CARE AND NOBODY’S GOING TO MAKE US CARE!” And when callous, insensitive people like the folks at Baylor demonstrate, clearly and unequivocally, that they truly don’t care (which is exactly what they have done), then nothing–not even a conversation with the top brass–is going to change that. So if you REALLY want to call someone who cares, don’t waste your time calling Baylor. (They would probably make black people sit in the back of the bus if they thought they could get away with it. That’s the mentality of these people.) Instead, channel your energy into something more constructive, like encouraging the city to pursue the charges that have been filed against Baylor. On second thought, the info you provided might be useful after all. Perhaps a news crew on their front door steps asking for a comment might be enlightening…
James, I think we’re on the same page as to Baylor’s response. But, I think if people really do start calling it can make a difference. These people feel comfortable making these decisions because they don’t have to hear too much about it. They think they’re insulated from it. That’s why Jennifer Coleman created a special gmail account for comments on this issue (like Baylor really uses gmail as its real email client) – that way she only has to look at it when she wants. I say bombard her work email with complaints, and maybe she can’t ignore it.
I called the general counsel’s office and it caused quite a buzz. They wanted to know which blogs, what info, which officers, etc. etc. I think if people start invading their world with comments, feedback, and complaints, it may cause them to give note.
I totally agree that its unlikely Baylor will change. But we have to send a message to these folks that when they stand by their bigoted policies, they will here from the gay community – at work, at home, everywhere.
I still encourage everyone to call, write, scream, and yell! Raise your voice!
Hey Mr. “Call the Baptists!”,
I do empathize with your cause however, I know for a fact that my father, David Ballard, is married to my mother, Michela Caruso. So again I empathize with your cause, but I would appreciate if you would refrain from leaking faulty information about my family to the general public. Not every woman takes her husband’s last name.
What’s this? Did I touch a nerve? Could it be that the families of Baylor’s executives don’t like people making innuendos and assumptions about the legitimacy of other folk’s families? But, isn’t this exactly what Baylor is doing to Steven Johnson and his partner – saying, in essence, “your relationship doesn’t fit our definition of family?”
Well I say, HOW DOES IT FEEL?
And I bet there are plenty of Baptists who would say your mother, Mrs. Caruso, is a godless hoochie for not taking your father’s last name – you know – like a good, submissive Baptist wife ought to do… I don’t think anything of it, but if we’re going by the Baylor book here….
It sucks when people start going after YOUR family doesn’t it?!
Why did the Voice take down all the Baylor Exec’s contact information?
@Call the Baptists!: We generally don’t print people’s home addresses or private phone numbers without their consent. If you’d like to repost with business e-mails and phones, feel free.
@Call the Baptists!: You, sir, appear to be quite deranged based on your last two comments. There was absolutely no need for you to post Dr. Ballard and Dr. Caruso’s personal information. In doing so, you tried to prove a point that was ultimately proven very wrong. No “nerve” was struck. The other commenter simply pointed out the error in what you said. You should have just accepted that, and moved on.
You’ve got to realize: While two gay men may consider themselves a family, the state of Texas believes otherwise. I’m sure it’s a sad fact to accept, but for now, it’s something that must be accepted. Change will come, eventually.
In your first comment (other than the deleted one), you do give some legitimate means to guide BHC to some sort of change. Give feedback! Write and call the parties involved–I’d avoid yelling and screaming (detracts from the central argument). So “fight” on!
And remember, assuming makes and “ass” out of “u” and “me.” You made quite the ass out of yourself in assuming that every employee with Baylor is a Baptist.
I don’t have to accept a damn thing from the state of Texas as far as definitions. And, nothing prohibits a private company from having a far more expansive definition of a “family” than the state of Texas. It is solely a decision of Baylor, who apparently, is happy with a limited definition – undoubtedly because of its conservative Baptist affiliations.
I don’t assume that all employees are Baptist at all. I’m just saying that the Baylor Baptists, whoever they are defending these biased policies, might well considered Caruso a modern vvh0re for failing to submit to her husband (per the Bible) and accept his last name over her own.
Apparently I have the Ballard clan riled up, and that’s a good thing! Hey – you took the job, buddy. And you call yourself a “quality officer.” We’ll let’s just see what kinda of quality crawls out of a $1.5 million house and behind a corporate veil while gay and lesbian couples a turned away at the Baylor doors.
And, maybe Ballard can grow a pair and answer for himself!
I’m sorry, but legally, you do have to accept Texas’ definition of a family. Yes, some laws are pointless and unreasonable–c’mon, Texas had a ban on sodomy until 2003. Lulwut?
And you realize that BHCS is a not-for-profit, publicly-owned company? Thus, they must abide by Texas’ definition of a family. Please, do your homework before commenting on an article like this.
You act like the church controls/influences everything. This is the 21st Century, my friend. Yes, the institution was founded by conservative Baptists. However, their control is no longer seen in the organization. They have little-to-no-clout within the ranks.
As for the Ballards, you have no right to include them in this conversation. Dr. Ballard is the chief quality officer. That position has no involvement with the comings and goings of the Landry Center. He had absolutely no say in the matter. And that was an incredibly low blow in calling the woman a wh0re. She legally decided to not don her husband’s surname.
I truly am sorry Mr. Johnson was denied family benefits at the clinic. However, it’s not like he was denied membership. I know that may seem like a slap in the face, but you, nonetheless, need to be aware of Texas laws.
Maybe you could man up (oh wait . . .) and not attack the Ballard family.