國外可是伊甸園? 同性戀員工在海外

In 2009, Nadeem Shamim left London to work for Standard Chartered Bank in Hong Kong. Although eager to make his mark in a new role, his enthusiasm was tempered by sadness. Unable to obtain the necessary visa to accompany him, his partner Peter, a web-marketing professional, was staying behind in Britain.

2009年，納迪姆•沙米姆(Nadeem Shamim)離開倫敦到香港的渣打銀行(Standard Chartered Bank)工作。雖然渴望在新崗位上做出成績，但他的熱情卻被悲傷沖淡了。他的配偶、網絡營銷專家彼得(Peter)無法獲得伴隨沙米姆駐香港所需的簽證，只能留在英國。

The couple spent the next two years shuttling between Asia and Europe, working one week in every six from each other’s location. Despite the diary juggling, the jet-lag and separations, Mr Shamim counts himself fortunate that he had a considerate boss who encouraged him to work flexibly. “Without [regular] contact, I think the relationship would have ended. It was tough . . . but we managed.”

在接下來的兩年裏，這對情侶來回穿梭於亞洲和歐洲之間，每六週飛往彼此的所在地工作一週。儘管要在日程安排上費些心思，還要忍受調整時差和兩地分居之苦，但沙米姆仍認爲自己算是幸運的，因爲他有一位善解人意的老闆，支持他的彈性工作方式。“少了（定期的）聯絡，我原本以爲這段戀情會結束。那段時間很難熬……但我們撐下來了。”

Run-ins with visa authorities are one of a number of vexations familiar to gay and lesbian executives who work internationally. While many global corporations say they treat all employees equally, the countries in which they do business often differ hugely in their acceptance of same-sex relationships, making company-wide equality pledges hard to fulfil.

對跨國工作的同性戀高管來說，與簽證當局的口舌之爭是他們不感到陌生的衆多煩惱之一。雖然許多跨國公司聲稱自己對所有員工一視同仁，但它們的業務所在國對同性戀情的接受度卻常常有着巨大差異，這使得它們難以兌現公司所有員工一律平等的承諾。

Although the number of states that recognise same-sex unions and marriages is growing, most still do not. Consequently, employees who are married or civilly partnered in one jurisdiction may find that immigration authorities elsewhere do not recognise their union, refuse their partner a visa, and may dispute their parental relationship with any children. Some countries, including with­in the EU, have passed equality laws protecting against discrimination and homophobic bullying. But in 78 countries it is homosexuality that is criminalised, with punishments ranging from fines to imprisonment, hard labour and even death.

儘管有越來越多的國家承認同性結合和同性婚姻，但大多數國家對此卻仍不認可。因此，在某一司法管轄區內結婚或民事結合(civilly partnered)的員工可能會發現，其他地方的移民當局不承認他們的結合，拒絕給他們的配偶發放簽證，並且可能會質疑他們與任何孩子的親子關係。包括歐盟(EU)國家在內的一些國家已通過涉及平等的法律，保護同性戀者不受歧視和“恐同”欺凌。但在78個國家裏，同性戀是犯罪行爲，懲罰包括罰款、監禁、勞役、甚至死刑。

So what to do in a world where employers encourage staff to “bring their whole self to work” − yet still expect top executives to have worked in a mix of markets, some of which may be unwelcoming to gay employees, or even unsafe?

僱主們鼓勵員工“把整個自我溶於工作”，而且希望高管在各種市場歷練過——其中一些市場可能不歡迎同性戀員工，甚至對他們來說是不安全的。在這樣的一個世界裏，到底應該怎麼做？

Matching gay and lesbian executives to socially progressive destinations might seem to solve the conundrum. However, executives sometimes worry that if they avoid strategically important markets because of anti-gay laws, for example in some Asian, African and Middle Eastern countries, their career will stall – even if their employer assures them it will not.

把同性戀高管刻意安排到社會文化進步的目的地看似可以解決這個難題。然而，高管們有時擔心，如果他們因某些地方——比如部分亞洲、非洲和中東國家——存在的反同性戀法而避開具有戰略重要性的市場，他們的職業生涯將會停滯——即便他們的僱主擔保不會發生這種事。

Rather than prejudge situations, Simon Feeke, who leads the workplace programme at Stonewall, the lobby group for lesbian, gay and bisexual people, recommends offering a choice of destinations and allowing individuals to decide what is right for them. “For the right opportunity, a minority of gay people would be prepared to travel to a country where there’s a severe penalty for being gay,” he says.

同性戀與雙性戀人羣遊說組織“石牆”(Stonewall)的職場項目主管西蒙•菲克(Simon Feeke)建議，不要預判情況，而是列出若干目的地供員工選擇，讓他們自己決定哪個目的地適合自己。他說：“如果機會確實難得，少數同性戀者願意前往對同性戀有嚴重懲罰的國家。”

According to Stonewall, about a quarter of gay employees hide their orientation from colleagues. This can create difficulties if an employee feels forced to accept a posting to a country with homophobic laws. They worry that if they say no, their employer will press for a reason. To mitigate the problem, the law firm Simmons & Simmons revised its policies to allow its lawyers to request an alternative to an offered destination, without saying why. “We realised people were opting out of secondments altogether, because of not wanting to be sent to particular countries,” says David Stone, who co-chairs the firm’s lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender network.

“石牆”的數據顯示，約四分之一的同性戀員工對同事隱瞞自己的性取向。如果員工覺得不得不接受調派到一個有“恐同”法律的國家工作，這個問題可能會對他造成困擾。員工擔心，如果他們拒絕接受借調，僱主會逼問他們理由。爲了在一定程度上解決這個問題，西盟斯律師事務所(Simmons & Simmons)修改了公司政策，允許旗下律師要求公司給出指派目的地之外的另一選擇，而且無需向公司說明理由。該事務所女同性戀者、男同性戀者、雙性戀者與跨性別者(LGBT)網絡聯席主管戴維•斯通(David Stone)說：“我們意識到，員工一口回絕借調的原因是，他們不想被派到特定的國家。”

Employers will sometimes go to un­usual lengths to make secondments do-able for gay executives whom they would struggle to replace. From 2005 to 2012, Steve Wardlaw headed the Moscow office of the law firm Baker Botts, on secondment from London, accompanied by his partner Ian, who was taking a career break. When in 2008 Russia tightened its visa rules, Baker Botts created a job for Ian, en­abling him to remain in Russia as an employee of the firm. “If we had been unable to fix it, I would have come back to London,” Mr Wardlaw says.

爲了讓一些難以取代的同性戀高管的借調具有可行性，僱主有時會盡其所能。2005年到2012年，史蒂夫•沃德洛(Steve Wardlaw)從倫敦的貝克博茨律師事務所(Baker Botts)借調到該事務所在莫斯科的辦事處當主管。他的配偶伊恩(Ian)當時正處於職業暫休期，就陪他去了莫斯科。當俄羅斯在2008年收緊簽證規定時，該事務所爲伊恩創造了一個職位，讓他能以事務所員工的身份留在俄羅斯。沃德洛說：“如果我們當時無法解決這個問題，我恐怕就回倫敦了。”

Employers are rarely so accommodating to junior employees sent abroad for professional development. However, relocation packages design­ed with the needs of traditional couples uppermost can sometimes be tweaked to better suit same-sex couples. Simmons & Simmons used to pay for the spouses of lawyers who went on unaccompanied secondments to visit them during the posting. Now, the spouse’s visits can be converted into trips home for the seconded employee, which same-sex couples often prefer when the host country is unwelcoming to gay people.

僱主們很少會對出於職業發展目的派往海外的初級員工這麼通融。然而，企業有時可以調整主要針對傳統伴侶需求設計的搬遷福利，使它更適用於同性伴侶。西盟斯律師事務所過去曾爲單身赴任的律師支付他們借調期內配偶的探親費用。現在，配偶的探親之旅可以轉爲借調員工的回家之旅——當派駐國不歡迎同性戀者時，同性伴侶往往更喜歡現在的安排。

Secondees sometimes have opportunities to shift how colleagues from socially conservative cultures perceive gay people. But it is advisable to tread carefully, cautions Mr Wardlaw. When managing Russian colleagues who were baffled by same-sex partnerships and gay adoption, his response was to invite them to ask him anything and to do his best, over Friday night drinks, “to dispel myths” about gay lifestyles. “Once or twice the debates became fairly heated, but usually because people were struggling with an idea [that challenged their assumptions].”

有時候，借調員工有機會改變那些來自保守社會文化的同事對同性戀者的看法。但沃德洛警告說，最好謹慎行事。面對對同性伴侶關係和同性戀收養感到困惑的俄羅斯同事，他的迴應是，在週五晚上邀請他們來喝杯酒，讓他們想問他什麼就問什麼，並儘自己所能驅散關於同性戀者生活方式的“神話”。“有一兩次，爭論變得相當激烈，但通常是因爲人們當時正糾結於一個想法 （而這個想法挑戰了他們想當然的東西）。”

Suki Sandhu, founder of OUTstanding, a professional network for lesbian and gay executives and their supporters, urges corporations to use their investment leverage to influence governments to repeal anti-gay laws: “If companies want to develop and nurture all of their talent, it’s important they make it as practical as possible for LGBT employees to work overseas.”

OUTstanding是一個面向同性戀高管及其支持者的專業網絡，它的創始人蘇基•桑德胡(Suki Sandhu)敦促企業利用它們的投資影響力去推動政府廢除反同性戀法律：“如果企業想培養和培育它們的全部人才，它們就應當儘可能地讓LGBT員工到海外工作變得更具可行性。”

In the absence of widespread tolerance, however, gay employees need up-to-date intelligence to make in­formed decisions on where to work and how to stay safe. At Simmons & Simmons, returning secondees produce guides on destination cities. These give information on local laws regarding homosexuality and whether local people and law enforcers are more or less accepting of same-sex relationships than might be inferred from the statute book.

然而，在不被廣泛接納的情況下，同性戀員工需要最新的情報，以便做出該在哪裏工作和該如何保證安全的明智決定。西盟斯律師事務所的回國借調員工製作了目的地城市指南。這些指南提供的信息包括：當地關於同性戀的法律，以及與從當地法律中推斷出的情況相比，當地居民和執法者是更能還是更不能接受同性戀情。

For some, secondments are an opportunity to live openly. After years of concealment in Russia and east Africa, Svetlana Omelchenko asked her then employer for a transfer to Britain and came out. Now employed by Coty in Paris, she has decided to work only in countries where she and her partner can live openly. In the digitally connected world, she notes, it is increasingly difficult to be out in some markets and not in others. “In London, I knew people who were out only to [trusted] gay colleagues, because they didn’t want word to get back to their home country.”

對一些同性戀者來說，借調是一個能以自己真實身份生活的機會。經歷了在俄羅斯和東非多年“躲在櫃中”的生活後，斯韋特蘭娜•奧梅利琴科(Svetlana Omelchenko)要求她當時的僱主將她調派到英國，並在那裏“出櫃”了。現在，奧梅利琴科受僱於巴黎的科蒂集團(Coty)，她已決定，只在她和她的配偶能以真實身份生活的國家工作。她指出，在數碼連接起來的世界中，只在某些市場公開身份是越來越難了。“在倫敦，我知道有些人只向（可信任的）同性戀同事公開身份，因爲他們不想讓消息傳回自己的祖國。”

Mr Shamim, now returned to London, plans to start a network connecting gay employees seconded abroad with people back home in whom they can confide. Although in Hong Kong he lived openly, he remembers from his early career the painfulness of concealing his sexuality. “For individuals [posted to markets with anti-gay cultures] who go back into the closet, having someone with whom they can talk difficulties through can be a huge support.”

沙米姆現在已經回到了倫敦。他計劃創辦一個網絡，讓借調海外的同性戀員工能與他們在家鄉充分信賴的人相互聯繫。雖然他在香港是以真實身份生活，但他還記得在他職業生涯早期隱瞞自己性取向時的痛苦。“對那些（借調到擁有反同性戀文化的市場）‘回到櫃中’的人來說，有人能與他們討論困難會是一個巨大的支持。”