Audio Interview, Thomas Privitere, January 3, 2013

EVELYN BAILEY: So I'm here with Tom Privitere on January 3rd,

2013.

And Tom gave me some statistics from 2007.

And what they indicate is that domestic partnership benefits

really benefited heterosexual couples more

than same-sex couples for the State of New York

when those benefits were put into effect.

And since, Governor Pataki, by executive order,

made domestic partnership benefits

available to state workers.

TOM PRIVITERE: Actually, it was Governor Cuomo.

EVELYN BAILEY: Governor Cuomo.

With the prospective Republican regime coming in in 19--

TOM PRIVITERE: 1995.

EVELYN BAILEY: 1995, it was important to have

the heterosexual population included

in the domestic partnership benefits

in order to offer greater protection

for that benefit for all.

Now Tom has been involved with the Union forever.

TOM PRIVITERE: (Laughs) Close to forever.

EVELYN BAILEY: No, I think he's that old.

But-- when did you begin?

TOM PRIVITERE: I began my career in the labor movement

officially in 1978.

I was a field representative for the American Federation

of State, County and Municipal Employees,

so I negotiated contracts for them, handled their grievances

and arbitrations here in actually Monroe County

and surrounding counties.

And so at the time, I represented

cities school district employees in the City of Rochester

and the non-teaching employees of the city schools

in Rochester.

And as an advocate and as a practitioner in labor relations

here in the region, in Monroe county and in Rochester,

it became glaringly apparent to me as a gay man

that one of the major benefits that heterosexual married

couples enjoyed that gay couples did not was health insurance.

Things that affected families in the labor contracts

didn't include gay families or how we defined ourselves

as families.

And so I began quite consciously an effort

to raise this with my colleagues in both AFSCME

and another labor unions.

Again, this is, you know, in the mid-to-late 1970s,

and talking about gay issues in the labor community

was not a very popular thing to do.

However, in 1985, I left the AFSCME's employ

and became a staff director, regional staff director

for the New York State Public Employees Federation,

which is a labor union representing, oh,

tens of thousands of professional

scientific and technical people who worked for the state.

As the regional staff director, my territory

included now not just Monroe County and surrounding counties

for AFSCME, but I was supervising

field offices in Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, south

of Cornell, and Binghamton.

So my--

EVELYN BAILEY: Wow.

TOM PRIVITERE: You know, my territory expanded,

my job changed, and concurrently,

my influence within the labor community.

I shot up a little bit, yeah.

And to my delight, what I discovered

in PEF, which was very progressive in its attitudes

about its gay and lesbian members,

was that they actually had a gay and lesbian caucus

within PEF who were advocating for things that I had been

discussing ten years before that very quietly

among my colleagues, which were the disparities in union

benefits between straight employees and gay employees.

And again, to my delight, I found

a very active and very vocal caucus

of gays and lesbians who were state employees, who

were members of PEF, who themselves had been advocating

that the Union start looking at the disparities between what

their heterosexual counterparts and their agencies

or offices or respective jobs were versus what they

as gays and lesbians saw to be lacking.

The primary concern for them was the disparity

in health insurance for their partners.

EVELYN BAILEY: Mm-hmm

TOM PRIVITERE: Keep in mind, at the time, that domestic partner

benefits had been extended to New York City employees

back in the early '90s by Mayor Dinkins.

And Governor Cuomo, when he was governor of New York State,

had extended domestic partner benefits to state employees

by executive order in 1994 this happened.

A year later, when George Pataki became governor as a Republican

with a more conservative perspective,

he was joined by then Dennis Vacco,

who became the attorney general of the State of New York--

also a Republican.

And Vacco's first action as attorney general

was to rescind what had been a longstanding practice

in that agency of nondiscrimination policy

against gays and lesbians.

So Vacco took active steps immediately

upon becoming attorney general to backpedal

on what we had seen as under Democratic administrations

some progressive and liberal perspectives about gays

and lesbians, particularly with respect to nondiscrimination

against us in our employment.

So as soon as Vacco did that, it was--

we were simultaneously negotiating contracts

with other unions across the state.

And I became concerned and I think understandably,

that Governor Pataki might in fact backpedal and rescind

what Governor Cuomo had just passed the year before,

which was domestic partner benefits for gays and lesbians

in state employment.

So we were at the negotiating table

and we formed a coalition on health care bargaining.

And during those discussions with my counterparts

in other labor unions, I was able to convince them

that it was in our collective interest

to negotiate this benefit into our contracts

because the executive order of one governor

can be rescinded by a new governor,

and the difference is that if we negotiated the benefit

into our contracts, the only way that they

could eliminate those benefits is

if they negotiated them away.

And so--

EVELYN BAILEY: Now let me stop you for just a minute.

The domestic partnership benefits

that came in by executive order were for all--

TOM PRIVITERE: All state employees.

EVELYN BAILEY: Heterosexual--

TOM PRIVITERE: And gays.

EVELYN BAILEY: And gays.

TOM PRIVITERE: Yes.

And And so you were also advocating for that same--

TOM PRIVITERE: Yes.

EVELYN BAILEY: --broad spectrum--

TOM PRIVITERE: The same standard to be applied in the contracts.

EVELYN BAILEY: For heterosexuals and gays?

TOM PRIVITERE: Mm-hmm.

Because--

EVELYN BAILEY: What other unions are we talking about?

TOM PRIVITERE: We're talking about UUP, the United

University Professors; the AFSCME Council TC-37, which

represented at the time correction officers in prisons;

CSEA, Civil Service Employees Association,

and they represented the bulk of state employees

who are nonprofessional.

At the time, PEF in 1995 had approximately 58,000 members.

CSEA was probably somewhere around 200 to 225,000.

So the vast majority--

numerically-- of state workers at the time were CSEA numbers.

So they were the big dog at the table.

And then along with PEF and UUP and the corrections officers,

we represented the balance of the state workforce.

So, you know, we're talking over a quarter

of a million employees.

And the issues were at the time--

and over time, we've all seen what

the unions knew in those days was that health insurance was

going to become increasingly the more and more important

issue for both public and private sector labor unions

in upcoming contracts.

And in the mid '90s, we had already

experienced probably in the preceding ten years

an escalation in health insurance costs.

So health insurance benefits became the litmus test for us

on whether we could actively include gay people in the mix

when we were talking about employee benefits.

And that plus other benefits that

are associated with married couples and families.

Leave, for example, bereavement leave,

leave for family illness.

Our families were not included in those definitions.

And so if I had a domestic partner

and one of my partner's parents died,

I would not be entitled under the bereavement leave

in our contracts to attend the funeral

under the bereavement leave language

because the contract didn't recognize my domestic partner

and our relationship as family.

And so it wasn't just health insurance,

but we were looking at other elements of the contract that

provided benefits to married couples

that we were by definition excluded from.

So we made some serious inroads in the mid '90s

and in our collective bargaining agreements

to ensure that LGBT members were protected to the extent

that we could in our contracts, and I

think that that was one of the crowning achievements

in the mid '90s.

And I've said to people before that DP benefits

and the bargaining of DP benefits into labor contracts

was really the foundation and the forerunner to our arguments

for marriage equality.

And there are links between all of the political considerations

that we made at the level of state legislators

and state senators who--

because we don't do this in a vacuum.

Negotiations doesn't happen just between the governor

and the president of the union.

There are backstories to how these things-- how

supportive the legislature was and had been.

For example, when Governor Cuomo issued the executive order

to grant domestic partner benefits to gays and lesbians

in state employment, clearly he had

to have support from key members of his party

and the legislature.

And subsequently, when we were negotiating our contracts,

we had to make sure that we had dotted the I's and crossed

the T's with assemblymen and state senators

and political activists who understood that the--

because budgets had to be passed in conjunction

with these contracts.

Budgets have to be passed by the legislature.

So we can't talk about these things

without being aware that those of us in the LGBT movement who

were involved politically used our political influence

with those people in the legislature

to support the governor and his move

to settle contracts with the state workforce, which included

benefits specifically enhancing the work

lives of gay and lesbian employees.

So the links had to be there.

So those were behind the scenes activities that a lot of people

don't realize happened.

EVELYN BAILEY: Now those links were primarily

developed, though, through democratic administrations?

TOM PRIVITERE: Yes.

I think-- but I think that it's also fair to say that there

were some progressive Republicans who had--

we had to form coalitions with.

I mean, it would be naive for us to think

that politically we could only rely on one particular party

to carry the mission statement and the goals forward.

But it was primarily Democrats in the early and mid '90s

who were supportive of our issues.

In fact, here locally, the very first democratic town

supervisor who contacted me after we successfully

negotiated DP benefits at the state level was Sandy Frankel.

And so you see on that list the town of Brighton

was the first and continuous to be the only town

government that provides domestic partner benefits.

Now to be fair, the town of Brighton,

not unlike some other jurisdictions,

only wanted to extend those benefits

to gay and lesbian employees.

But, keep in mind that this was in the context years

later of us actually reaching the point where marriage

equality was on the horizon.

And so the irony is that now that DP benefits were broadly

applied to the state workforce, fast

forward to the early 2000s--

2003, 2004, 2005.

And in 2006, the Rochester Area Labor Federation--

the labor council, the local labor council--

passed the very first resolution of its kind

in New York State supporting the concept of marriage

equality for gays and lesbians.

And I don't think it's an overestimation for me

to say that if it weren't for the labor

movement in its early and vocal intangible support for rights

for gays and lesbians in the workforce,

that the later fight for marriage equality

wouldn't have been as successful in the laws, because I think

we had already done the leg work on convincing them

about equality in the workplace in terms of benefit

levels like health insurance, like bereavement leave,

like family medical leave.

So we had already primed the pump

as it were politically to support the concept

of domestic partner benefits.

It wasn't a quantum leap for many of these same legislators

in governmental agencies when the concept of marriage

equality came down the pike for the unions

to get behind marriage equality as a civil rights and a worker

rights issue.

EVELYN BAILEY: Right.

TOM PRIVITERE: Because one of the things I'd

like to point out is that many people don't realize

that while domestic partner benefits did

secure to some extent a measure of equality,

it was not equality, because domestic partner benefits

are taxed.

So for people who are married, for example, legally married,

and they have health insurance spousal benefits for a husband

and/or wife, those benefits are not

taxed by the federal government because the federal government

actually recognizes the legal marriage.

Domestic partner benefits, however, came in

under a separate tax category.

The government looked at DP benefits

as exactly that-- a benefit accruing

to the employee who then extends that benefit

to their domestic partner.

And so they taxed the value of those premiums

as if they were a fringe benefit that gay people were--

EVELYN BAILEY: Right.

TOM PRIVITERE: So it was not a level playing field

by any stretch of the imagination.

And so the fight then became a different type of battle for us

because we argued that it was separate and unequal for DP

benefits.

Because marriage, which didn't exist

in New York State at the time, was something that we really

had to fight for.

And so the unions--

and the union particularly in Monroe county

here in Rochester--

by this time, I found myself surrounded

by more and more LGBT activists in the labor movement.

Bess Watts comes to mind.

Ove Overmeyer.

You know, the people who are the unsung heroes and heroines

of this whole movement began to become activists

in their own unions.

And so I got a lot more support as time

went on from my colleagues who also

happened to be gay and lesbian in other labor unions.

So in 2006, which was a little more than ten years

after we negotiated the DP benefits,

the time was ripe for us to use the labor community and all

the power and all the influence it had politically

to get behind the marriage equality movement.

And so subsequent to that resolution in 2006,

that was passed by the Rochester Area Labor

Federation, the State AF of L-CIO

that same year at its statewide meeting

put that resolution on the table and successfully

passed a resolution by the state AF of L-CIO

in support of marriage equality for gays and lesbian workers.

So we ratcheted up the influence in conjunction

with the Pride Agenda, HRC, all of the other activist groups

that got behind marriage equality in New York state.

In conjunction with the labor movement,

I think collectively we were able to come together and build

the coalition that was necessary to get both

the legislature and the governor to support

the concept of marriage for gays and lesbians in New York.

But the history, people think it--

some people who aren't as involved as you and I just

woke up one morning and thought, oh, wow,

god, we can get married!

Did that just happen?

EVELYN BAILEY: Tom, talk to me a little bit about--

you've been in this from the '70s to present day.

TOM PRIVITERE: Yes.

EVELYN BAILEY: Attitude of your colleagues

toward LGBT issues, people.

I mean, back in the '70s, you didn't talk--

TOM PRIVITERE: Right.

EVELYN BAILEY: --about who you were.

TOM PRIVITERE: Right.

Well, I was-- actually--

EVELYN BAILEY: You may have.

TOM PRIVITERE: I was out at work and I was a small minority

of labor activists who--

there was a minority of one here in Monroe County.

But I started identifying LGBT people and other labor

organizations around the state, particularly

in CSEA in New York City, people like Vivian Freind, who

was a PEF member; Desma Holgum; Marion Frank--

activists downstate who were open and vocal and politically

active.

Those people who later became activists in the New York State

Pride Agenda before Pride Agenda was even formed.

There were those of us in Monroe County.

You know, I remember meeting in Tom Wall's living room.

This is back in the '80s with Tim Mains and a few of us

before the Pride Agenda was even formed,

in the nascent days of building those types of organizations.

So I think that we found each other

and built an upstate coalition of LGBT activists

who had already built relationships

in other parts of the state, whether through their labor

union or through their business or through their political

connections.

The formation of the gay civil rights movement

in all of the different links were starting

to come together and coalesce.

And so many of us, myself included,

became active with the Gay Alliance here.

I was active with my union I became active with Pride Agenda

and subsequently, in 1993, the Gay March on Washington was

an opportunity for those of us in the labor movement from all

across the country to get together at the march--

and I think I mentioned that to you in our last interview--

where we were hosted by Service Employees International Union

headquarters in Washington D.C.

And the then President John Sweeney

opened up SEIU headquarters to labor activists

from anywhere, both the public and the private sector,

to come together and we did that.

And we met and we formed what later

became known as Pride at Work, which

is a national organization of gay, lesbian, bisexual,

and transgender labor union members.

And in 2007, we formed our very first chapter here

in Rochester.

EVELYN BAILEY: Mm-hmm.

TOM PRIVITERE: Bess Watts is the president,

I'm the vice president.

We now have formed and helped to form a chapter last year

in Buffalo of Pride at Work.

And so I proudly display that because we organized

a very visible and vocal gay and lesbian presence officially

within the labor movement when we formed Pride at Work,

and we're recognized as a legitimate constituency

group of the AF of L-CIO.

And we're very proud of that.

EVELYN BAILEY: What kind of opposition, though, in the '70s

and '80s did you encounter within the labor movement

to the concept of including LGBT people issues in the broader

issues that would cover everyone in the union?

TOM PRIVITERE: That's a good question.

And I think it parallels the fact that in the '70s

and well into the '80s, many people in our community

were closeted.

And so there was a lot of speculation and denial

about the fact that there were even

gays and lesbians in the workforce

if you can believe that.

And so I think the attitudes of people

within the labor movement about how necessary it

was for us to take into consideration legitimately,

and I talked a little bit earlier about the coalition

statewide in '95 of the major labor unions.

And one union in particular, the corrections officers quite

frankly questioned whether or not

they even had any gays and lesbians in their bargaining

unit.

You know, keep in mind that I was

working toward a coalition of unions in order

to support our position.

And so, you know, I use the carrot and stick approach

and I said to them, let's assume that you

don't have any gays and lesbians in your bargaining unit.

Of course I knew differently.

I've been in jails and in prisons across New York State

and I've met members belonging to their union who

I knew were gays and lesbians.

But my proposal, and I think it bore out subsequently--

and in fact, it took a lot of heat

from gay and lesbian activists who

struggled with the concept of extending DP people benefits

to straight people, they said, you know,

there were employers, quite frankly, the state included,

who were willing to just give DP benefits to gay people.

I resisted that.

And I said to these corrections officers,

"Look, I think you misunderstand my approach to this.

I don't intend to exclude heterosexuals

from this benefit."

And they said, "Oh, well, in that case, we're on board."

And as these statistics demonstrated after the fact,

a lot more heterosexuals took advantage of DP benefits

because there are more of them-- just

numerically they outnumber us in every state,

in every level of society, so to alienate

them would have done no good.

To argue with them that yes indeed, they

did have gays and lesbians in their bargaining unit

would have done no good.

And so it wasn't as important to me

that I convince straight allies that they

had gay people in their unions, it was much more

important that I convince them that this was a human rights

issue, a worker rights issue, and whether you are

gay or straight, black or white, male or female,

everybody was covered under the union umbrella.

That was a concept that they could embrace.

EVELYN BAILEY: Mm-hmm.

TOM PRIVITERE: Because quite frankly, you know,

women in the labor movement have had the same types

of experiences of isolation and discrimination

in positions of leadership.

You know, the Family Medical Leave Act,

taking into consideration quite frankly

that, you know, the vast majority of employees

in and outside of unions who need

to take care of their families during pregnancies and so on

were women.

Women workers.

Pay equity.

You know, to this day, women in this country make $0.70

on the dollar less than their male counterparts.

So, you know, there's still wage disparities-- gender

in wage disparities.

We certainly haven't leveled the playing field totally

for gays and lesbians in the labor movement because

of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act, which effectively

precludes the federal government from recognizing

for tax purposes, even those gay and lesbian people who

within their own particular state can legally marry.

So the fight isn't over, you know?

It began with DP benefits and before

and after that, you know, we got marriage equality in New York

State, but until the Federal Defense of Marriage Act

is struck down, the federal government will not

recognize us as full-fledged citizens

under the law for purposes of taxing.

EVELYN BAILEY: In New York, you certainly worked

on building the coalitions that were

necessary to gain the benefits for all that were fair, just,

legal.

TOM PRIVITERE: Mm-hmm.

Correct.

EVELYN BAILEY: And to build a sentiment of equality

that certainly carried through to 2011.

TOM PRIVITERE: Oh yes.

EVELYN BAILEY: OK?

What is the relationship between the New York State

Federation of Labor Unions and the National labor union

movement?

I mean, we've seen in Chicago an attempt to break the union.

We've seen in Detroit an attempt to break the union

and undermine the power that unions have.

TOM PRIVITERE: Yeah, Michigan just passed its right--

it became a Right to Work State, which effectively has crippled

labor organizing in the State of Michigan to the extent that--

labor unions along with other progressive movements

in this country I think find themselves under attack

by the right, by the very vocal and very active and very

virulent conservative groups in this country.

So make no mistake about it--

I think this is class warfare.

The relationship between the labor community in New York

State, particularly the LGBT labor community in New York

State, and LGBT activists nationwide

is strong and growing.

We in this past fall--

in September-- held our Pride at Work convention in Cleveland.

It was called Boots on the Ground,

and there were hundreds of LGBT activists at our convention.

And one of the objectives of having the convention in Ohio,

quite frankly, was to provide support and--

we dedicated one of the three days of the convention

toward registering people to vote in the state of Ohio,

because we knew it was a swing state.

And we also knew that this federal government

under President Obama has demonstrated and proven

to be a voice at the federal level

for gay and lesbian rights and equality

that quite frankly we've never seen

the like of as a community.

His repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, his position

to the attorney general's office to stop prosecuting, you know,

the Don't Ask, Don't Tell cases before the repeal even went

through demonstrated to me as an LGBT activist

that it was important for us as a community,

it was important for the future for LGBT people in this country

to maintain the policies that Obama had set forth.

And toward the end of his campaign,

he openly came out and supported the concept

of marriage equality for LGBT people nationally.

So it was a no-brainer for us in the LGBT component of the labor

community nationwide that we had to get

behind this administration.

We had to make sure that the macrocosm of what

happened in the mid '90s, when we went

from a Democratic administration to a Republican administration,

the first thing they did was rescind

anti-discrimination policies against gays

and lesbians in the workforce here in New York.

And so, you know, we take two steps forward

and one step back.

We get domestic partner benefits but they tax us.

We get marriage equality but we have DOMA.

So, you know, we're a people, who like many other groups

in this country who have been undervalued

or whether they've been actively or covertly discriminated

against, have learned lessons from our past.

And we know that it takes patience

and perseverance and hard work and dedication and building

bridges, you know, because there are so few of us.

We have to rely on relationships that we build in coalitions

that we build, whether it's with the labor movement

or whether it's with a particular political party

or a segment of that peculiar political party,

we know which side our bread is buttered on.

We know who our friends are and we know who our foes are.

And sometimes it appears that people that we formerly

thought we could count on, haven't been there for us

when the rubber hit the road, but it's

a very, very important, I think, for us as a community to keep

our eye on the prize.

And while I think we all take great pride and satisfaction

in the few states and the District of Columbia

that have passed marriage equality, what we also

have to remember is that there are something

like forty-five states in this union where it's

either prohibited or illegal, you

know, for LGBT people to marry.

EVELYN BAILEY: Right.

TOM PRIVITERE: So while I think it's important for us

to recognize our gains, we can't sit on our laurels

and stop here.

There's much more work to be done.

EVELYN BAILEY: Have you personally ever experienced

discrimination because of being a gay man?

TOM PRIVITERE: In my early career--

I think I mentioned this to you at our last meeting.

EVELYN BAILEY: Right.

TOM PRIVITERE: I worked for the police department and the court

system for eleven years.

And I remember vividly--

I was a civilian working in the police department

and I vividly recall a police officer

was actually terminated back then because--

I don't know the specifics of how he was outed

or how they discovered that he was gay,

but he was fired from the police force.

What people of our generation remember

is that being gay or being discovered to be gay

could cost you your job.

There were no protections for us as gay people.

And in fact, it wasn't until 2002

in this state that the SONDA--

Sexual Orientation Non-Discrimination Act--

was passed.

So, you know, it's ten years ago I could

have been fired from my job--

even at this job--

for being gay, and I would have had no legal recourse

in the State of New York.

Despite all of the things that we've

gained in union contracts, despite all

of the things that we've gained now with marriage equality,

it wasn't that long ago that I could

have been fired from my job.

And so what I did when I finished my college degree,

I did what a lot of other gay people did--

I actually went to hairdressing school

and got a license, a beautician's license

to practice cosmetology, because I realized

that if they found out I was gay on the job,

I could have been fired from my job.

And I had to have some means of support and back up.

And, you know, that's certainly no way to live.

And so knowing that that could have happened to me when

I got into a position where I realized

I could make a meaningful contribution to the disparity

and the inequity in employment that faced all of us,

it wasn't a question of if I should, but of course I would.

And so, you know, as I look back over my career

and the opportunities I've had to make a difference for myself

and other LGBT people, you know, I have a son who is also gay.

EVELYN BAILEY: Mm-hmm

TOM PRIVITERE: Who by happenstance and good luck

has found himself a husband whom he loves and is very proud of

and he's extremely happy with.

And, you know, unfortunately, my son and his husband

weren't able to marry in New York State.

They went to Connecticut, you know, three years ago.

And then I guess my point is that whether there's something

personal for us to gain by fighting for rights

and equality for gays and lesbians

because we happen to have a family member who is gay,

or whether or not we have an obligation

to look at future generations, whether we're related to them

or not, and say that the injustices that we

experienced-- the fear, the anxiety, the discrimination,

the violence, it has to stop.

And the fight, the struggle has to continue.

And I'm so proud of you, Evelyn, for doing

this, because I think it's human nature for people who

have experienced trauma, fear, rejection,

discrimination to try to move on with their lives

and put those things behind them,

but it's also important for us to remember where we came from

and what we've been through so that future generations

understand that their freedoms, their protections,

their inclusion in society isn't something that they should take

for granted.

And so if there is a message for future LGBT people,

it's that while ten years from now

or twenty years from now, the things that we found

so critical to fight in and go to the wall about that they may

be taking for granted as full-fledged citizens

of this country.

I look ahead to what's current today,

which is the issue of immigration and the issue

whether or not millions of people in this country who are

second-class citizens, migrant workers who are farm workers

who are excluded from the basic protections and the laws that

many of us take for granted--

you know, a forty-hour work week, overtime, safe

working conditions-- those are a huge segment of our population

who are excluded from basic protections.

So if there's one thing that I would

say to a gay or lesbian person who may listen to this twenty

years from now, forty years from now, a hundred years from now,

if there are people in society who are considered less than

or who need to have an advocate for their plight,

it's incumbent upon us as gays and lesbians

to remember that there was a time when

we needed to reach out to people and ask them

for help in our struggle.

That's a message I'd like to send to gay and lesbian kids,

because I already see--

and I'm happy for them, it's a huge sea change from the fear

and paranoia and terror that we experienced as young people

and growing up in a society that, you know,

hated us for who we were.

So the day will come when gay and lesbian kids will

be, you know, part of the mainstream and nobody will

think anything of it.

But I would hope that if they saw injustice

and they saw inequity and they saw disparity

for any group of people in this country,

that they'd be the first ones to jump in and say this is wrong

and this must stop.

EVELYN BAILEY: That's a good hope.

And I'm not cynical enough to say that that won't happen,

but I do think maturity plays a large part in taking up

the plight of someone else and life experience.

TOM PRIVITERE: Sure.

EVELYN BAILEY: In In 2002 when SONDA passed, would you

identify that as a shift in attitude?

Necessitated by law, but certainly

a shift so that fear of losing your job, fear

of being discriminated against not only in employment

but in housing and in other areas changed?

TOM PRIVITERE: I don't think so.

I think just because a law is passed

doesn't mean that attitudes shift

and automatically overnight protections

that the law provides are guaranteed.

In fact, people always try to find a way around a law.

So while it's a beginning, and it certainly

is important for us to seek legislation and seek

legal protections, you know, until we change

hearts and minds of people, the laws

are just a stepping stone for us to achieve

what we would hope would be equality within the society.

A recognition that we have a right to live and to exist.

That simply because a law was passed

didn't automatically overnight mean

that attitudes had changed.

Violations of their-- you know, laws

are made to guide society and protect people

within the society from injustice, but as we all know,

laws are broken every single day.

You know, there are laws against murder and genocide,

but people still, you know, kill other people.

And I don't mean to equate our plight with that,

but it happens, you know?

And so we have to do more than just

ask the government to pass a law to protect us,

we have to stay engaged, you know?

We have to participate in society.

And I think coming out is probably

one of those the most important things any of us

do to demonstrate to the rest of society

that it's important that we be seen for who we are

and what we are, and that we be accepted, you know, for who

and what we are.

EVELYN BAILEY: Is really what you're

saying, the fact that the labor movement has included

in its contracts and protections for LGBT people,

that they're on paper only?

And that young people today coming into the labor force

and becoming a part of unions are

living in a world of unreality?

TOM PRIVITERE: No.

I don't mean to imply that.

I think certainly they're going to walk into a situation that

is infinitely better than the one

that you or I walked into thirty or forty years ago

in the workplace.

There certainly are many more protections

that they have within their labor contracts

than I did forty years ago coming into the workforce.

But that doesn't mean that they're

going to automatically walk into a situation where

every single supervisor or every single boss

accepts them at face value because they're gay.

Because prejudices exist, whether they're

prejudices against you because you're a woman.

You know, women have had the vote in this country

for almost 100 years now, but it doesn't

mean that women are equal at the workplace.

The same thing with LGBT people.

I mean, the fact that there are laws protecting

women's rights or gay rights or that there

are contract provisions protecting rights

doesn't mean that those contracts are always

going to be totally adhered to.

But there are measures.

There are actions that you can take.

You know, if somebody violates your civil rights,

you can take them to court.

If somebody violates your contractual rights,

you can file a grievance.

You know, there are--

in contracts, labor contracts are

intended to set forth the relationship

between the employer and the employees

that's a legal and binding, but violations occur all the time,

and that's why every contract has

provisions in it for addressing violations of those contracts.

So, you know, it's not a panacea,

it doesn't, you know, the world isn't all rosy and shiny

and we all aren't floating around on pink clouds

because the legislature saw fit two years ago to pass marriage

equality in New York, or, you know, the State of New York

agreed in 1995 to include domestic partner

benefits in our contracts.

The fact is that we're always growing and maturing

and improving on human relationships,

and that's really what it all boils down to.

Laws and protections under laws or under contracts are just

the beginning, you. know?

They require that people behave in a certain way.

But simply because they require that,

that doesn't automatically mean that people

are going to do that.

So I think the short answer to your question

is no, it isn't going to create the level playing

field that we all would like, but it's certainly

light years from where we were before these protections were

put in place, before marriage equality became

the law of the land here in New York State.

And I'm optimistic that the building blocks that we've

set into place are now--

I mean, if you use the analogy of a Lego,

one piece is connected to another piece and, you know,

there's a foundation that we've established.

Are we at the pinnacle?

No.

But, you know, to quote Martin Luther King,

you know, I've been to the mountaintop

and I can see that we have come closer

to full equality in this country and in this state.

EVELYN BAILEY: Are the building blocks

independent of the people in charge

or in leadership positions in the Union?

TOM PRIVITERE: Yeah, I think they are.

I think it would be very, very difficult

for successive administrations to unilaterally try

to undo in the labor movement what we have collectively

been able achieve.

Similarly, you know, I think--

and we see today with marriage equality--

the issue had been at one point in time from our detractors,

well, you're achieving these by legislative fiat.

The people haven't spoken.

Every time this comes up and it goes before the people,

the people vote it down.

Well that's now proven to be untrue.

The last three states where marriage equality occurred,

it occurred as a result of people in those states

actually voting for something as opposed

to the opposition voting against us.

And again, to your point, those building blocks

that were formed by those states that required marriage

equality as a result of going through their governor

or their legislature to achieve have created the Petri

dish or the foundation for other states

to successively and successfully go

to the people in those states and say,

this is the right thing to do.

And again, you know, is it happening as quickly

as we would like to?

No.

Has it happened more quickly than any of us

ever expected it to?

Yes!

So, you know, there's a yin and a yang to this in a balance

that I think we're--

EVELYN BAILEY: Well certainly for New York

the time was right.

We had political, labor, business leadership,

TOM PRIVITERE: Faith communities.

EVELYN BAILEY: --political, faith communities all on board.