When Lisa, Susan and their six-year-old daughter Paige moved to a new city, they chose to bank with Susan’s employee credit union. Wanting to teach their daughter good savings habits, they took Paige with them to open their new accounts and chose to establish one for Paige.
Lisa and Susan completed the required banking forms and were then informed that they could not open a joint account because they were not married. In addition, they could not open an account for Paige, they were told, because Lisa, not Susan, was Paige’s legal parent.
This credit union carried the employer’s name, logo and colors in their signage and advertising. The employer had a strong nondiscrimination policy, and about 20 percent of its employees were not heterosexual. Yet, when Lisa and Susan protested, they were informed that the banking policies were set by the credit union board of directors — not the employer.
To set a good example for Paige, Lisa met with the manager and voiced her concerns about the policies and the lack of alignment with the employer. She expressed her disappointment and humiliation when the credit union rejected them and their daughter as clients.
After they left, Paige became very angry and frustrated, holding on to her piggy bank and refusing to give anyone her money.
“Would this also be the policy if an employee who was a grandparent, aunt or uncle wanted to open an account for a child?” Lisa wondered. “If an employee wanted to open a joint account with a brother or sister, would they be refused?”
(While this story is true, the names of the people were changed at their request.)
