Civil Service Trans policy - what can I do?

Immediately meeting a QC next week on another thing we are working on. I'm going to talk to him about this.

Avoiding sexual harassment and abuse at work is a legitimate aim. They no doubt have a policy that states that. They are now stating that men who are dressing and using sex segregated facilities for erotic reasons can do that. And they will permit the use of disciplinary procedures to override consent.

Ghastly idea. I may well whistleblow at work myself. I work at a Russell group uni so that's going to be funny. HR whistleblowing on an HR policy.

The Government Equalities Office was quoted in the Independent

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/transgender-people-no-right-single-sex-spaces-government-penny-mordaunt-toilets-changing-rooms-a8414771.html

In response to a petition calling for women to be consulted before any change to the Gender Recognition Act (GRA), which allows people to legally change their gender, the Government Equalities Office said: “We are clear that we have no intention of amending the Equality Act 2010, the legislation that allows for single-sex spaces.

“Any GRA reform will not change the protected characteristics in the Equality Act nor the exceptions under the Equality Act that allow provision for single and separate sex spaces.”

It added: “Providers of women-only services can continue to provide services in a different way, or even not provide services to trans individuals, provided it is objectively justified on a case-by-case basis.

“The same can be said about toilets, changing rooms or single-sex activities. Providers may exclude trans people from facilities of the sex they identify with, providing it is a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim.”

So it seems that the government are standing back to see if people will be bothered to fight this on a case by case basis and can prove that denial of access meets a 'legitimate aim'. I have not read (and do not want to read!) the 2010 Equalities Act, neither have I yet looked up the case law based upon which transgender women with no GRC are allowed to carry out full body searches on women against their will. I haven't time to do either at the moment but will try over the weekend.

This does seem to mean that people like the OP are left to try to take whatever action possible on a case by case basis - whether this means a battle over every single toilet in the civil service or over the case of access to toilets in the civil service, in general, I'm not sure - maybe it's me being thick. But I'm sure of one thing although I'm sure @trousering is right, I wouldn't want to be the one to whistleblow, especially without the backing of some organisation that had the resources to support me - this is what the unions were supposed to do after all. It seems she is stuck between a rock and a hard place.

This is enforcement of sexual harassment.

Therefore post transition, it would be humiliating, inappropriate and undermining to expect a person in their acquired gender to
use toilet facilities of their birth sex or indeed be restricted to the use of the accessible toilet.

So it's OK for disabled people to be humiliated and undermined? Fuck that.

I have never come across separate men's and women's accessible toilets, why is it OK to force disabled people to use mixed sex facilities?

What happens if you have a disabled trans woman? Do you have to build a new ladies disabled toilet?

Sex is a protected characteristic in law, a policy cannot trump law.

Ok I will be back once I have read it.

I note that there is a specific news media channel commenting on the Civil Service, hope they will pick this up: www.civilserviceworld.com

In law. And what that means in practice.

It's where the EA characteristics conflate one another.

There needs to be reference to the other characteristics in the document. In any document covering them. And how all the rights are respected now law.

Reading and raging.

What the fuck is wrong with our politicians? Why on earth do they not want my vote?

So those who change ‘gender’ according to the day of the week or how they feel that day - we have to accommodate them too? Always men though isn’t it?

This is awful, the civil service is supposed to be good employer for women. And like several other women on this board, at my workplace our women’s toilets are shared with an AGP trans woman so I know how degrading, scary and upsetting it is to have it OK’d at top level that women just have to suck this up. But this is also next level- not only the women in offices expected to get on board but vulnerable women in the legal custody of civil servants. Is that what it’s saying??

it is so awful to think women in all of civil service and service users could be forced into this. How many staff are in the civil service? It’s a huge UK employer.

How can we expect the civil service to listen to the needs of women as the objects of policy it makes or the services it provides when it treats its own staff like this? Why hasn’t it consulted with service users about this? It looks like it’s only for internal civil service consultation. What does that process look like?

Also, other UK employers look to the civil service as offering the gold standard for employment rights. Like with civil service pensions. This feels like it’s massively accelerating a race to the bottom for women’s rights in the workplace.

Well, there needs to be clarity. I'm querying the scenarios given in the training. And the feeling given that you cannot ask any questions at all.

They are including men who change roles for erotics factors in the group of people they are giving permission to use facilities of their choice quite explicitly here aren't they? So condoning the erotic and sexualised behaviour at work. Definitely a a conflict with a sexual harassment policy.

Toilet para uses term transsexual. But then is a bit confusing imo.

Under transgender (there's a separate paragraph on transsexual):

(Umbrella term) It is often the preferred term for those who change their role permanently, as well as others who, for example, cross-dress intermittently for a variety of reasons including erotic factors (also referred to as transvestism). Those who live continuously outside gender norms, sometimes with, and sometimes without, medical intervention are covered by this term.
There is a great deal of difference between say, drag artists and people who change their role permanently.

Dear me, I didn't pick up the the bit about braina being sexed. Again this is a belief, it's untrue and we can't be harassed or discriminated for not sharing that belief.

It's interesting trying to read the outlined definitions and then trying to lie them against the guidance for toilets, which initially says transsexuals but then seems to say but actually there may not be medical intervention? I think it's trying to refer to the two years living in the opposite sex role?

I also note what they include under transgender compared to transsexual. And some bilge about brains being sexed in terms of translating to gender expression.

I don't have time to do a longer post but I feel the woman delivering this has made it even woolier than it was already.

I'm absolutely boiling with rage on the OP's behalf.

That policy needs sending to a suitable journalist (Gilligan?, The Mail?) and very widely exposed. That sort of policy will be in every workplace in a flash.

Can't we start a petition with the aim of getting 100,000 signatures so it has to be debated in Parliament?

How do we get this aired? It should peak trans any women not already there yet!

@Hayden555 I worked in a big office where a guy on the same floor transitioned 25 years ago. Different team on different side of the building so only really knew by sight.

Nobody was really bothered - all very live and let live. Apart from when it came to the loos - there was a sudden and marked change when they started using them, ditto the kitchen they never troubled themselves with tidying it up as they went as all women had previously. Their most heinous though was to flout the dress code and look like they were just off to a nightclub in miniskirts and sequinned tips rather than the suits/smart stuff worn by everyone else. The women had only just won the (long requested) right to wear smart trousers whereas they were pushing for every woman to have to wear short skirt suits and remove the right to wear trousers despite the fact that it was optional and much wanted by everyone else.

The trousers remained - as did the stench in the loos!

On a lighter note ... As long as these trans women keep the toilets clean and not smelly and dirty like men's toilets, I can deal with this ... But I know this isn't the objection.

It's not just women who are having their beliefs ignored is it. Men are also being harassed into standing by and watching other men discrimate against their female colleagues. Men are being contractually gagged and intimidated into permitting and condoning sexual assault.

Blow the bloody doors off.

I don't think there's any point messing about at a low level with HR or unions on this one. The civil service is a massive employer. The only way to get directly to the top is to whistleblow.

Doesn't have to be complicated, but must pre emp any fobbing off with lies about the Equality act; saying TWAW when this is quite demonstrably a belief which is counter to the majority belief in this country and that they are an inclusive employer. Non of those answers permit legal discrimination against women. All of that lying and fobbing off is in the policy which is being used to harass and discriminate against non believers.

happy to contribute to crowd fund for legal support on this if needed

Also me.

I think fair play for women has a good document on their website, detailing where women’s rights overrule trans rights.

Is there any reason we can’t start our own union? A gender critical one that represents natal women across all industries?