Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Joseph Rowntree Foundation

35 replies

catgirl1976 · 28/05/2019 18:52

Went to apply for a role with Joseph Rowntree.

I was having a look on the careers page and noticed they were a Stonewall Top 100 employer.

Scrolled down a bit further to see them proudly claiming that they welcome applicants regardless of:

age
gender identity
disability
marriage or civil partnership
pregnancy or maternity
religion or belief
race
sexual orientation
transgender status
social economic background

No mention of sex. And some interesting variations from the Equality Act's list of protected characteristics.

Should I complain? And to whom? Is there anyone on MN / Twitter who could highlight this? I am SO annoyed that the characteristic of sex has been thrown out of the window.

Link to the careers page here

www.jrht.org.uk/about-us/careers

OP posts:
HermioneWeasley · 28/05/2019 20:19

You need to write and complain - they have left out one of the protected characteristics from the Equality Act

EverardDigby · 28/05/2019 19:39

People use gender because sex is a bit icky, but "gender identity" seems a step further. I wouldn't assume it means anything about the organisation as a whole though, it might just be one woke HR person and no one else paying any attention.

RosaWaiting · 28/05/2019 19:36

oh cross post

I haven't worked anywhere that "pregnant people" came up - that must be terrifying!

RosaWaiting · 28/05/2019 19:35

OP a lot of employers are just putting everything they think they should put on their list, on their list.

it's pretty meaningless. I'm not sure if I'd ditch applying on that basis - just a thought. There's often no connection in the brain of the organisation and what's written on paper.

ditto companies claiming to be flexible and generally considerate of staff and being nothing like that!

Original poster
catgirl1976 · 28/05/2019 19:34

I noticed that - why have it twice? Why leave out sex?

I assume because Stonewall told them to.

OP posts:
FannyCann · 28/05/2019 19:32

It's interesting they list gender identity and transgender status. Confused

Original poster
catgirl1976 · 28/05/2019 19:28

That is true. I just think I struggle to get through the interview without asking them why they didn't feel the need to mention they welcome applications from women.

If it helps, in my current role I recently dug my heels in about changing "pregnant women" to "pregnant people" in our policies. We compromised on just using "the employee" so not a huge win but......it did spark some conversations.

OP posts:
donquixotedelamancha · 28/05/2019 19:25

I'm not applying for the role now btw

Obviously you decide based on your own situation, but we need more feminist women in organisations like this dragging their work back to a more grounded reality.

Original poster
catgirl1976 · 28/05/2019 19:19

Oh dear. That is iffy. As you say, probably well meaning.

I'm not applying for the role now btw, I don't feel as a woman I would be welcome.

OP posts:
Freespeecher · 28/05/2019 19:16

I ahve a vague recollection of them meaning well but giving money to some iffy causes.

[citation needed] I know but a bit of digging could well bear fruit.

There we go, CAGE was one such, am sure there were others:

www.itv.com/news/story/2015-03-07/charities-withdraw-support-for-cage-after-groups-comments-on-jihadi-john/