Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Creating a case to request that my employers status as Stonewall Champion be reviewed

56 replies

JustcameoutGC · 24/05/2021 22:31

I think now might be the time to formally request that my employer reviews our status as a Stonewall Champion.

I need your hive viper mind to help build the case.

So, I think I will start with pointing out recent developments

  1. Discrimination lawyer has declared advice given by SW to Essex Uni, to be unlawful, leading to restrictions on freedom of speech on an academic campus.

Question to the vipers, do we have any evidence of the teaching of biology at uni being impacted by gender ideology? That would be handy.

  1. SW have hidden the list of champions on their website, should this worry us?

  2. The EHRC have severed their links with DW, again, is this cause for concern?

  3. SW have released a new strategy which clearly positions them as a campaigning political organisation. Some of their aims have the potential to clash with the rights and protections of other protected groups such as women and vulnerable groups such as children. Is it appropriate to have some of our internal HR policies dictated by an external political organisation?

  4. By focusing so much on SW have we lost focus on other groups

Anything else I should add? Anyone else done this successfully?

OP posts:
VanGoghsDog · 25/05/2021 08:50

My employer had this on an action plan, to join. I've been keeping an eye on it and am pleased to say it's been shelved for now due to SW political lobbying. My employer thinks that is inappropriate and we should not be tying ourselves to that activity.

Yay. For now......

FindTheTruth · 25/05/2021 08:48

I think our association with them is reputationally risky, and I want to make sure leadership are aware of the risks.

A good lead in as leaders want to be aware of risks, even if they don't share values

Original poster
JustcameoutGC · 25/05/2021 08:46

Mulling it over in the shower. I will be asked what my motivation is. I am in part motivated by my personal opposition to some of Stonewalls aims, but mostly I am motivated to take this stance in the workplace because I think our association with them is reputationally risky, and I want to make sure leadership are aware of the risks.

OP posts:
FindTheTruth · 25/05/2021 08:46

OP is your organisation a public body? if so, here's the SexMatters letter to the Committee on Standards in Public Life calling for a public inquiry into “Stonewall Law”

FindTheTruth · 25/05/2021 08:42

I don't think you need to wait for a court ruling to point out your personal issues with being a SW champion.

FindTheTruth · 25/05/2021 08:41

@JustcameoutGC SexMatters are writing to all the SW champions, so their letter may contain useful points too

Donotgogentle · 25/05/2021 08:25

@JustcameoutGC

Agree that the Allison Bailey case and the findings from the Forstater appeal will be critical. If the ET comes back as it should then I would be much more confident in voicing my concerns.

I don't think I want to wait until the Bailey verdict, they would likely have another lot of our money by then.

It would be a difficult point to take up in my organisation without the backing of an independent court/ET ruling. HR would want to avoid an issue they see as political.

EHRC decision does help though.

oldwomanwhoruns · 25/05/2021 08:18

Your point 4 "some of their aims have the potential to clash..."
I'd have thought that you could be more positive here!!! "...some of their aims are directly at odds with the legal rights of..."

Good luck Flowers

Original poster
JustcameoutGC · 25/05/2021 08:17

Agree that the Allison Bailey case and the findings from the Forstater appeal will be critical. If the ET comes back as it should then I would be much more confident in voicing my concerns.

I don't think I want to wait until the Bailey verdict, they would likely have another lot of our money by then.

OP posts:
Original poster
JustcameoutGC · 25/05/2021 08:12

I do need to factor in the resourcing of it as well. We made hundreds of people redundant last year and we were supposed to strip out all unnecessary activity.

I now need to decide how to run this up the flag pole. If I go in via HR I suspect I won't get far, but if I go in via my own leadership structure I might get somewhere.

As I told a colleague, I may have found the hill I am prepared to die on.

OP posts:
FindTheTruth · 25/05/2021 07:58

It is not appropriate to have an org which is campaigning against the rights of groups with protected characteristics advising on internal policy.

good headline for the whole thing

OhHolyJesus · 25/05/2021 07:47

I second that you are very brave.

This is a useful thread as I am back tracking to log all the issues too. It will take some digging but if you Google search 'Mumsnet' and 'stonewall' you will not be short of threads to mine!

Was it Nottinghamshire Police who left the champion scheme over the staff hours it takes to make a submission?

Bristol/Somerset/Gloucester CCG (NHS Care Commission Group) left it too.

grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/why-everyone-is-dropping-stonewall

FindTheTruth · 25/05/2021 07:35

Another point is the conditional funding from the Arcus foundation / US big pharma money. It started in 2014 with £100k, conditional on including their policies (that many trans people don't agree with). A notable feature of the grants illustrates the tactic of forced teaming. This is led to SW campaigning to remove sex exemptions in the equality act. It's not independent. It has received funds from Arcus. Twitter user @StillTish investigated this. Arcus donated more than $10 million to religious organisations, many with explicit anti-LGB policies and practices

gendercriticalwoman.wordpress.com/2021/04/22/arcus-foundation-grants/

gottakeeponmovin · 25/05/2021 07:34

You are genuinely very brave. I wish I could do this

Tibtom · 25/05/2021 07:30

@boydy99

following as id also like to bring this up to my employer. but mine is a large public sector organisation, also on Stonewalls top 100 employers, so I am a bit worried. also new to taking any action on this, but have been a long time lurker on here.
In the public sector I would ask about how they implement/uphold their public sector equality duty when following an scheme designed to promote one protected characteristic at the expense of others.
FindTheTruth · 25/05/2021 07:20

survivors of coercion and abuse at the hands of certain SW employees, is a key one for me. Does your employer really want to follow the advice/orders/interpretations of law and policies of SW where people like this had a hand in them? and could even be corresponding with them directly?

endofthelinefinally · 25/05/2021 07:18

I simply don't understand why companies would pay lots of money to a lobby group, employ extra staff, buy lots of tat, when we have a perfectly good equality act that everyone can read and follow. It is brainwashing on a massive scale.

FindTheTruth · 25/05/2021 07:15

Another point is that they campaign to remove single sex exemptions from the Equality Act, so they are indirectly funding this... does your employer agree with removing single sex exemptions? (demand an answer to this from HR/Policy)

Creating a case to request that my employers status as Stonewall Champion be reviewed
Leafstamp · 25/05/2021 07:13

Brilliant @boydy99

I do like it when lurkers surface Smile

FindTheTruth · 25/05/2021 07:12

power to you boydy

boydy99 · 25/05/2021 07:10

following as id also like to bring this up to my employer. but mine is a large public sector organisation, also on Stonewalls top 100 employers, so I am a bit worried. also new to taking any action on this, but have been a long time lurker on here.

FindTheTruth · 25/05/2021 07:05

Allison Bailey case is next year and I agree it'll be pivotal but in the meantime I see no reason to delay pointing out the issues of SW membership.

FindTheTruth · 25/05/2021 07:00

you could also point out what the key employees in that organisation have done to children. One employee ran a teenage youth group where they actively invited in older males to start 'relationships' underage females, in an environment of coercion and abuse, as described by Benji here:

Donotgogentle · 25/05/2021 06:58

I’m waiting for the Alison Bailey ruling. If it’s as critical as I would expect it’s the right moment to challenge our membership.

FindTheTruth · 25/05/2021 06:54

Another point is that they simply don't need to do it. As Debbie Hayton points out, they don't need outsiders "to tell them to treat LGBT employees and customers no less favourably because of their sexual orientation or gender reassignment status. It really isn’t difficult, as many employers – including my own – have discovered, without handing large sums of money over"

www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-are-taxpayers-funding-stonewall-diversity-programmes-

Swipe left for the next trending thread