Is this correct? (Equality Act)

Why do so many get this wrong? How hard can it be to get it right?

So I googled "Equality Act UK Protected Characteristics" and this came up top:

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/equality-act/protected-characteristics

Which seems clear enough.

("Sex. A Man or a Woman.")

If you feel safe to do so, please gently challenge. It is in their interest, as much as yours, that they understand and correctly represent the legislation as written. There are other threads where people have done similar and documents have been changed painlessly. Good luck

If your company has paid an external provider for this training, you need to call it out, because that is laughably piss-poor to misquote an Act of Parliament.

If it's in-house traininng it's still pertinent to point it out; not knowing about pregnancy/maternity as a protected characteristic could get very expensive...

Approach it calmly, and factually, and from the point of view of saving the company money.

I pointed out that the Equality Act had been in place with the current wording since 2010.

Nothing more was said. They accepted my point but the poster remained in place.

I left shortly after but would have pursued it had I still been there.

The punctuation also makes it look like they are lumping 'transgender' in with sexual orientation, to try to make it appear a protected characteristic.

Sex and gender reassignment. Not gender or transgender.

They are mis representing the Equality Act as usual.

gender ideology as a belief may well be protected under religion and gender non-conformity under sex.

Yes, definitely.

Thanks. Wondering whether to fill out a feedback form to suggest they make their training more closely align in terms of wording with the actual Equality Act.

Good idea, and especially remind them of "pregnancy and maternity" which they've completely omitted to mention.

You should. Just point out that they have two of the protected characteristics wrong and that they should amend. "Gender reassignment" is about transition, though gender ideology as a belief may well be protected under religion and gender non-conformity under sex.

They have misstated the characteristics.
In practice people are also protected because of the perception of, for instance the employer who thought an employee was transitioning, even if they weren’t transitioning.

They have omitted the “belief” part of religion or belief. Maya Forstater’s belief that sex is important is protected under that grounds.

The 9 protected characteristics are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation.

Gender is not a protected characteristic, it should say sex.

They've said "including", but no, "gender" is not a legally protected characteristic. It is either about sex or gender reassignment. "Transgender" is not a legally protected characteristic.

I similarly wanted to question inclusion of gender rather than sex when I we had training but wasn't brave enough.

It's everywhere.

And if sex based distinctions such as hospital wards are self id then its meaningless :(

"Gender reassignment" is also protected when it is just "planned", so I would say the text is correct.