Reading this Vice piece ( www.vice.com/en/article/bvnymd/ehrc-staff-quitting-transphobia ) critically it seems as if the EHRC is beginning to realise what it's job actually is, and is beginning to implement changes to achieve this.
Staff described board members changing their work – making the documents “transphobic and seriously inaccurate”
I assume this means the words woman / women / female are being used instead of vagina haver.
One ex-employee said: “I was seeing our upcoming publications and guidance pushing for trans rights being changed – or completely scrapped and shelved permanently – meanwhile the Board was building links to anti-trans groups. It was awful.
Translates as EHRC are making sure their advice and campaigns aligns with the actual law, and that they are consulting with people representing all protected characteristics and reflecting a range of opinion.
Staff are being pushed to not be so ‘woke’, and forced to be more impartial
Impartiality is a good thing surely?
The EHRC was established in 2007 by the then Labour government to monitor human rights in England, Wales and Scotland, and to enforce equality laws based on protected characteristics, such as sexuality, gender reassignment, race and religion.
Translated as these are the most important characteristics and we should really ignore the others?
They added: “For me, there was suddenly this new kind of emphasis on the need to be ‘evidence based’. But that doesn’t mean we weren’t collecting evidence before – we’ve always had people employed as researchers, and we have staff with lived experience too.
Surely evidence based rather than anecdote based is a good thing?
All in all it sounds as if the EHRC is escaping its former policy capture and beginning to try and do its job properly?