Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Equality Act employment question

30 replies

JemimaTiggywinkles · 22/01/2024 20:13

I’m a bit confused about how the equality act works with respect to “women only” jobs. Below is what I think, but I’m obviously not a lawyer so would appreciate and corrections and/or answers to the questions!

So a job can be reserved for women if it is necessary (eg in a rape crisis centre). This means it can be advertised as women only and any men who apply will have their applications binned and cannot claim discrimination on the grounds of sex. Is this the same as, or similar to the “proportionate means to a legitimate end”?

If a TW with a GRC applies they have to be considered for the post because their correct comparator in a trans discrimination claim is a woman. A woman would be considered, therefore the TW must be considered. Is this always true, or are there exceptions an employer can invoke?

If a TW without a GRC applies they do not need to be considered because their correct comparator in a trans discrimination claim is a non-trans man. However, what happens if the employer decides that they follow Stonewall Law of self-ID? They’d consider the application equivalent to a woman. But, given the correct comparator in a trans discrimination claim is a non-trans man, doesn’t that open up the risk of a non-trans man claiming he has been discriminated against by not being trans? Or is trans discrimination one-way only?

OP posts:
IwantToRetire · 22/01/2024 20:35

A job that is for women only would be advertised until the single sex exemptions, ie only for biological females.

It is spelt out in the EA.

If this is something you / your organisations wants to do just google single sex exemptions and when posting the ad make sure that it is clearly stated that this is the basis on which the post is being advertised.

donquixotedelamancha · 22/01/2024 20:33

is trans discrimination one-way only?

Yes, it is. The PC is gender reassignment. However, sex is also a PC. If a transwoman can do a job, why not a man?

The problem is it would need someone to pursue for discrimination in recruitment practice, which I don't think has ever happened.

P.S. IANAL, this is just what I've gathered.

HangingOnJustAbout · 22/01/2024 20:32

The correct comparison for a trans woman is a man. A trans woman without the gender reassignment protected characteristic is a man not a woman, regardless of grc.

donquixotedelamancha · 22/01/2024 20:29

If a TW with a GRC applies they have to be considered for the post because their correct comparator in a trans discrimination claim is a woman.

No. The GRC isn't really relevant much. It's more about what the legitimate aim is.

Where sex is relevant transewomen can be excluded. Where its more about (for example) encouraging female participation it might well be the case that a transwoman could not be excluded.

Thing is, in those cases a non-passing transwoman might well put some women off but then it's about reasonableness.

donquixotedelamancha · 22/01/2024 20:25

So a job can be reserved for women if it is necessary (eg in a rape crisis centre). This means it can be advertised as women only and any men who apply will have their applications binned and cannot claim discrimination on the grounds of sex.

Yes.

Is this the same as, or similar to the “proportionate means to a legitimate end”?

Same