Transgender Judge Seeks Leave To Intervene in FWS Case re Legal Definition of Woman

The appeal of Haldane to the Inner Court struck down (if that's the correct phrase) her judgement partly and confirmed that the maternity and pregnancy provisions refer to bio sex and do protect women who claim to be men. They took the approach that Sex could mean either bio sex+certificated sex OR bio sex, depending on which provisions of the Act were concerned and in the maternity and pregnancy provisions it must mean bio sex.

So I'm confused easily, so is it, you can live and work legally with a GRC as a female , but expect to be paid salary and pension as your biological sex..man?

I think this is progress - a member of the judiciary not taking advantage of a privileged position to change practice to their personal advantage as has been happening to a shameful degree in recent years. Instead becoming an open campaigner with the (sadly rather unsuccessful) "Good Law" group. As their leader Jolyon has pointed out (not a direct quote, I've made a few tweaks) but he understands the principle:

So many of these cases – about and with profound effects on the lives of trans people women– are decided without any trans people women in the room

Presumably the good judge is under the impression that transwomen like ‘her’ are routinely being paid less because employers think they are actually women. As oppose to the evidence of our eyes which suggests transwomen are disproportionately in higher paid roles because employers think they are really men.

Well yes, my point was that if the comparator for wages was another man, McCloud would be protected under “gender reassignment”.

Maternity is a separate matter. If the EHRC are concerned, then presumably there is some problematic wording. Seems odd though as a judge has already clarified that anyone who gives birth is a mother.

Thank you. Excellent turn of phrase. Much needed here.

The more I find out about the Equality Act, the more I realise how well it was drafted. The word Woman is clearly defined and so many of the provisions make it clear that TWAM, GRC notwithstanding. The problems we have are mostly of Stonewall's and captured judges' making.

Because McCloud is of the male sex. So you aren't comparing him with the opposite sex, which is the basis of sex discrimination.

Wait. The comparator for McCloud would be another man. So the discrimination in pay would be on the basis of gender reassignment, not sex.

I don't think even the judge could explain that!

Yeah that makes no sense at all.

Pension perhaps?

The concerns the EHRC had were that transmen would lose maternity rights.

Ooh! A threatened flounce!

“This would mean in practice that women like her [with a gender recognition certificate] would lose rights to equal pay with men”

Can anyone explain how the good judge would not be protected by equality laws on the basis of sex or the EA under “gender reassignment”?

Or JKR’s lawyers have written a stiff letter, Cranky.

Something must be seriously wrong at the gooniad, they described JK as "author and campaigner" and not as a big ole terfy pants who unexists the most marginalized!
Perhaps LOJs mum has sent him to bed early for being a little shit?