"Darlington Nurses" vs County Durham and Darlington NHS Trust Tribunal Thread 9

Gods help us all

That’s the new grade 7 Civil Service job holders first task.😂

I genuinely think it would be impossible to establish a legal definition of non-binary. Lots of countries claim to have done it, but any competent HR/employment/human rights lawyer could drive a truck through those definitions.

A fair point. I started to draft my post in one way and changed my mind and forgot to amend “I have always believed” to “I believe”.

Also do that without referencing sex.

Good luck with that too.

It's fine saying we need a legal definition of gender.

Now write one without referencing regressive sexed stereotypes which are at odds with the equality act.

Good luck with that.

And this is why no one has attempted it, because it lays it bare that gender identity is totally sexist and regressive.

I have always believed we need separate and clear legal definitions of sex and gender identity, including non-binary. Both should be PCs but legal clarity on the rights and responsibilities of each would help everyone.

Always? Or just in the last 5 years since we've been repeatedly told this utter cobblers is a real thing?

The CIPD is already known to be somewhat compromised by bias itself on this issue, but that is an interesting point.

Bold is by me not from website.

Apologies for the delayed question.
In all these cases if the HR person is CIPD qualified aren't they supposed to be be following their code of conduct...?
https://www.cipd.org/uk/membership/professional-standards/code-of-conduct/
Including

• Ensure that your professional judgement is not compromised nor could be perceived as being compromised because of bias, or the undue influence of others.
• Take all reasonable steps to resolve disputes and complaints in a fair, timely and professional manner. Never allow a complaint to affect the standard of behaviour or professionalism shown to those who raise concerns, engage authentically and respectfully.
• Take responsibility for your professional actions and decisions. Rectify issues and take all reasonable steps to mitigate loss or harm as soon as possible. Inform those affected of the potential impact

I have always believed we need separate and clear legal definitions of sex and gender identity, including non-binary. Both should be PCs but legal clarity on the rights and responsibilities of each would help everyone.

Neither 'gender identity' nor 'non-binary' are recognised in law.

But let’s wait and see. Once this person is in place, ze may find “things are worse than zir thought” and a more senior team is installed.

It is an excellent article. It highlights how female discomfort is seen as subordinate to male satisfaction - exactly what played out in Darlington. However I do think that the judgement didn't entirely grasp how deep seated the discomfort was. The afternoon where the 2 male counsel and the male judge discussed "normal" behaviour in a female changing room was deeply uncomfortable as it was clear that they had no idea - women in a changing room generally spend as little time as possible in the underwear and pass that as discreetly as possible (facing away from the room etc) both to preserve their own privacy and that of others. Yet the 3 men didn't understand that Rose prancing around in his boxers was not normal behaviour in a female changing room and this was probably the basis for the finding in the judgement that his behaviour was basically normal and just that the women perceived it as abnormal as their senses were heightened to his presence anyway.

Presumably they will have cleared any statement with their LBGTQ++ people/groups who will have pointed out that the use of the word "woman" is problematic.

I agree.

In addition if, as they should, the gmt and Civil Service apply the FWS SC judgment and make it clear SSS are just that. Then there is an issue to resolve and that is what is the solution for trans people.

Even the SC acknowledged a trans identifying female (transman) should use female SSS but in doing so their appearance may mean it causes distress e.g. rape crisis centres.

The debate to be had is how do we respect sex and SSS whilst treating people with the PC of gender reassignment. Trans and non-binary people need to be involved in discussions, as do women. No debate did not just harm women but also some trans people. I can see a need for this role as part of a much wider piece of work.

I have always believed we need separate and clear legal definitions of sex and gender identity, including non-binary. Both should be PCs but legal clarity on the rights and responsibilities of each would help everyone.

Seems like they are trying to score some petty point by deliberately avoiding the w word, certainly no change of heart or lesson learnt whatsoever.

wow how many times do the trust say 'colleagues'? Very clear they have an issue with the word 'women'.

Victoria Smith has written a good article in the Critic

Does women’s discomfort matter? | Victoria Smith | The Critic Magazine https://share.google/0kdOlvgGH9cB2lQ1x

BBC website this morning (the newspapers).

Can they be bothered to report accurately? Of course, No.

(Complaint duly submitted.)

i wonder if the mealy mouthed wording 'all our colleagues' is an attempt to avoid an acknowledgement that they have failed a group of 'colleagues' who share the protected characteristic of being female?

In other words are they trying to avoid being accused of sex discrimination? I haven't fully followed this case but was that allegation actually made by the nurses?

To be fair it’s just one Grade 7 role, which isn’t that senior. When govt is gearing up for new legislation, there would typically be a whole team (say 6-10 people).

Every time the nurses open their mouths their honesty and generosity shines through, especially towards RH, who, according to what we heard in court, really did behave very badly towards them, whatever the conclusion arrived at by the panel. The Trust, totally the opposite.

The term ‘colleagues’ is notably overused and their failure to acknowledge the issue at hand - single sex provision is ridiculous.

It comes across to me as them being brittle and resentful about the judgement

Wow, they really have worked incredibly hard to not mention women at all in that statement. Twats.

Not really an apology!