BridgetPhillipsonIsACowardlyJobsworth ·
27/04/2026 09:44
As a tangent to another thread:
Page 11 | Biggus Titus of Oxford University | Mumsnet
And following on from posts made by @fromorbit and @MrsOvertonsWindow , I thought that the concept of Employer-Initiated Coercive Control (EICC) was worth exploring in its own thread (first mention on the thread p. 11 was a post on X)
I guess something just clicked when I read that, because I had never pinpointed it as part of this whole ideology. Is this part of Denton's playbook? Or an unintended, yet desirable, consequence of the whole trans/queer movement?
Reading about the lecturer at Oxford, it occurred to me that most employers, including in HE, have Dignity in the Workplace policies, or their equivalent, which are supposed to protect their employees and give them recourse. Wouldn't that apply here? (I'm talking of course about this man's colleagues, both men and women, because Matt Rattley seems to have all his "dignity" already catered for).
Employer-Initiated Coercive Control (EICC) seems to me to be exactly what all these recent court cases have been about (Sandie Peggie, Darlington nurses, various professionals who have been hounded out of their jobs because of "wrongthink").
Wondering what everyone's thoughts are, especially if there are any legal people (particularly HR bods in HE) who have ever come across this concept. And whether you think this could ever be applied to future legal cases, because it hasn't been mentioned (that I have noticed) in any of the recent tribunals.
If there's already a thread specifically on this concept, would be helpful if you could signpost to it, thanks.