Reforms proposes "Women and Motherhood Protection Act"

That was exactly my first thought

Legally, personal comfort levels and boundaries are not considered discrimination. Discrimination involves taking adverse action or treating someone unfavourably based on protected personal characteristics, such as race, sex, age, or disability which is more the domain of the left.

Ah, so we don't need to worry about people who don't want to use the spaces for their sex, because their comfort and boundaries don't matter, and it's not legal discrimination? Men with gender identities can just go in male spaces, put up and shut up?

Really?

there is nothing to indicate they will do anything other than the Work Welfare bill or what ever it is called.

Yet.

And as of a couple of days ago, there wasn't even that.

Many of these rights exist at a bare minimum of what is required to properly facilitate the lives that women lead in our society - they're almost begrudgingly won from successive governments, with minimum welfare funding attached, and they often come with caveats and opt outs for employers to claim that granting these rights is too disruptive or expensive. The Disability Discrimination Act is along the same lines - in theory it grants rights/protections but in practice it's bloody hard to actually rely on or claim those rights/protections and often organisations get away with ignoring their obligations e.g. transport companies.

I think, unlike the majority of the population, the people who make it as MPs have middle-class earnings and/or family support to keep them in their careers and I don't think that any government has seriously looked at how society has only bent a little bit around the edges to accommodate women's needs while still maintaining the historic slant towards fitting in around the lives/careers of men.

Whether Reform can do something about this or not, I'm highly sceptical because it seems to be composed of the same class of people who are already overrepresented in our political/institutional/business class.

I see I caused confusion by saying 'right thinking' - I meant you seem to see being homophobic, racist, religious intolerant, ableist and misogynist as the correct way for good people to be. I didn't mean 'votes for right wing parties'.
If you support Labour/Lib dem and Green then yes, you are owning those behaviours, they are a part of those parties' beliefs. That women who are not able to tolerate or cope with men in their spaces - due to disability, trauma, being of different cultures, faiths - are women to be derisive about and dismiss as not worthy of any spaces at all. That's the politics you support.

You are making the error of assuming GC comfort level concerns not being catered for by the left is a result of their homophobia, racism, religious intolerance & misogyny when its really that they don't qualify as discrimination from a leftist standpoint which is their area of interest particularly given defending the endless spectrum of comfort levels would be entirely impractical.

Legally, personal comfort levels and boundaries are not considered discrimination. Discrimination involves taking adverse action or treating someone unfavourably based on protected personal characteristics, such as race, sex, age, or disability which is more the domain of the left.

Edited to add: also noting in this sense you're using 'right wing' meaning 'intrinsically evil' which is equally blindly prejudiced to me. The 'left' parties aren't anywhere near actual 'left' policies now, they just identify as left. I'm not interested in making any party look better than it is, I'm a voter without any home at all. I don't want any of them.

My posts are referring to the current right who indisputably exhibit racism, misogyny, classism, authoritarianism & a raft of other socially damaging beliefs.

I wonder if they are thinking of legislating in a way that is much more tailored to the problems groups have. Rather than trying to create a framework for all.

I have often thought that with such different needs and characteristics, that might be better. In what way is a blind person's problems in the workforce really similar to a gay man's?

If be interested to see what they might come up with though tbh I expect stronger ideas from the Tories at the moment. But more ideas and discussion is better in general.

Yes, that is precisely why that happens and it's common in many sectors.

People will accept lower pay in return for things like flexibility, benefits, good working hours, and so on.

And people will expect a premium for jobs with high demands, lots of travel, or higher chances of injury (like warehouse work, and I will say here that I think paying retail workers the same is unjust on the face of it.)

One way to increase pay for nursery workers might be to require higher education. Although I think that also has downsides. That's what happens in some places, all or a certain percentage need advanced degrees and therefore demand higher pay. My relative who is in the sciences sees this, there are a lot of women in his part of thf civil services compared to the sand disaplined in industry, or academia. Why? Good work hours compared to those other rmployers, good maternity leave, stable employment and pensions.

I also think we could also reasonably ask if childcare even should be highly paid, if it's role is to facilitate productivity at what point does that no longer pencil out? Should society instead look at supporting more parents to stay longer with small children?

Anyway, that's beyond our scope here but I think the underlying assumption that some work pays less because women are doing it is almost always false. It's because there is some trade off it offers where people are willing to accept lower pay.

@IwantToRetire
Not buying it have always imagined fungal farage and his chums drooling over the concept of flaxen haired trad wives who are kept firmly in place

She did not say that though, it was kinder and kareers.

All these rights already exist and are frequently ignored. Making a great big shiny new Act will draw attention to how problematic female employees are. Women my age have had to avoid drawing attention to the fact we are women to get by in the workplace and it’s still been an uphill challenge. Reform will put a big shiny bow on the ladies and make th sink without trace. Genius! Not

They haven't yet voted in Reform to a position where Reform have the power to enable a return to that. And I'm an optimist.

I look forward to seeing what other equality legislation Reform proposes in places of the EA2010.

I see I caused confusion by saying 'right thinking' - I meant you seem to see being homophobic, racist, religious intolerant, ableist and misogynist as the correct way for good people to be. I didn't mean 'votes for right wing parties'.

If you support Labour/Lib dem and Green then yes, you are owning those behaviours, they are a part of those parties' beliefs. That women who are not able to tolerate or cope with men in their spaces - due to disability, trauma, being of different cultures, faiths - are women to be derisive about and dismiss as not worthy of any spaces at all. That's the politics you support.

I don't honestly see the difference between this kind of awful prejudice and any 'right wing' parties.

Edited to add: also noting in this sense you're using 'right wing' meaning 'intrinsically evil' which is equally blindly prejudiced to me. The 'left' parties aren't anywhere near actual 'left' policies now, they just identify as left. I'm not interested in making any party look better than it is, I'm a voter without any home at all. I don't want any of them.

Outside of the workplace I don't think many people will support a legislative regime that permits a return to the times of "no blacks, no dogs, no Irish".

Really I was actively following UK politics then and that one also passed me by. Labour were in power in 1999 just like in 2004 with the GRA so clearly the T has always been on their agenda.

Try the Communist Party. Left surely.

Gender reassignment protections go back a bit earlier, starting with the Sex Discrimination (Gender Reassignment) Regulations 1999 which amended the Sex Discrimination Act 1975.

@IwantToRetire the 2010 Act was a bringing together of separate individual acts dating back to the 1970s in some cases (eg Sex Discrimination Act) but it added some extras including the infamous 'gender reassignment'.
If Reform plan to abolish the Equality Act as it stands, they will naturally have to replace some aspects such as this.

I agree market forces should be allowed to operate but I'm also concerned about the need for some oversight.
Jobs like nursery work for example can easily attract women due to working hours so no market pressure to pay well. However this is arguably one of the most skilled and important for society, ditto care work.
We need some mechanism to raise these wages. We can do this by regulation eg demanding qualifications [compare gas fitters]. But they will never be a lack of applicants for jobs.