Not another trans thread, but a question to employers/managers

[CatsArePeopleToo]

If somebody reported that your employee is a TERF, would you fire her?
Asking this, because doxxing and harassment of women is obviously a thing.

Be kind?

Oh go away.

If somebody reported that your employee is a TERF, would you fire her?

I'd say well done, they are obviously sensible and not prone to cult-thinking.

@Janevaljane why the need to be bitchy?

@Bairnsmum05

Whilst it's fine to have different opinions and beliefs, there is no need for the nastiness and accusatory statements thrown about here. What happened to everyone posting about mental health issues? Supporting others? Being kind?

I agree. It’s awful that people are being bullied into using compelled speech. It’s awful that the rights of those that have autism who may find it extremely distressing to use pronouns that do not ‘fit’ the sex of the person they are addressing/discussing. are being punished or threatened with punishment for not being able to do that? We really should have to take into consideration the affects that this order to change another person’s pronouns has on the autistic person’s mental health. Thank you for understanding that it is important to be kind to these people.

@PrimalLass

If somebody reported that your employee is a TERF, would you fire her?

I'd say well done, they are obviously sensible and not prone to cult-thinking.

So without even knowing what was said? Just like that they are a ‘sensible’ person? They may well have been reported for harassing a trans person or being a genuine bigot but that’s ok with you? Are the posters here actually fine with transphobia? Or just gender critical? Because it feels like the lines are blurring closer together, the more I see these posts and that’s not good for anyone.

So without even knowing what was said? Just like that they are a ‘sensible’ person?

I've been on Twitter enough to know they type who use 'terf' as a slur. It's like conversing with the most belligerent of teenagers.

Well said uneasyy

”So I doubt very much that gender identity is in your handbook.”

It’s entirely possible that it is. Many organisations either take a rather lax approach to the wording of the protected characteristics or add in extra characteristics that are not technically protected by law.

Nothing wrong with adding stuff in as such, unless it results in less favourable treatment for a group who do have a specific protected characteristic. Indirect disability discrimination is one risk of adding gender identity in, if an organisation is going to discipline someone for not using different pronouns.

Nothing wrong with adding stuff in as such, unless it results in less favourable treatment for a group who do have a specific protected characteristic. Indirect disability discrimination is one risk of adding gender identity in, if an organisation is going to discipline someone for not using different pronouns.

Indeed.

@flowery

”So I doubt very much that gender identity is in your handbook.”

It’s entirely possible that it is. Many organisations either take a rather lax approach to the wording of the protected characteristics or add in extra characteristics that are not technically protected by law.

Nothing wrong with adding stuff in as such, unless it results in less favourable treatment for a group who do have a specific protected characteristic. Indirect disability discrimination is one risk of adding gender identity in, if an organisation is going to discipline someone for not using different pronouns.

To be fair the person posting was recalling details from the top of their head not reading the policy verbatim. Also, the transitioning process is covered because one complete you legally becon the 'new' sex. Also, nationality would come under race and having children is referred to under the EA so somewhat disingenuous to suggest its not.

To be fair the person posting was recalling details from the top of their head not reading the policy verbatim.

I’d argue that the understanding/recall of what is said is more important than the wording.

Also, the transitioning process is covered because one complete you legally becon the 'new' sex.

No it isn’t. There are sex based provisions which apply until the GRC is issued. So it actively disregards the transitioning process because your plogocal sex has not been accepted to be different.

Also, nationality would come under race

Again, 2 different words with 2 different meanings.

and having children is referred to under the EA so somewhat disingenuous to suggest its not.

In what way is having children a protected characteristic in and of itself?

@Feminist10101

To be fair the person posting was recalling details from the top of their head not reading the policy verbatim.

I’d argue that the understanding/recall of what is said is more important than the wording.

Also, the transitioning process is covered because one complete you legally becon the 'new' sex.

No it isn’t. There are sex based provisions which apply until the GRC is issued. So it actively disregards the transitioning process because your plogocal sex has not been accepted to be different.

Also, nationality would come under race

Again, 2 different words with 2 different meanings.

and having children is referred to under the EA so somewhat disingenuous to suggest its not.

In what way is having children a protected characteristic in and of itself?

Now your being unreasonably pedantic. I doubt you could recall all of your works policy word for word. Oh and this is what the EA says"

A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex."

So transitioning is covered

@Janevaljane

If that's all there was to it he could take you to a tribunal and win. Unless he had verbal and written warnings which he didn't contest.

He had both, and still refused to treat his trans colleague the same as the rest of his colleagues. He was one of those incredibly arrogant men who genuinely believed he was too important and too valuable to let go.

I was not the manager in question, FWIW. Though i would have done the same.

One of the things I find most frustrating about this particular issue is the propensity of too many people to think this is easy and straightforward, either one way or another. If only!

No one should be treated less favourably, harassed or discriminated against because they are transgender, or express their identity in any non-stereotypical way at all, or because they believe it is possible to change sex, or believe there are many gender identities, or suffer from gender dysphoria.

Neither should anyone be penalised or treated less favourably on the grounds of sex, or for believing it is not possible to change sex, or for having personal, religious, or cultural reasons for wanting single sex spaces.

Balancing all of that both fairly and lawfully is incredibly difficult, nigh on impossible at times, and it frustrates me when people disingenuously argue that isn’t the case.

We really should have to take into consideration the affects that this order to change another person’s pronouns has on the autistic person’s mental health.

I'm also on the spectrum but I don't think autism is a good enough reason to want to mis gender people, I don't do it.

I don't like people touching things without gloves on, does that mean everyone now have to wear gloves to pander to my autism?

So this looks like it turned into another conservative anti-trans thread. Well done folks.

So this looks like it turned into another conservative anti-trans thread. Well done folks.

It got sidetracked from my original question.

@JustAnotherPoster00

We really should have to take into consideration the affects that this order to change another person’s pronouns has on the autistic person’s mental health.

I'm also on the spectrum but I don't think autism is a good enough reason to want to mis gender people, I don't do it.

I don't like people touching things without gloves on, does that mean everyone now have to wear gloves to pander to my autism?

So all autistic people are the same? My oldest is autistic and part of that affects the very foods he eats. He’s on a very limited diet. He caused offence at a family part because he didn’t like any of the food so ordered in a pizza. His sister is also autistic and has ‘quirks’ regarding food but was happy because the buffet meant she could keep food from tounchimg each other. Should I have let him go hungry or forced him to eat the food, because my in-laws were very offended. You should know better than to say because you can deal with it, other autistic people should.

We've just had something like this come up in work. Previously, we've had both a trans woman and a trans man work with us and there weren't really any problems. The TW had transitioned before she came to work with us so people knew her as "Jane" from the start. She passed better than most which, unfair as it may be, likely helped a lot.
The TM transitioned while working with us so the dynamic was quite different, as colleagues had been calling him "Laura" for the past few years and forgot that they'd now been asked to call him "James" as well as he/him. For the most part I think this was people just genuinely forgetting. He was very understanding about the fact that people were just adjusting to calling him something different.

However, about a month ago someone in a different apartment came out as a trans woman and this was very different. First there were arguments over dress code, when they accused their manager of being transphobic when they were told that their outfit was inappropriate for work (neither male nor female employees would have been allowed to wear it). Then the argument was over toilets, first with an attempt to rename the women's toilets "Unisex" which female employees rightly contested. Then there were complaints that the trans woman, allowed to use the women's bathroom, was acting inappropriately toward other women. Throughout this there have been complaints that colleagues are "deadnaming" them. Again, most of this seems to be due to the fact that, in the 8 years they've worked here, people have used "Robert" and he/him and, for some reason, have not naturally adapted to calling a 6'1" bearded, obviously male bodied person she.
This is all happening in a different department so I'm not certain how it's being resolved but a lot of people (overwhelmingly women) have been accused of transphobia and bullying. Realistically, they can't all be fired.

Now your being unreasonably pedantic. I doubt you could recall all of your works policy word for word. Oh and this is what the EA says"

As Head of HR I absolutely can.

I think most of us who have worked in organisations that misrepresent the EA absolutely know the protected characteristics off by heart.

The term TERF is a slur so I wouldn't be impressed with anyone using this term to describe a member of my staff.
If there was any substance to the complaint then I would investigate it but most of the time when I see that term used, it is just because women are enforcing their own boundaries.

@JustAnotherPoster00

We really should have to take into consideration the affects that this order to change another person’s pronouns has on the autistic person’s mental health.

I'm also on the spectrum but I don't think autism is a good enough reason to want to mis gender people, I don't do it.

I don't like people touching things without gloves on, does that mean everyone now have to wear gloves to pander to my autism?

This is exactly the point though. Expecting everyone to wear gloves would be the equivalent of expecting everyone to pretend that one had changed sex.

We all have our hang ups, and many of us have real problems getting along with reality. There are perfectly ordinary, everyday things that can make me curl up into a scared ball and feel I'm about to be assaulted - I don't get to command everyone around me, and no one would think it was healthy if I did.

Expecting everyone around you to wear gloves at all times that work would, in most circumstances, not be a reasonable adjustment to a protected characteristic (assuming that this is because you may have a disability)

Asking people to use the correct pronoun would Be a reasonable adjustment For their protected characteristic.

None of us would say that somebody with a disability And an opinion that people with a different racial characteristics to them should be protected in using outdated language. And please don’t let’s go down the line of “well someone can’t choose their race”. That kind of thing used to be said about lesbian and gay people not so long ago, and it is no longer acceptable.

Perhaps the better analogy is somebody calling a lesbian’s wife your friend, whereas calling a straight person’s wife their wife. This would not be okay regardless of what religious or political affiliation they had that would make them uncomfortable around gay marriage.

The trouble with these threads is that I think they Undermine the debate. When we talking about protecting spaces, a lot of people have some sympathy. When we talking about making people uncomfortable by not using their chosen pronouns, i Certainly feel that this is ridiculous and it makes me less likely to speak out or engage with the most serious issues.

I actually think that a lot of these threads are started by people on the other side of the argument!

We wouldn't fire someone for being labelled a TERF. If they've written things online that wouldn't be a dismissal unless they were targeting an employee, customer or had done something to damage the companies reputation.