Rainbow badges at work - upset

[whatishappening123]

I work in a sector with vulnerable young people. A few years ago, we made the decision as a company to wear as part of our uniform, a name tag with the rainbow on as part of pledging our support to LGBT+
We have all received new name badges and for the first time ever- an option has been provided to have a red coloured one instead of the rainbow if staff 'do not agree with LGBT+'
I have raised this with HR and union and been told that staff are now allowed to choose and that is their right.
I feel really upset by this - colleagues I have known for years are now deciding against the rainbow badge.
We work with the most vulnerable- who are often LGBT. Some of our service users have asked staff directly why they are not using them- and they have lied saying " They'd run out , or the pin on the rainbow ones are crap, some staff are hiding the red ones.
It's not a majority by any means - it's probably about 11 staff in a staff of 60.
I just feel really really upset by it, but I can't quite put my finger on why.
I also don't understand how people can be 'against' LGBT
It's a protected characteristic.

🤣🤣🤣

It is definitely not been designed as an 'anti' option, it is just a neutral option, anything that is compulsory (like a name badge) should be free of affiliation in any way IMO, it's not the place for it, and no one should be forced to show support for something they may not 100% support, LGBT+ encompasses a lot and people may be happy to show their support for some but not personally believe in others so would prefer to opt out and show their support in others ways.. they shouldn't be accused of being phobic when that is not the reality.

I'm sure you could have an optional lanyard or pin badge for your generic name badge that shows your support instead and that is how it should be.

I would refuse. Who I support or not ( and yes I do support LGBT) is no one’s business but mine and should be kept out of the workspace. If you are going to wear rainbow badges then you need badges to support autistic members, members with cancer and the rest

The rainbow badges should never have been a thing. Not everyone supports it and there is nothing wrong with it.

Live and let live but don't inflict your beliefs on others. Labelling the red badges as anti is unfair. Why not just class them as alternative. (And get rid of the rainbow badges)

As someone others have said, I would refuse to wear it too. Personal/political beliefs, opinions etc don't belong in a professional work space.

LGBT isn’t a protected characteristic. If you don’t know that, I don’t see any reason why I should read any further to be honest.

On whites case I actually agree with you and I'm queer AF and about as bleeding heart liberal as it's possible to be. This was a total safeguarding failure by the prison service not actually following their safeguarding rules. Subsequently the safeguarding rules were updated by parliament. That's exactly why the specialist segregation unit was created and the supervision rules put in place, plus the stricter risk assessments.
Which is why we now have over 95% of trans women housed in the male estate.
In the modern prison system there is 0 unsupervised interaction between trans women and the rest of the population. Again you could argue that the seg unit should be in the male estate, but ultimately it's a prison within a prison and completely separate.
Your hyperbolic fantasy of trans women raping vulnerable women just cannot physically happen any more.
So why waste effort promoting that conspiracy theory and actually focus on the real problems of carceral exploitation and assault, both sexual and violent caused by the large minority of make officers?

Aspects of LGBT are protected characteristics, specifically sexual orientation and gender reassignment.

I work in HR and I would be concerned - staff made to wear a red sign which essentially points them out as declining to wear a rainbow pin could mean employers are in breach of the equality act. Religion and belief, including being gender critical and political opinions are also protected characteristics. Not wanting to wear a rainbow doesn’t mean that you are ‘against’ those beliefs, and the red pin could constitute harassment.

Do you have a separate badge type for each of the protected characteristics? Arguably, it is discriminatory to favour some over others.

Also LGBT+ is not a protected characteristic. Elements of it are, Gender Reassignment and Sexual Orientation but things like gender identity are not protected. In fact there is case law in the Court of Appeal that holds that non-binary is not a legally recognised concept at all (therefore it could not be a Protected Characteristic under the EA).

So your company has decided to show support for things that are not Protected Characteristics whilst offering no option for showing support for other PC like disability or sex. Did they undertake any form of survey of service users to ensure they weren’t creating a hostile environment for someone who held protected Gender Critical beliefs? What about disabled service users wasn’t a welcoming atmosphere important for them?

If you are providing a service to vulnerable people then scrupulous neutrality would be better. You should be providing an equally supportive environment irrespective of their Protected Characteristics or beliefs.

This. Wave your flags and support what you want in your own time.

Leave employees/colleagues out of it.

I would not wear a rainbow badge as I do not believe I need to advertise my personal beliefs at work. I wouldn't wear a cross so Christians feel safe or a hijab so Muslims feel safe or a yellow daffodil so cancer patients feel safe or a blue ribbon so Tories feel safe, etc..., etc... If I am employed in a job working with vulnerable and needy people, it should be a given that they are safe with me. If for some reason HR made a terrible mistake and they aren't safe with me, the rainbow badge isn't going to magically change that; it will simply, and very dangerously, present an illusion of safety.

Except "sexual orientation" IS a protected characteristic. So...

This has only been the case since the country raised holy hell over “Isla Bryson”.
We can’t rest on our laurels when men are claiming women’s rights.

Absolutely agree. I am very supportive of the LGB - not sure I’d wear a badge to ‘prove’ it though but the misogynistic TQ+ brigade can go swivel

I absolutely hate this sort of shit. It’s divisive not inclusive. It’s navel gazing, box ticking, virtue signalling ‘ooh look at me I’m #bekind’ perfunctory bollocks

New transgender prisoner policy comes into force - GOV.UK https://share.google/urJDUMvbcTxe1kTX9

In terms of numbers these were the 22/23 figures from here people with GRCs were excluded from the demographic breakdown but at the time there were 13 prisoners with a grc.

SN04334.pdf share.google/1xUuBNFjTkW8DoI8w

Prison Establishments and Gender Identity
80 of the 123 public and private prisons (65%) in England and Wales said that they had one or more transgender prisoners.
Of the 268 transgender prisoners: 48 were in female prisons, 5 self-identified as transgender female, 41 self-identified as transgender male. The remaining 2 self-identified as non-binary, in a different way, or did not provide a response. 220 were in male prisons, 198 self-identified as transgender female, 0 self-identified as transgender male. The remaining 22 self-identified as non-binary, in a different way, or did not provide a response.

Isn’t it a bit like poppies? I wear one and I am a bit baffled by those that don’t but I don’t care that they don’t. It’s wrong to force someone to wear a poppy and it’s wrong to force someone to wear a rainbow.

I don’t support the T part of LGBT so I wouldn’t wear a rainbow lanyard.

This.

Can employers make wearing symbols of affiliation to causes other than the employer themselves compulsory?

Perhaps they can but I don't think so - I remember a school I worked in many years ago trying to make poppy wearing compulsory for the week and banning the white poppies, but being forced (with poor grace) to back down on that.

It’s not to say ‘they don’t agree’. It’s simply an alternative.

@Bobbingtons

“Your hyperbolic fantasy of trans women raping vulnerable women physically can not happen now”

Yes. “Now” in prisons it can’t because women stood up to this nonsense but it was happening.

Just like it is still possible in other places women are vulnerable like hospital wards and refuges.

Do you think trans men should be placed in men’s hostels etc?

The segregated unit was set up because women campaigned.

You are missing the whole point.

i also wouldn’t wear one and I work for a company where we have people in that community that come in; my beliefs are my own and I don’t fancy getting into an argument or conversation with someone else over wearing a poxy badge or pin.

What about the violent men in the Scottish female estate? Also rather odd to talk about an actual case a man raping women as a ‘hyperbolic fantasy’ - are you projecting? 🤢

It’s ridiculous that you were made to wear a rainbow badge in the first place. As others have said can’t stand this virtue signaling nonsense and I would choose the red badge for that reason, if I didn’t think it would come back to bite me career wise. It’s the same as all the she/her/hers pronouns nonsense, 99% of people think it’s ridiculous but felt forced into doing it the last few years lest they be accused of not being an ally, not being supportive of DEI etc. Thankfully the tide is now turning and we can all hopefully get on with actual work at work and keep our beliefs private. I have many many gay friends (and colleagues) and couldn’t really care less about my colleagues sexuality but I do object to having to show support for it at work.

How unimaginative.

We live (thank goodness) in a diverse world where everyone is a complex mix of characteristics, some actively chosen, many not. Many things, e.g. living together unmarried, would have been unacceptable 50 years ago and we rightly look back and think that was very narrow minded.

It might be difficult to get your head around someone being non-binary if you have a strong ID as a man or a woman. But just because you haven't experienced something, and don't have the empathy to be able to imagine it it doesn't mean it's ridiculous.

Tiffany Louise Scott[1] (1991/92 – 29 February 2024), born Andrew Burns, was a Scottish sex offender who was subject to an Order for Lifelong Restriction after admitting to stalking a 13-year-old girl by sending her letters while serving time in prison. Scott later identified as female while in prison and then applied successfully to be transferred from a men's to a women's prison.