Consultation of Equality Act enforcement open : Womens' and Equality Committee

[theOtherPamAyres]

"We've heard that enforcement of the Equality Act isn't working. Today we're launching an inquiry to find out why not and what needs to change. If you have information that can help us answer these questions, you can find out more and submit evidence here:

www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/women-and-equalities-committee/news-parliament-2017/enforcing-the-equality-act-launch-17-19/

Sounds like the City of London and other councils need to examine their policies of gender identity's primacy.

Hoorah

But there are things like the genuine occupational requirement that allow blanket policies such as Scottish Women's Aid only ever hiring female staff, and it's also possible for the NHS to provide female only care, like for eg to women requesting it for things like smear tests. The exemptions don't always require a case by case assessment. But yes, there are huge issues with the fact that the sex based exemptions are very difficult to implement. As someone else said, there is no balancing of needs anymore, and this needs to change,. And clear guidance should be written up on implementing the exemptions, so that they can be implemented without having to have a law degree.

Agree with those two needs, leyat. On another thread we identified a need for a Transgender Trend style pack for employers explaining how needs could potentially be balanced.

Thanks Pencils !

It seems logical that the councils that were advised their EA policies were fraudulent and in violation of the EA contacted the commission to get the correct documents and policies.

Is sarah ar implying that the removal of sex as a protected characteristic in the EA has something to do with transgenders?
Other than that one who bragged that they had done it?

Ereshkigal our group is currently working on proposals we will be putting to the Scottish govt in about a month's time. We will be making proposals re actions to take in improving the Equality Act, and hopefully people would find it useful in relation to the GRA consultation and this inquiry re EA enforcement. The inquiry doesn't close till October, I would advise everyone to respond as late as possible as it gives you the best chance of having the best info basically. Our work will be posted publicly before then and perhaps others' will as well. We will probably try to post what we think would be useful to raise too, and again I imagine others will too....

Thank you pencils

....In addition they felt their new guidance to both employers and service providers written by Gendered Intelligence would help with informing them of their responsibilities*

@Erishkigal I've just spotted this. I didn't pick up before that the Government had commissioned GI to write guidance on the Equality Act. (I'll have to get hold of a copy)

Perhaps all those councils, police forces, NHS Trusts and businesses replaced 'sex' with 'gender' because the government said it was OK.

In which case, we have a mountain to climb to roll back government-backed practice and I feel sick.

Bump. This is another consultation to fill in! Deadline 5th Oct.

Thanks qumquat! Had forgotten about this.

Does anyone know if there is any guidance from FPFW or anywhere else on how to fill it?

Here it is theOtherPam:

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/484857/Providing_services_for_transgender_customers-a_guide.pdf

Interesting document

Starts out by saying that sex is biologial and gender is social.

Then goes on to say contradictory stuff like:

1. Try not to assume someone’s gender simply by their appearance.
2. Consider whether you need to ask someone’s gender.

So if 2 is true, then 3 needs to be reworded to say "You always need to ask for everyone's gender, as their appearance may not affect their gender". However, this will not work, as lots of transpeople will be insulted if a service provider asks their gender...

While there are some clear instances where you need to collect gender data, such as to prevent sex discrimination. (?????????)

"A sports centre believed that no trans people attended the centre as last time a
monitoring exercise was carried out, nobody ticked the ‘transgender’ box on the form
under ‘sexuality’. When the exercise was repeated with improved questions correctly
located under ‘gender’, the trans people using the centre could see the centre had
developed greater understanding and felt comfortable to disclose that they were trans."

That made me lol :D

"Nope I'm NOT going to answer their question because they dont' understand me properly. Even though by not answering it properly it reduces my chances that they will cater to my group"

That's 6 year old nose / face logic :D

"A trans person should be free to select the facilities (such as toilets or changing rooms)
appropriate to the gender in which they present"

This is wholly transphobic and out of date with what activists want, and what is happening in real life.
In real life, how a person "presents" ie what gendered clothes they wear or if they have a beard or so forth is irrelevant to gender ID and therefore what facilities can be used.

"[Some staff] have actually shouted, "Women's are over there" or come up to me and practically tried to escort me to a different department!”

Complained giant beardy Dave,

"I was just having a piss in the sink and they told me I had to leave!".

"“There was a pub in the West End where all my buddies used to drink… There was only
one stall in the men’s room and it was missing its door. Drinking beer and not being able
to [go to the toilet]… meant this particular pub was off-limits to me.”

I've been to loads of pubs with no locks on doors / holes in doors / even one where the doors went missing until there were none left in the ladies at all!

This feels like an odd complaint? I'd say if you don't like the state of the bogs, in general, drink somewhere else.
It never occured to me to complain about this sort of thing!

"“I have experienced absolutely no problems with a gym which I went to for several years

• this included the communal changing and showering area (obviously segregated into

the traditional binary [male and female])."

In government guidance as an example of good practice.

The government has explcitly handed out guidance saying that males who may or may not have a GRC (not allowed to ask) and in any case GRC does not need surgery so definitely full on cock n balls

SHOULD be allowed in fact encouraged to use communcal women's and girls changing and showering facilities.

OK well fuck that.

"In recent years, legislation has been introduced to recognise a person’s right to determine their own gender"

SELF ID

This is stated as a breach of the equality act
Note the previous point refers to people "determining their own gender"

"Refusing to allow a woman to use female facilities because staff perceive her to be male"

SO
This is why men have been so confident in insisting on (and gaining access to) places lie top shop changing rooms, communal changing and showers and so on.

Reading on...

"As a service provider, in most practical situations, it is not appropriate to treat a person without a GRC differently from one with a GRC."

And in fact you're not allowed to ask.

The law is firmly on the side of allowing giant beardy dave (and possibly his mates if they're out on the piss for eg) going into any and all women / girl only faciltiies.

And there's nothing anyone can do about it unless / until they actually attack someone. There are no laws against being creepy as fuck, wandering around naked in a communal changing area, standing way too close to poeple, followign them, saying odd stuff to them, staring, and the million other things creepy men do to upset / intimidate / scare women that are just this side of the law.

So there we have it. All of this - is in black and white in government guidance. Men must allowed to be able to do whatever they want. Women and girls must not challenge them, or expect any support from service prviders. If they don't like it, they can go somewhere else (or stay at home).

The conflicts with other protected characteristics are apparently irrelevant (religion for eg).

Which is what the girl guides said. In a conflict between teh rigth of religious girls to attend, adn transgirls, we choose the transgirls, teh religious girls should leave.

Note they have a broad definition of trans

"Trans people come from all walks of life and include those who may describe themselves as transsexual, transgender, a cross-dresser (transvestite), non-binary and anyone else who may not conform to traditional gender roles".

Non binary people often present as standard men but still are entitled to use any and all facilities for women & girls.

What a total shitshow.

I've been in correspondence with the consultation team about whether we can submit anonymous responses to this, because the website asks for full name and then says 'If your submission is confidential and you do not want it published please explain your reasons in the Additional information. Most written submissions are published on the website.

There's no 'publish anonymously' option like there is with the GRA one.

After a bit of back and forth I've had the following response -

Dear xxxx,

I am the inquiry manager for the Committee’s inquiry into enforcing the Equality Act. I believe that my colleague may have already provided you with basic information on our rules on confidentiality, but I wanted to contact you myself to make sure.

I apologise that the wording on our website is not entirely clear. There are a number of different options available to us in handling submission on sensitive areas or where the person submitting has reason not to want to be identified, and we tend to identify the most appropriate option on a case-by-case basis considering the content, context and the wishes of the person. We can agree for a submission to be anonymized when it is published – redacting the person’s name and any other identifying features, but still publishing the substance of the submission. We can, where appropriate, accept a submission but not publish it but to be honest this tends to be the exception rather than the rule as the default position is to be as open as possible about the evidence on which an inquiry and any report is based.

If you still wish to submit evidence but would want any published version to have your name removed please let me know and we will consider that request. I can also assure you that we would not publish anything with your name attached against your wishes.

I hope this is clearer.
Yours
xxxx

--------

So I think we should be fine saying 'please publish anonymously' in the additional information box.

All this confusion just makes me feel that the Government has to repeal the GRA, the legal fiction that a man can become a woman.
Women’s sex segregated spaces have to be for women & girls, NOT someone who ‘feelz like a girl’
Women have to be able to ask a man to leave their women’s only spaces.
Feel a bit sick we have a female PM & this bs is happening.

We've got just less than 2 weeks to do this one.

A few initial thoughts on some of the questions:

How easy it is for people to understand and enforce their rights under the Equality Act

Not at all easy to understand:

• Huge piece of legislation replacing several older acts.
• Spaghetti law in places.
• Impossible for lay people to navigate so very reliant on guidance.
• local authorities and other orgs INCLUDING THE EHRC replacing sex with gender
• EHRC statutory code written under pressure from trans orgs makes sex based exceptions impossible to use because 'case by case'
• 'guidance' written by trans pressure groups seriously misinforms & fails to even mention sex based exceptions

Very difficult to enforce:

• fear of victimisation
• lack of access to legal advice and representation/advocacy.
• Legal aid cut to the bone.
• Unions have just voted unanimously for self-ID

How effective and accessible tribunals and other legal means of redress under the Equality Act are, and what changes would improve those processes

• legal aid cuts
• short time limits on tribunals

Whether changes are needed to the Commission’s approach to using its enforcement powers as set out in its policies (such as the strategic litigation policy and compliance and enforcement policy) or as implemented in practice, and the way it identifies and selects legal cases to lead or support;

• EHRC has done lots of strategic litigation to clarify the conflict of rights between religious belief and sexual orientation. They've done nothing to clarify the conflict between sex and gender reassignment. We have almost no case law. That's why everyone still drags up that post office case from decades ago.

• They need to bring cases on the sex based exceptions from the side of women's orgs to see whether it's actually possible to use the sex based exceptions. If successful we have case law we can point at. If unsuccessful we will have very clear evidence that our rights exist only on paper.

• They've done very little for sex based rights at all, or for pregnancy and maternity rights (this is a separate protected characteristic). We've had some shocking recent govt reports on sexual harassment & abuse of girls in school and on pregnancy & maternity discimination in the workplace. Women's Aid and Rape Crisis have had to crowdfund a legal challenge on the 2 child benefit limit (rape clause). Jenifer James has had to crowdfund a legal challenge to labour's AWS self-ID policy (which has huge implications for the PC of sex throughout the EA) Why aren't EHRC doing anything for women?

• EHRC are currently busy suing the NHS over trans people's fertility rights which is a) a sledgehammer and b) futile because fertility treatment on the NHS is shit or non-existent for everyone because no money.

I don't know much about the EHRC's enforcement role beyond strategic litigation. I'll do some research tomorrow and also come back with some links and further thoughts.