Civil Service Trans policy - what can I do?

[DoxxMeTwice]

Following an awful "workplace inclusion" meeting today I was prompted to check out my work policy for Trans (link below).

I work for the Civil Service ( name changed, as I was previously doxed and can't risk it here).

Page 31 is particularly bad, I feel like it implies that any woman who objects to sharing single sex facilities will be disciplined for being discriminatory.

This policy is clearly being put into practice as during my meeting today it was discussed that a Trans Woman was left hurt and embarrassed recently after a woman did an immediate u-turn out of the toilets when she saw them. It was stated as a gentle warning to others to consider trans feelings.

The woman's feelings were not considered at all, though I expect she has probably since been vilified in her local office!

Does anyone have any real life examples of policies like this being successfully challenged by using EHRC/Equalities act??

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachmentdata/file/503663/WorkplaceeGuideCSEPPrevisedFinallV1.pdf

Trousering can you let us know if / when you incur any costs please as there are lots of us who really want to contribute. Thanks again for what you are doing!

I'll also contribute, do let us know.

Yup. Completely agree.

Inadvertently endorsing sexual harassment at work with these policies is a massive risk. It has to be dealt with. Organisations don't act until they are under threat so I made it clear women and men were getting ready to act on this.

Good work Trousering. Excellent stuff.

From the OP I find this particularly chilling:

a Trans Woman was left hurt and embarrassed recently after a woman did an immediate u-turn out of the toilets when she saw them. It was stated as a gentle warning to others to consider trans feelings.

This is assuming that the TW reading of the situation is correct. Can the TW mind-read? There are dozens of other reasons a women could do a u-turn out of the toilets, so not only are womens' feelings about sharing toilets with male bodies irrelevant but also they are just automatically taking the TW assumption about what that woman was thinking as truth.

Maybe she went to the loo to change a pad/tampon but remembered that she didn't have any on her. Maybe the toilet smelled bad and she wanted to use another. Maybe she was pregnant and wanted to be sick but didn't want to go into a toilet with anyone else there (or wanted to go into one that didn't smell bad). Maybe she was having a forgetful moment and started walking to the loo whilst thinking of something else automatically and didn't actually want to be there at all and only realised when she went in (this happens to me a lot since kids and my mental load increasing / sleep decreasing). There are lots of OTHER reasons for someone behaving like that and yet she's assumed to be in the wrong and chastised without anyone even asking her.

It's all about the TW all the time, so different to how actual women are treated. It is utterly, utterly terrifying. If this happened somewhere I worked I'd be very tempted to self ID as a man and use the mens. At least that way you're not with those who have clearly stated they don't give a shit about womens' boundaries. And yes, it would force me into the position of not caring about mens' boundaries. But they'd all be bigger and stronger than me, and I'd be happy to expand on why I felt forced into that position.

Or maybe she just didn't want to use the loo in the presence of a male. Which is perfectly ok.

I've said it before and I will say it again. The diversity and inclusion teams in HR are a world of their own. They don't engage in the sharp end of managing tribunals and disciplinaries and we ignore them most of the time. This has gone through with no one taking much notice. I'm explaining this legal mess to men in HR who have no idea this is the case. The dots have not been joined up. They will dump a policy that they are told breaks the law and is promoting and endorsing sexual harassment if we shake a big stick at them.

Well, yes I agree, but what I wanted to point out is how the TW narrative of being 'hurt' without even knowing what the woman was thinking is the only perspective that seems to matter. The TW gets to decide why that woman acted that way, not the woman herself.

Massive thanks Trousering

It's the perspective from which trans policies have been written.

Once the legal conflict is pointed out to people used to taking both sides of a conflict into account then the problems are obvious and the rights have to be balanced. Gender identity is not a protected characteristic, all the policy's being introduced have been put in place on the assumption that it is. The sexual nature of cross dressing has been obscured by the use of the phrase gender identity but its still there, and it is unwanted conduct of a sexual nature. Have a look at the sexual harassment pages on acas. Org. UK.

This is deliberate obfuscation as we know but it is all quite simple really.

This is great, Trousering, thank you.

Count me in for any crowd funding.

I’d be happy to contribute as well

Me too.

Interesting Trousering

Although also many issues with 'meaningful transition'.

This is the way the GRA will most likely go: all freedoms to women's facilities limited to GRC holders (no to self ID), BUT getting a GRC will be made something casually achievable with very little gatekeeping by anyone who feels so inclined, regardless of their reasons.

End of women's single sex spaces or women's right to privacy, dignity and freedom to undress or toilet apart from any male who wishes to be with them.

No. The floodgates have been opened, it's been demonstrated that 'any' males allowed to use women's spaces just descends into a battle of how far that window can be pushed. Women have a right to single sex spaces without sacrificing this to validate the chosen identity of males, and it is impossible to change sex. Third spaces please.

Pleased to see the declaration today. I have used that in a follow up email.

link here:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3527477-Declaration-on-Womens-Sex-Based-Rights-IWD2019

Me too, Trousering count me in for crowd funding

Hi all

The lovely Trousering, who I am in contact with off the board and is not on MN now, has asked me to post an update.

She has just heard back from the director of diversity and inclusion at the Russell group uni she mentioned, that in response to the email they are changing policies back to gender reassignment and sex. This was received civilly and uncontroversially with recognition of the conflict.

So that's a win.

She says she is not leaving it there as they have skirted round the harassment issue she raised. She will be pressing them further on this, including letting them know of the QC opinion upthread, and will update again.

She also says that there is no detriment to her for raising this and so she suggests we should be brave and try to speak up at work.

Excellent. That's quite a result.

That's great news, thanks for passing it on Eresh.

That's very good to hear! Thanks Eresh. And to Trousering. Brave lady, and she inspired me to write to MP again, sharing the policy conflicts with him. So far he's hiding under his desk again, but he can't say he wasn't told.

News:
www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-workplace-and-gender-reassignment/the-workplace-and-gender-reassignment

Civil Service

Guidance
The Workplace and Gender Reassignment
Updated 21 March 2019

The Workplace and Gender Reassignment, published by a:gender, the cross government network for trans, intersex and non binary civil servants, has provided invaluable guidance to departments since 2011.It was revised in 2016, and now requires further revision to bring it up to date and broaden the scope. Therefore, it has been removed from this page.

Civil Service HR Employee Policy, working closely with a:gender and others, will shortly be publishing a Gender Identity and Intersex Model Policy Package, to provide information, guidance and support to government Departments in relation to gender identity issues for civil servants and their managers, including issues connected with gender reassignment.

This package will be available through departmental HR departments. In the meantime, for further information and advice, contact a:gender:[email protected]

Gender identity is a completely different thing from Intersex. As I understand it, intersex representation groups have asked to be kept out of transideology, because transideology has nothing to do with disorders of sex development.

So why is the Civil Service conflating them deliberately, and producing a "Gender Identity and Intersex Model Policy Package"?

I mean, what the fuck? This seems deliberately provocative.

If I had a DSD I imagine I'd be fairly private about it. Certainly at work. I wouldn't be announcing it on any forms requiring me to tick a box marked sex gender. I probably wouldn't tell anyone unless there was a good reason to do so eg for medical/ time off work reasons. And I'd be very pissed off at being lumped in with trans for policy matters. They could fuck off with that.

They are including men who change roles for erotics factors in the group of people they are giving permission to use facilities of their choice quite explicitly here aren't they? So condoning the erotic and sexualised behaviour at work. Definitely a a conflict with a sexual harassment policy.

Quite. Implementing legally-sanctionedsrlf-ID for such a broadly defined transgender population would provide sexually-motivated cross fressers legal cover to practise their fetish in the presence of unconsenting women and minor children. Unacceptable.