Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Remploy's equal opportunities policy excludes sex as a protected characteristic

27 replies

RussellSprout · 16/04/2019 08:31

I went on a course with Remploy yesterday.

They seem to have completely excluded sex from their equal opportunities policy.

This is the policy

Remploy has an Equal Opportunities Policy to ensure all employees and customers are treated equitably and as individuals regardless of colour, race, nationality, ethnic or national origin, religion, political belief, social or economic class, marital or parental status, gender, sexual orientation, age or disability

Is this normal now? Is this the erasure of sex based protection?

I'm half hoping some numpty has just confused sex and gender and is using the terms interchangeably but surely this means that eventually any sex based differences between men and women are excluded from protection on the basis that a man who feels like a woman is a woman and doesn't have the sex based difference, therefore there is no difference between women and men?

Surely the whole point of sex based protection is on the fact that male bodies and female bodies are different in the first place and female bodied people have historically needed protection/faced discrimination because of those differences particularly in the world of work which Remploy seeks to address inequality and help disadvantaged people back into work?

Grrrr, I don't want to be lumped in with male bodied people when it comes to protection from discrimination, whether they identify as a woman or not!

OP posts:
AlwaysTawnyOwl · 17/04/2019 13:28

They can’t just change the protected characteristics like this. This must be challenged.

R0wantrees · 17/04/2019 14:21

They can’t just change the protected characteristics like this. This must be challenged.

Its interesting to realise/recognise how effective the smearing of those who are simply standing up for sex-based rights has been.
It shouldn't feel contentious to point out an error in quoting legislation.
If another of the protected characteristics was been wrongly quoted would it cause so much hesitation before pointing it out?
It is in every public service, charity, business and organisation's interest that their diversity & equality policies are based on actual law.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread