We need to think about the pressures that front line service staff are under, in all fields. Probably lots of people reading this are in exactly this position.
These are generally low paid jobs with poorsecurity. Employees have been sent on the 'training' courses and have been told things so insane it just made their brains lock up. They are then handed a policy to implement which tells them that it's ILLEGAL to exclude a male person who says 'I am a woman' from the female changing room.
What are they going to do?
Probably the vast majority know that it's wrong. They also know that if they start being awkward they just won't be given shifts, or fault will be found with their work and they'll be dismissed.
Section 111 of the EA says that it's prohibited conduct to instruct, cause or induce someone to discriminate against, harass or victimise another person.
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/111
Both the customer/potential customer and the front line staff member, who has been given the unlawful policy and told to follow it, have a claim against the employer/service provider, if they have suffered a detriment.
Some employment rights don't apply until you've been in a job for 2 years. You can bring an EA case from day 1 of employment or even before, during the recruitment process.
The example in the explanatory notes says:
A GP instructs his receptionist not to register anyone with an Asian name. The receptionist would have a claim against the GP if subjected to a detriment for not doing so. A potential patient would also have a claim against the GP if she discovered the instruction had been given and was put off applying to register. The receptionist’s claim against the GP would be brought before the employment tribunal as it relates to employment, while the potential patient’s claim would be brought in the county court as it relates to services.
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/8/4
Center Parcs instructs its staff to allow male people who say 'I am a woman' into open plan female changing rooms. The staff members would have a claim against Center Parcs if subjected to a detriment for not doing so. A potential customer would also have a claim against Center Parcs if she discovered the instruction had been given and was put off booking a holiday. The staff members' claims against Center Parcs would be brought before the employment tribunal as they relate to employment, while the potential customer’s claim would be brought in the county court as it relates to services.