Transwoman awarded £9k for sex discrimination

[jadefinch]

A transwoman has been awarded £9k after claiming they failed to get a job at Debenhams because they're trans (and used sex discrimination legislation!).

The only evidence they had of discrimination was an 'anonymous email'.

Their story doesn't make much sense - who asks to see a birth certificate at an interview? Other comments they've given to the media about people in a canteen gawping seem to contradict their claim that there was no transphobia during the interview, and Debenhams paid on the basis that they accept 'no liability'.

There's also claims on Facebook that this person was recently caught on CCTV stealing.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7894413/Transgender-woman-Ava-Moore-Newry-Northern-Ireland-gets-9-000-settlement-Debenhams.html

I have had to provide birth certificate, passport, proof of address and qualifications at interview for years. It's to ensure that you are eligible to work and that you are who you say you are and have the quals you say you do. Very normal.

I saw the bbc article and decided there must be more to the story.

I have never once had to present my birth certificate for a job application.
Passport yes.
That's it.

I've worked for very well known financial corps and when younger, in retail. It would be very unusual to have to present your birth certificate on too of other ID.

The only reason HR would ever ask for that much ID would be if they do not believe you are who you say you are and they need more evidence. Which is fair enough.

Looks like if you're a known shoplifter and denied a job on that basis, all you need to do is cry "trans" to gain a years wages from a woke company.

Same here - passport only, never birth certificate (and think anyone's ever asked for proof of qualifications unless I needed a visa either)

I don't even know where my birth certificate is! I'd have to order a new one if someone actually wanted to see it.

Something bizarre going on if they asked to see it.

Unless I'm mistaken, Debenhams settled to avoid court, right? There was no ruling or award for discrimination.

She wasn't awarded anything, Debenhams paid a settlement to her. Completely different things. Also what does her stealing have to do with an employment law dispute?

I meant to say alleged stealing, apologies.

Ah I'm obviously mistaken. I've certainly been asked for two forms of ID, one photo ID. I've just taken my BC.

I worked for the NHS and one of my colleagues had to move heaven and earth to find her GCSE certificates before they would confirm her job. Apparently her degree certificate wasn't enough. Absolutely bloody ridiculous, the rules were ludicrous.

Companies already give in to trans demands to use women’s changing rooms and toilets. That must cost money, in terms of annoying the female customers who provide most of their income.

Interesting to see that they are intimidated enough to hand over large sums of money to avoid accusations of transphobia.

I'd say the alleged stealing is relevant as it suggests this person is dishonest when it comes to trying to get money

There's something wrong with the story. If they sued for sex discrimination then their trans status would be irrelevant surely? They would have been discriminated against because of their gender identity.

And of course it is quite possible that there was no discrimination at all and Debenhams just settled because it was easier (although I'm surprised they didn't require an NDA)

Plenty of interviews I've had have requested the following- Proof of eligibility to work in the UK in the form of a valid passport (Front Cover & photo page) or full British Birth Certificate or Full UK Adoption Certificate
· Proof your National Insurance Number, i.e. payslip, P60 or P4

I've also had interviews where I felt I had done brilliantly but didn't get the job

Strange

You need to change the title.
the transwoman settled a claim for £9000 that might have failed at tribunal

I suppose it is possible that there was discrimination here or they are not 100% sure that there wasn’t. Defending a case like this would cost them thousands and even if they win they may not get the money back. Plus all the negative associated press. £9000 is not much really when you see the costs associated with Maya’s case for example.

There is something strange about the birth certificate story though. I saw an interview with this person and they are so obviously a trans woman the interviewer would not have needed a birth certificate to realise this.

Ava Moore is the name of a TV character. This woman chose a weird name if she knew about the character.

wikipedia link

Doesn't surprise me. The local barber was sued last year.
www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/dublin-barber-fined-5-000-in-transgender-discrimination-case-1.3577517

Can I be a dissenting voice here? If Debenham's rejected the transwoman's employment application because the transwoman was trans, then they have engaged in discrimination in employment and should agree a settlement. I think this is a sensible use of discrimination law, as the discrimination stopped someone getting a job which they may otherwise have been appointed to. This is, I think, what the 'gender reassignment' provisions of the Equality Act were intended to protect against.

This situation is very different from one in which a transwoman claims discrimination when they are not considered for a job which is reserved for women, such as rape crisis counsellor for women. Reserving those jobs for women is incredibly important in protecting single sex spaces. As I understand it, reserving these jobs for women is considered a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, and so doesn't break discrimination law, despite the TRA propaganda.

I agree Lukewarm, if this applicant was rejected because they were trans, that would be discrimination. But perhaps the interview panel thought another candidate was a better fit for the team, had more relevant and/or recent experience etc? We just don't know. I'm damn sure Debenhams didn't reject the candidate due to their protected status - they would have to be really stupid to do that, and most people are actually really stupid.

Missing the point but.... the pub has CCTV in the ladies toilets?

*aren't

Aargh!

But they have no idea if they were rejected for being trans. They claim to have an anonymous email but that's all. They have no idea how the other candidates performed, if they had more experience or anything like that. And the Equality Act does not cover N Ireland, although there is different legislation in place.

Recruitment here is so rigid. Everything is meant to be advertised, and you are meant to meet every single one of the essential criteria to be called to interview. You can't just talk your way into a job and bag it with your enthusiasm. Large employers like Debenhams are expected to adhere to very strict recruitment practices, and generally they do. If you read up on recruitment discrimination cases here it's very rare to see a large employer implicated because they all have HR people who know the law. It's usually small companies who get it wrong. I'd be amazed if Debenhams didn't follow the same practice as all the other big companies.

Missing the point but.... the pub has CCTV in the ladies toilets?

No, the CCTV was in the pub, the thief was seen taking the purse from under the table. The missing purse then was found in the ladies toilets.

Yes, quite isobelle

*isabelle
*
Sorry, fat fingers today