My workplace has been Stonewalled. Completely new policy released. If anyone objects to sharing facilities with a transgender individual of the opposite sex, they will be the ones asked to move.

[iexpectedthis]

I am considering posting the paragraph in question, but its obviously a bit outing as it's a massive corporation.

It talks about being sent to use facilities on another floor if you object, so I am sure they are thinking about their massive offices in London.

I don't feel it will affect me personally on a day to day basis, but I am feeling down on reading the whole policy full of assigned at birth and stereotypes.

I could see this coming as we have had a lot of Stonewall input on diversity days, presentations in London offices featuring Pip Bunce and visits from Scottish trans groups to educate us.

Just a bit of a vent and asking for any thoughts on whether/how to question or challenge this :(

When the home office introduced gender neutral toilets, women refused to use them. That is the reality. www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6065075/Female-Home-Office-employees-refusing-use-new-36-000-gender-neutral-toilets.html

One approach would be not to challenge the whole identity thing (frustrating I know but at least it avoids the risk of being 'labelled') but ask how these changes are going to operate in practice.

Ask lots of awkward questions about the practicalities. It sounds as if there are a variety of workplaces (production sites, London office, regional offices?) which will have very different set-ups.

What about workplaces with insufficient facilities to have both mixed sex and single sex toilets easily accessible to employees? All employees? Every part of the site? Close enough for every employee to reach within designated break times?

What about toilets with urinals? They can't be designated mixed sex.

What about the availability of sanitary bins in all cubicles which may be used by women?

Is the workforce predominantly male or female, OP? That might make a difference to its impact.

Ours are certainly not unisex by name and it looks like that is not planned.

@iexpectedthis

Ours are certainly not unisex by name and it looks like that is not planned.

So how does the company expect employees who object to know which facilities they are supposed to use if none of the signage is changing?

There is quite a mix of sexes, although certain roles are about 98% men and the production lines have a high % of women.

So it would impact different areas differently or some not at all.

It will be difficult to show that i absolutely support being inclusive but feel that the policy excludes people who do not believe in gender identity.

That annoying term 'gender neutral' is an oxymoron if ever I saw one. Gender is about as far removed from neutral as it's possible to be. It's the key reason feminists have objected to gender, its constraints, stereotypes, silly pinkification and all the politicised BS that goes along with it since about the year dot.

A PP is right to suggest most decent men don't want to share: my DH for one is very uncomfortable with the idea and questioned what kind of man would be clamouring his way into female-only facilities in any event. This isn't about inclusivity, but (yet again) the exclusion of women. I've yet to see a satisfactory explanation as to why it's always women's loos that are converted into 'gender neutral' spaces but the men get to keep their own, but if that isn't an assertion of masculine dominance then I'm the next Janis Joplin.

The likes of Stonewall and Mermaids have no business coming into any place of employment and conducting 'training' of any kind, There are laws in place to protect people from discrimination on account of their sex or sexuality. There is union representation and an HR department if any employee believes those laws haven't been adequately adhered to. I know this process works having personally used it (sexual harrassment and sex discrimination). It's sufficient. But it also scores fewer woke points.

NB. I say this as one whose employer is up to its nuts in Wokeism and probably next in line to adopt these repulsive policies. Watch this space. (Gender neutral space, no doubt ...)

As others have said ask for the input assessment and check carefully the areas on sex, disability and religion and belief. If they have not collected enough evidence in these areas they can be challenged.

Op, I would get a large number of female colleagues together, state collectively that you identify as men on say, Wednesdays - you can quote Philip/Pippa Bunce, who changes gender through the week and was given a Women in Business award - then all of you invade the men’s loos while senior managers are in there. Engage them in conversation while they urinate, tell them how fabulous the new arrangements are, that you feel so comfortable in the men’s spaces, etc. Tell them how brave and woke the company is being, risking lawsuits for excluding Muslim and Orthodox Jewish women from their own toilets in order to please trans rights activists. Make them every bit as fucking uncomfortable and stressed as women are when confronted with male sexed bodies in women’s toilets.
I think there might be a rapid reassessment of the policy, as soon as men are inconvenienced by it - they don’t give a shit (pun intended) if only women suffer.

As I understand it, the Stonewall recommendations aren't really in line with the law. I'd be asking why they are choosing the former over the latter.

@Babdoc

Op, I would get a large number of female colleagues together, state collectively that you identify as men on say, Wednesdays - you can quote Philip/Pippa Bunce, who changes gender through the week and was given a Women in Business award - then all of you invade the men’s loos while senior managers are in there. Engage them in conversation while they urinate, tell them how fabulous the new arrangements are, that you feel so comfortable in the men’s spaces, etc. Tell them how brave and woke the company is being, risking lawsuits for excluding Muslim and Orthodox Jewish women from their own toilets in order to please trans rights activists. Make them every bit as fucking uncomfortable and stressed as women are when confronted with male sexed bodies in women’s toilets. I think there might be a rapid reassessment of the policy, as soon as men are inconvenienced by it - they don’t give a shit (pun intended) if only women suffer.

Yes. This.

I'm confused by what the proposals actually are.

Is the company retaining the current male/female toilet signage, saying transgender people can use whichever toilet they like but if any other employee is not comfortable with that, then they must notify the company and will be directed to another set of facilities in the building thereafter?

Is this their cackhanded (pun also intended) way of saying it's OK, we're making provision for people who may have objections on grounds of, for example, religion?

But it doesn't make sense unless they actually do have designated single sex toilets they can direct people to.

Presumably yours is a very white industry OP with no women of faith working there who would be unable to share toilets with men?

It just goes to show how little organisations are genuinely committed to diversity. After many years working to ensure that marginalised groups of women from a variety of BAME backgrounds were able to access education, sport and the workplace, their needs are suddenly tossed aside in favour of the demands of a predominantly white male led group. Unbelievable.

How about:

"Gender neutral. OK, so we are not talking about gender.

What's the sex-based provision for those with this protected characteristic? That's men and women, so we all have an interest"

From what I can gather it's new Gender Identity and Expression Guidelines (so not actually a policy), but it provides a way to formally change your gender markers and request support from the company.

Locker, changing and toilet facilities will not change, but if an employee has a concern about sharing with a transgender individual they will need to talk to the manager or HR.

"Ultimately, co-workers uncomfortable with sharing a restroom with a transgender individual should be the ones asked to travel to a different floor or work area to use the facilities (do not ask the transgender person to go out of their way). "

That does seem discriminatory to the individual with a concern.

persistentwoman I'm not sure if it's a very white industry, it is here just due to local demographics. But there are premises in a lot of different areas of the UK that this will apply to.

OP, from your update, it seems that the policy simply has no legal basis:

• Gender identity has no legal basis/protections. Doesn't exist.

• Gender expression. See above.

If women (or men) are expected to move because there's a policy which is rooted in unlawful policy, then presumably the company has no way of enforcing it.

So how will they make sure they don't do something not permitted by the law? That's the question.

FWIW, I've worked with a trans woman and this simply never ever came up. She used the ladies' loo and we all worked well together like people do, day in, day out.

Somehow - somehow - we all managed this without the interference of lobby groups misrepresenting the law.

So you could end up with transgender individuals on every floor? Then what?

Will all the toilets have sanitary bins in , so that transmen are fully supported or will they be expected to use the ladies at those times ?

The guidelines sound like they do not comply with the law which, in England and Wales require companies to provide single sex toiled facilities for employees. Not sure if there is an obligation to provide a certain ratio of facilities:staff numbers or not. (Some caveats- transgendered people with a GRC, but not those who have not gone through the whole GRC process, could legally be allowed to use the toilet of the sex they had transitioned to. Unisex toilet facilities could be provided as well as single sex or instead if they are in lockable cubicles with floor to ceiling walls and doors).

So if they are providing unisex facilities on one floor and single sex on the next, they would probably be in line with obligations. If they are saying trans people can use facilities of their choice on any floor they probably aren’t as there would be nothing in company policy stopping a transwoman coming into that toilet while you were in there.

I don’t think a case has been brought against a company on this basis yet, but you could try asking how they are meeting their obligation to provide single sex toilet facilities (you’d probably need to find the law and quote it). Maybe with a starting line about how you are so glad they are increasing their diversity efforts To include sex and you just want to make sure they aren’t forgetting their obligations on the basis of sex while they do so.

I don’t believe private companies are obliged to do equality impact assessments, so I don’t think that route would have as much legal weight.

Oops. That should say :
so glad they are increasing their diversity efforts To include gender and you just want to make sure they aren’t forgetting their obligations on the basis of sex while they do so.

I have MS. Which means bladder problems and urgency from time to time. If they didn't make a toilet available to me that protected my dignity, I'd take them to a Tribunal for discrimination so quickly they wouldn't know what hit them. I am not registered disabled and generally don't need access to a disabled toilet.

[quote PronounssheRa]When the home office introduced gender neutral toilets, women refused to use them. That is the reality. www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6065075/Female-Home-Office-employees-refusing-use-new-36-000-gender-neutral-toilets.html[/quote]
This nugget shows how much basic biology is forgotten by the writers, "Gender-neutral toilets can be used by people of any gender or gender identity, be it male, female, transgender or intersex – in which a person may be born with genitalia or chromosomes from both sexes."

A person born with chromosomes from both sexes includes every human ever born.

It just feels like it's almost for show. Not an actual policy, but to show they've made provision.

It's uncomfortable reading for me.

Ultimately, co-workers uncomfortable with sharing a restroom with a transgender individual should be the ones asked to travel to a different floor or work area to use the facilities (do not ask the transgender person to go out of their way). "

This old canard/straw man persists everywhere.
It is NOT the trans (or otherwise) status of the person that is an issue. I do not care one bit if i am sharing a single-sex space with a person who is trans in any way.

It is the SEX of the person, regardless of their trans status, that is the issue.

So what are you meant to do if you are fine with trans men or non binary people in your space but not with male individuals?

The problem is that, ACAS, which is the primary source of employment information, released guidance in 2017 which is consistent with this employer's policy.

I have attached a screenshot.

You can read the full PDF through this page it is called 'Gender Reassignment Discrimination: key points for the workplace'
archive.acas.org.uk/genderreassignment