Where would you go for advice on dodgy policy at work

[Notagain20]

If your large employer had a policy on trans employees and you felt it said some dodgy stuff about accommodating choices of cross dressers, but you wanted some solid advice about whether it was actually legal or was utterly Stonewalled, who would you contact? WPUK? Or is anyone else looking at this stuff? I know there's someone on twitter who tweets about recruitment ads etc that are not following the Equality Act properly, but I can't remember who it is.
cheers

Anne Sinnott of Authentic Equity Alliance : twitter.com/AnnMSinnott

Legal Feminist (Feminist lawyer collective) : twitter.com/legalfeminist

Sex Not Gender is the account which challenges incorrect recruitment adverts and policies:

www.sexnotgender.info/

Fair Play for Women?

Sex Matters? (I know they are new, but might have useful info/links especially given Maya Forstater's involvement)

I know who you mean on twitter, but can't recall the name of the account I am afraid.

Brilliant links, thanks very much. Of course the organisation will know exactly who has downloaded the policy so I won't manage to be anonymous in my feedback, but if it turns out that what they are doing is not legal I will have to say something. Enough is enough.

It also states the a full equality impact assessment isn't needed! Ffs. Just redefine women-only without assessing the impact on your female staff, why dontcha

Its a good week to look for evidence.

Maya Forstater's legal skeleton argument has been published and is packed with information.

hiyamaya.files.wordpress.com/2021/04/forstater-eat-claimant-skeleton-argument-plus-low-res-pages-1-50.pdf

thread: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4228233-Maya-Forstaters-appeal-skeleton

Brilliant, thanks

This is a good thread:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3520371-civil-service-trans-policy-what-can-i-do

perfect, will have a read

Is it Alan Henness?

It's probably in one of the above threads but the HSE specifies toilets separate for men and women.

www.hse.gov.uk/contact/faqs/toilets.htm

It is useful to remember that the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment is often misrepresented in Stonewalled organisations. It doesn't mean that people with this pc who identify as the opposite sex are allowed to access the single sex spaces/facilities of that sex.

The comparator when looking at discrimination in relation to a transwoman for example is another male. If a male person is excluded from accessing certain female only spaces for example, then so is a transwoman.

Organisations also have to consider discrimination against people with other protected characteristics for example we had a thread recently with a distressed lady whose religion requires her to have access to a single sex space to adjust her hijab etc and her company had effectively removed that provision by saying that any male person could access it on the basis of their gender identity.

Where possible it is really important to remember that many spaces/facilities are segregated on the basis of sex (for a number of very good reasons).

Gender identity is not the same as sex (even many activists agree on this now) so should not be allowed to override the requirements dictated by sex.

That's one of the things I was thinking in terms of an equality impact assessment, what about women for whom single sex spaces are essential for cultural or religious reasons? These sorts of questions are surely what an impact assessment is for, to ensure all protected characteristics are considered, not justthe mmost ffashionable

Organisations also have to consider discrimination against people with other protected characteristics

And the 2010 Equalities Act states (somewhere in it) something to the effect that there isn't an hierarchy of protected characteristics ie religion doesn't trump sex, which doesn't trump disability, which doesn't trump sexual orientation ...and so on.

So all the guff about "the most oppressed" is not condoned by equalities legislation.