ACAS confirms it has left Stonewall - the Times

[ChoosandChipsandSealingWax]

“ A second high-profile public body has ditched a rights group’s scheme to encourage “diversity days” after concerns were raised that it gave unlawful advice on transgender rights.

Acas, the employment dispute service, confirmed to The Times that it had withdrawn “for cost reasons” from the diversity champions scheme run by Stonewall”

Link: www.thetimes.co.uk/article/stonewall-suffers-fresh-setback-in-trans-advice-row-j3p79gb2k

Share token via Sex Matters:
twitter.com/sexmattersorg/status/1398142285305597952?s=21

So everybody, you do know how this is going to play out if many more organisations decide they ‘can’t afford’ being Stonewalled? The U.K. will start being compared to Poland or as a homophobic, right wing cesspit where LGBT+ citizens are no longer protected. And threads like these will be translated into ‘crowing’ and celebrating this (because of course many will not bother actually reading about WHY many of us have become disillusioned and disturbed by Stonewall’s underhand tactics)

Meh, they say these things about us anyway.

Excellent news!
Schools and the police urgently need to implement similar cost savings now, as well as every other government department, the law society and the CPS.

Hmm @EmpressWitchDoesntBurn I get that, perhaps the trust is gone. No love lost really.

As long as there is a well-respected and well-known LGB rights group in its place. I'm not that up on it.

Agree 'costs' is a good, non-contentious argument. It's bloody NOT value for money that's for sure.

🥳🥳🥳

"I have no problem with EHRC and ACAS using the cost saving reason to leave"

There probably is an element of truth in it

If an organization signs up and has all their procedures vetted, staff sent on training courses etc they may be happy with that for a while but there has to come a point when Stonewall are not delivering anything new. Even if they were offering good advice, how many times would you need to hear it?

If an organization feels the need to back out quietly, there is a good excuse.

May MANY other organisations follow

I too am sad that Stonewall now has such a bad name. The “Lawyers” who advised them to reinterpret the Equality Act, need to be investigated. And the board members who fell for it should be having a word with themselves. Their arrogance is astounding.

@Imnobody4

They're reading the writing on the wall. Getting out before Maya's and Allison's cases are heard.

When is Allison's case?

I feel no joy in the downfall of Stonewall. It was founded with good intent s28 was an abomination (I say that as a straight person). Gay people are still dying in some countries- not through wrong pronouns- but being hanged or thrown off buildings. Stonewall, Amnesty et al. should be there for them not wasting their time unwinding women’s rights.

I take little pleasure in Stonewall’s difficulties but as a woman I do feel a huge sense of relief that the siege on my rights might be lifting.

The sad thing about all of this is that companies and especially schools do need good practices & ethos to make sure staff and children are not bullied for being gay, or for identifying as trans, and to generally be places which are accceoting of difference. There is a need for training and template policies to help in this area. That was a good aim. And it's all gone horribly wrong in 5 years.

Aye, Eresh, people have been trying to paint feminism as a cesspit of rightwing Xtian US alt/loony left/misandry/ whatever for years. It doesn't work because it's inaccurate, and mud-slinging might play well on Twitter but it doesn't seem to work so well outwith social media.

Actually, maybe the inquiry needs to look into media and social media and how these are sometimes 'gamed' to use leverage and disproportionate influence.

• I should clarify, this inquiry is just something I think in my own head should happen. Not actually a thing, yet.

ofwarren Allison Baileys case is not till 2022 and will take 20 days ... I think it’s been delayed because SW are delaying sending in their case papers, or something.

@EmbarrassingAdmissions

Costs as the presenting reason are an excellent move.

I am concerned that organisations are hoping for a very quiet redemption narrative in which they agree never to talk about how badly they were mislead - without acknowledging it, they're likely to repeat the same mistakes. They need to admit to their lack of due diligence and explore why they didn't do it.

Yes exactly. Until this is acknowledged fully, they are wide open to further manipulation when the next trend comes along.

As a PP said, it is chilling how quickly and fully public organisations got on board with this, defying common sense. The sceptic in me wonders what next?

@Thecatonthemat

ofwarren Allison Baileys case is not till 2022 and will take 20 days ... I think it’s been delayed because SW are delaying sending in their case papers, or something.

Disappointing that it's not taking place this year, there is momentum at the moment regarding Stonewall's dodgy practices.

I reckon they are stalling, hoping Allison's legal costs will spiral.

@vivariumvivariumsvivaria

I fear you may have a long wait, if this comment by C Marsden under the Times article is correct

Unison's Women's Committee National chair is a biological male who identifies as a woman.

Out of the hundreds of thousands of female members of Unison, the most capable one of leading is male.

What are the chances?

I think what goes on in your head should be what happens IRL Arabella

@LizzieSiddal

I too am sad that Stonewall now has such a bad name. The “Lawyers” who advised them to reinterpret the Equality Act, need to be investigated. And the board members who fell for it should be having a word with themselves. Their arrogance is astounding.

I'd also like this point by @DdraigGoch to be investigated in an inquiry:

"T" has no direct connection with "LGB" and this is a distraction in an age where gays still get thrown from roofs in some parts of the world

How were SW able to appropriate elements of male gay culture and announce it to be 'trans' and 'woman'? Just how?

And also, how were SW also able to appropriate niche elements of male heterosexual sexual culture and announce it to be 'trans' and 'woman'? And have major organisations believe it?

Stonewall Costs Too Much.

Stonewall Costs Too Much.

In so many ways! Oh and literally too...

Great news.

Dominoes toppling over.

They wouldn't switch to being a solely trans lobby group (although they technically are now) for the same reasons they added the T onto an already established lobby group in 2015.

They needed to appropriate and hide behind oppressed groups because if they didn't have gay rights to use as shield they wouldn't have got the power and money they have now.

@Helleofabore

Stonewall Costs Too Much.

In so many ways! Oh and literally too...

Yeah, it might be my new slogan ...

I wonder if ACAS are going to review their policies?

[quote ArabellaScott]Gosh, yes, it is quite a lot of money for a scheme that misrepresents the law, when you think about it, isn't it? [blinks]

Come on, everyone. Cost savings! Let's do it!

Domino time.

[/quote] A trifle tangential, but I'll let that video pass.

Briefly wondered "who posted that? Was it...?", and indeed it was when I scrolled up.

Title (at least) of this one is more relevant, even if the rest of the lyrics aren't:

And all the people in the video seem to be having far much more fun than some of their alleged contemporaries...

@FemaleAndLearning

I wonder if ACAS are going to review their policies?

According to Ann Sinnott they already have...

"In AEA's Court Hearing it emerged that EHRC, having corrected its own guidance [thanks to AEA], it advised some orgs to also correct their guidance. ACAS guidance changed a few months ago. Now this."
twitter.com/AnnMSinnott/status/1398159964334612480?s=19

I imagine that would have something to do with their decision...