TedImgoingmad
I can understand a school head or whatever not knowing the law, but ACAS and EHRC? It makes you think these bodies are either not fit for purpose, or something seriously untoward has happened that has allowed them to adopt Stonewall lies - let's call them what they are - and get away with it for so long.
This has been the winning strategy up to this point.
Organisation recognises it’s a sensitive area.
Gets an 'expert' in (from the usual suspects) to inform policy.
Unquestioningly accepts expert's views and doesn't fact check/challenge, even when organisation already has far more relevant expertise
Presents activist position as 'best practice'
Doubles down - 'going above and beyond the law'
We saw it also with the old NHS website page on gender dysphoria, saying that puberty blockers were just a pause etc. People naturally assume that because it is said by the NHS, ACAS, EHRC, CQC etc it must be legal, accurate and a middle of the road position
Acas advice on 'the T' (described as such in the report) is in absolute lockstep with Stonewall advice on 'the T'.
Why?
Acas commissioned some guidance on trans and intersex issues in 2017 which is still prominent on its website today and, while it has the usual disclaimers as not being the views of ACAS, the ideas make for familiar reading.
www.acas.org.uk/supporting-trans-employees-in-the-workplace
"Most participants interviewed for this research stated that the [Equality] Act is not currently fully trans or intersex-inclusive. Good practice was thus roundly agreed to be action which goes above and beyond what is enshrined in law."
Who influenced the bibliography?
GIRES.
Ehrc
A:gender
Stonewall
Hines S (2010), ‘Queerly situated? Exploring negotiations of trans queer subjectivities at work and within community spaces in the UK Gender’, Place & Culture, 17(5) pages 597-613
Etc
ACAS' examples of good practice employers were selected based on membership of Inclusive Employers OR inclusion in Stonewall’s Top 100 Employers
"Employers often devised policies with guidance from expert third parties such as GIRES, Inclusive Employers, the Scottish Trans Alliance or Stonewall. However, none discussed having consulted organisations which had a specific focus on intersex people. Others consulted working groups of trans employees to ensure policies were appropriately termed."
At no point in the report does there seem to be any awareness that there might be any people with other protected characteristics that might possibly be impacted by a transitioning colleague. Which is extraordinary when you think it is commissioned by a conciliation service.
The remit of the report was intended to also focus on people with intersex conditions but, time and again, it acknowledges that it fails to do so. Nobody consulted with the intersex organisations, nobody has any intersex policies.
Multiple times there are references to:
providing individual toilet cubicles for all staff or allowing staff to use facilities that align best with their gender identity
review dress codes or uniform policies at work for any potential negative implications for trans staff
have clear protocols for data management to avoid any non-consensual disclosure.
Good practice identified includes:
'A member of staff identifies as both male and female, so we got them 2 security passes, one in a male identity and one in a female identity… on each day they can choose which one they want to use depending on how they feel and that’s not a problem. For a building like [ours] which has ridiculous security, that was quite a big achievement.' (Public sector employer 2)
Tl:dr
What 'the T' wants, 'the T' gets.
It’s going to be incredibly difficult to unpick this stuff because they have been so enmeshed but backing away from Stonewall is a positive first step