First 'chat with HR'

[Iwasonlytryingtohelp]

I mentioned LGB Alliance in a conf call (HR director asked for input on which diversity and inclusion external groups to engage with). Someone stated it was a transphobic organisation, so I just said I was happy to discuss off line. Today I have been approached by my HR business partner 'to chat'.

@Doublesheets

As a long time poster here I just want to comment on the feminist attitude to women working in HR. HR is one of the most successful and influential professional services careers women have, we dominate the profession.

Without fail this board talks about women in HR with utter contempt and loathing.

No, don't think I have. Are you referring to specific posters? I don't think I understand your use of the phrase 'without fail'.

HR work for the employer, not the women who work there. OP has been accused of transphobia in the workplace. This is a very serious allegation, with potentially serious consequences for OP, that HR are clearly investigating on behalf of the employer. As an employee, any time HR want to chat, you need to seek advice and to protect yourself very carefully. HR are not your friend, they are there to protect the business interests of the company. HR will act illegally and immorally if they have to. I am sure many of us have had experiences of sex discrimination that has been facilitated/ignored/covered up by HR. It's nothing personal about the people who work in HR, it's about competing interests and women protecting themselves against discrimination in the work place. I hope OP seeks advice from ACAS/union and protects herself.

It’s harassment pure and simple. I hope the OP points this out to the HR dept.

They asked me to send links. I am sending the charity commission link and if I can find it the one about uni of essex. any other recommendations for factual, legal, evidenced docs?

@Iwasonlytryingtohelp here are links I posted in the Mermaids charity commission appeal against LGB Alliance thread

LINK SUMMARY

Mermaids Appeal against LGBAlliance
Mermaids grounds of appeal
9.6 “LGB Alliance has repeatedly targeted registered LGBT rights charities including Mermaids, as well as Stonewall (registered charity no. 1101255), LGBT Foundation (registered charity no. 1070904), GIRES (registered charity no. 1068137)”

Charity Commission full decision to register LGB Alliance:
Decision to register LGBAlliance as a charity

Register of Charities:
Register of Charities Mermaids
Register of Charities LGBAlliance
Register of Charities LGBT Foundation
Register of Charities Stonewall
Register of Charities GIRES

Charity Commission Guidance:
Charities Act 2011
Legal Underpinnings
Campaigning and political activity guidance
litigation a guide for trustees

Equalities and Human Rights Commission EHRC guidance:
EHRC - Equality Act 2010 protected characteristics
EHRC Chair, Baroness Kishwer Falkner response to the LGBT Consortium's open letter “Defending the right to believe that sex is immutable in no way impacts on our commitment to uphold the rights of trans people.”

News and threads on the mermaids appeal:
Lesbian and Gay news legal commentary
THREAD by Barrister Barbara Rich @BarbaraRich_law
THREAD by Andy Lewis Quackometer@lecanardnoir
THREAD by Barrister Allison Bailey @BluskyeAllison
Times article - Mermaids against LGB Alliance

LGB Alliance new trustees:
LGB Alliance appoints trustees
Article re Professor Robert Wintemute who drafted 29 guiding LGBT rules “Yogyakarta Principles” Now a trustee for LGBA. Wintemute, “I would have had to consider the potential for conflict with women’s rights, but I didn’t.” Neither, so far as he knows, did anyone else at the meeting at which the Principles were drafted. “Women’s rights weren’t raised.”

Fantastic thankyou.

A phrase along the lines of "given the huge controversy about Stonewall ATM, in particular their apparent misrepresentation of equalities law, I am concerned that [organisation] will incur reputational damage going forward if we align with them. It would seem prudent to ensure that any policies we have are fully compliant with the law"

Stonewall are on the front page of the Telegraph today.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/03/stonewall-advises-organisations-use-parent-has-given-birth-help/

Well done OP

The tide is turning, you should try not to worry, your actions will have helped your company

Wow that article

There is it. That could have been a thread here two years ago, we knew all of this, but there it is all laid out in the national press and it's indefensible. Wheels off and rolling down the hill.

if I can find it the one about uni of essex

Well done @Iwasonlytryingtohelp - that sounds like a productive conversation.

Fair Play for Women and A Woman's Place websites have a lot of good resources.

And a quick search through this Feminism forum will give you links.

Here's the U of Essex blog, with links to the report.

www.essex.ac.uk/blog/posts/2021/05/17/review-of-two-events-with-external-speakers

@EishetChayil

Without fail this board talks about women in HR with utter contempt and loathing.

And why is that, I wonder?

Many women here have been utterly shafted by HR departments.

Yes 100%

As they have ever been.

I worked in one place where a particular male member of staff was reported so many times for inappropriate behaviour to female members of staff. He used to come to our department (he didn’t need to) and stand over a member of my team and basically salivate over here and talk about visiting prostitutes (having a sex with one who was so drunk she couldn’t stand up) and his ‘lovely lovely daughters’ (which just sounded incredibly creepy as he was peering down your top to catch a flash of your boobs).

HR did naff all. If a trader did something outrageous (as often was the case) they were basically given a lollipop and told not to be so naughty.

This is interesting: law firm announcing it’s leaving the Stonewall scheme and being pretty straightforward why:
www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/exclusive-law-firm-quits-stonewall-over-its-disquieting-recent-actions

“A law firm has ended its membership of a diversity scheme run by Stonewall citing concerns over its recent actions, saying it can no longer support the LGBTQ+ charity.

Moon Beever, based in Gray's Inn and specialising in insolvency work, was one of 77 firms signed up to Stonewall's Diversity Champions scheme.

But Frances Coulson, the firm's Senior Partner, told RollOnFriday that Moon Beever had relinquished its membership.

"After some disquiet about recent actions of Stonewall we have decided to exit the Stonewall Diversity Programme", she said.

"This in no way detracts from our commitment to diversity and equality, but in common with the Equality and Human Rights Commission and Government Departments we no longer feel that we can support Stonewall", said Coulson.”

@MinervaBoudicca

This is interesting: law firm announcing it’s leaving the Stonewall scheme and being pretty straightforward why: www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/exclusive-law-firm-quits-stonewall-over-its-disquieting-recent-actions

“A law firm has ended its membership of a diversity scheme run by Stonewall citing concerns over its recent actions, saying it can no longer support the LGBTQ+ charity.

Moon Beever, based in Gray's Inn and specialising in insolvency work, was one of 77 firms signed up to Stonewall's Diversity Champions scheme.

But Frances Coulson, the firm's Senior Partner, told RollOnFriday that Moon Beever had relinquished its membership.

"After some disquiet about recent actions of Stonewall we have decided to exit the Stonewall Diversity Programme", she said.

"This in no way detracts from our commitment to diversity and equality, but in common with the Equality and Human Rights Commission and Government Departments we no longer feel that we can support Stonewall", said Coulson.”

Hurrah! Great to see a firm stating the reason so clearly.

[quote YoBeaches]@JediGnot OP has said nothing about a complaint. She made a suggestion in a HR meeting and they are taking her up on her offer to chat offline.

Fabulous.[/quote]
I know - I was more trying to reassure her in the face of other posters who seemed to be very worried for her!

I dont want to get into an All HR are bad etc..

But just to say as I understand it the "chat" was because another member of staff responded to mention of LGB Alliance by saying they were transphobic.

So I hope in the instance of fairness and balance that member of staff has also been approached for a "chat" and asked to substantiate their statement.

As a professional company looking at their at diversity and inclusion they wouldn't want decisions to be based on idle twitter opinion or personal bias!

Hopefully whoever the person was who actually made the unsubstatiated comment will be made aware of the facts that have been provided by OP and will be asked to think more clearly before speaking in future.

Sadly not. I contacted the HR person today to ask if there was any action I needed to take as I would not want people to have been made uncomfortable and I asked directly if they had spoken to the person who made the comment (no) . The HR person said they didn't need anything more from me 'at this stage' and confirmed that it was all very informal. I did say it would be helpful for me if they could reply to my email and confirm how they saw our discussion. I am wondering if I should request MN for a thread deletion. I should have name-changed.

@alexyyy

It sounds like you are being informally investigated. Do be sure to follow up the meeting with a summary of what was said and retrospectively ask for confirmation of the nature of the meeting.

My thoughts exactly. If good faith goes, anything not on paper just didn’t happen. Keep everything.

Lmfao

You should definitely ask them if they approach everyone who suggests a charity to support.

As a long time poster here I just want to comment on the feminist attitude to women working in HR. HR is one of the most successful and influential professional services careers women have, we dominate the profession.

Well, I try to think of the HR at my place as colleagues, but I've just finished spending 3 hours today trying to sort out a balls up they made, which they shouldn't have made, if they had been at all aware of what they should be doing.

And this is not the first time I've had to do this, cover for HR stupidity or errors or simply not doing what they were supposed to do.

I still remember a decade ago, trying to discuss what workplace adjustments could be made for me, as the head of my unit, when I had a broken arm, wrist & hand (my dominant hand). They were utterly useless - no suggestions, no support, no help - I had to search my own institution and finally beg for support from our student disability service. The memory of that still makes me angry.

So -

This is useful I think:
Naomi Cunningham, a barrister specialising in discrimination, warned: “They are misrepresenting the contents of the Equality Act… But public authorities are believing it and because of that they're finding themselves in breach of the law. So it's a real trap.
“The obsessive focus on this tiny, tiny proportion of any given workforce is unbalancing, and it does mean that there is a strong likelihood that as employers sign up to Stonewall programmes, there will be equality impacts for other protected groups, particularly women but also religious groups.”

And good that they got in about profiling transwomen on IWD
Employers are told that they could signal their commitment with badges, mugs, bi and trans flags and by profiling transwomen on International Women’s Day.

@stumbledin

I dont want to get into an All HR are bad etc..

But just to say as I understand it the "chat" was because another member of staff responded to mention of LGB Alliance by saying they were transphobic.

So I hope in the instance of fairness and balance that member of staff has also been approached for a "chat" and asked to substantiate their statement.

As a professional company looking at their at diversity and inclusion they wouldn't want decisions to be based on idle twitter opinion or personal bias!

Hopefully whoever the person was who actually made the unsubstatiated comment will be made aware of the facts that have been provided by OP and will be asked to think more clearly before speaking in future.

That is a very good point. I would not wish to try to shut down people's honestly held concerns, but equally it is probably best if concerns are expressed based on facts and not misinformation.

@Iwasonlytryingtohelp