Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Is this correct? (Equality Act)

41 replies

parentalhelpline · 04/08/2021 14:42

I'm doing some training at work and the video I'm watching says:

'The Equality Act 2010 protects people from discrimination due to protected characteristics including: race: gender, disability, sexual orientation: transgender, religion and age.'

Punctuation is all theirs. Hmm

I've looked up the protected characteristics on the gov.uk website, and they use 'sex' rather than 'gender' and 'gender reassignment' rather than 'transgender'.

Is there a difference between the last two?

Funnily enough, they don't give pregnancy or maternity leave in their examples of protected characteristics.

OP posts:
CatherinaJTV · 04/08/2021 14:44

"Gender reassignment" is also protected when it is just "planned", so I would say the text is correct.

GiantToadstool · 04/08/2021 14:46

I similarly wanted to question inclusion of gender rather than sex when I we had training but wasn't brave enough.

It's everywhere.

And if sex based distinctions such as hospital wards are self id then its meaningless :(

Ereshkigalangcleg · 04/08/2021 14:47

They've said "including", but no, "gender" is not a legally protected characteristic. It is either about sex or gender reassignment. "Transgender" is not a legally protected characteristic.

Original poster
parentalhelpline · 04/08/2021 14:48

Thanks. Wondering whether to fill out a feedback form to suggest they make their training more closely align in terms of wording with the actual Equality Act.

OP posts:
HalfShrunkMoreToGo · 04/08/2021 14:48

The 9 protected characteristics are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation.

Gender is not a protected characteristic, it should say sex.

OneEpisode · 04/08/2021 14:50

They have misstated the characteristics.
In practice people are also protected because of the perception of, for instance the employer who thought an employee was transitioning, even if they weren’t transitioning.

They have omitted the “belief” part of religion or belief. Maya Forstater’s belief that sex is important is protected under that grounds.

PaleBlueMoonlight · 04/08/2021 14:51

You should. Just point out that they have two of the protected characteristics wrong and that they should amend. "Gender reassignment" is about transition, though gender ideology as a belief may well be protected under religion and gender non-conformity under sex.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 04/08/2021 14:54

Thanks. Wondering whether to fill out a feedback form to suggest they make their training more closely align in terms of wording with the actual Equality Act.

Good idea, and especially remind them of "pregnancy and maternity" which they've completely omitted to mention.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 04/08/2021 14:54

gender ideology as a belief may well be protected under religion and gender non-conformity under sex.

Yes, definitely.

Whatsnewpussyhat · 04/08/2021 14:56

The punctuation also makes it look like they are lumping 'transgender' in with sexual orientation, to try to make it appear a protected characteristic.

Sex and gender reassignment. Not gender or transgender.

They are mis representing the Equality Act as usual.

OldChinaJug · 04/08/2021 14:58

@parentalhelpline

Thanks. Wondering whether to fill out a feedback form to suggest they make their training more closely align in terms of wording with the actual Equality Act.
I did about a poster at work re the protected characteristics. My workplace agreed with me that the wording was wrong. They also tried justifying it by saying the poster had been up a couple of years and things had changed since then.

I pointed out that the Equality Act had been in place with the current wording since 2010.

Nothing more was said. They accepted my point but the poster remained in place.

I left shortly after but would have pursued it had I still been there.

Beowulfa · 04/08/2021 14:59

If your company has paid an external provider for this training, you need to call it out, because that is laughably piss-poor to misquote an Act of Parliament.

If it's in-house traininng it's still pertinent to point it out; not knowing about pregnancy/maternity as a protected characteristic could get very expensive...

Approach it calmly, and factually, and from the point of view of saving the company money.

KevinBaconsJeans · 04/08/2021 15:02

If you feel safe to do so, please gently challenge. It is in their interest, as much as yours, that they understand and correctly represent the legislation as written. There are other threads where people have done similar and documents have been changed painlessly. Good luck

Original poster
parentalhelpline · 04/08/2021 15:03

Thanks all. I'll finish the rest of the training and look for a feedback form.

OP posts:
PronounssheRa · 04/08/2021 15:07

@parentalhelpline

Thanks. Wondering whether to fill out a feedback form to suggest they make their training more closely align in terms of wording with the actual Equality Act.
I would. They risk breaching the Equality Act if they misrepresent it.
Jaysmith71 · 04/08/2021 15:11

Why do so many get this wrong? How hard can it be to get it right?

So I googled "Equality Act UK Protected Characteristics" and this came up top:

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/equality-act/protected-characteristics

Which seems clear enough.

("Sex. A Man or a Woman.")

MrsOvertonsWindow · 04/08/2021 15:12

It's incredible - when you do training the one thing you do is that you make sure that your quoting of the law and interpretation is accurate. If there are conflicting interpretations, you reference them.
The idea that trainers (who are paid for this) can causally reinterpret and misrepresent the law because...... reasons..... should lead to companies demanding their money back.

If you are incapable of cutting and pasting an accurate version of the law, then presumably the rest of the training is likely to be a load of irrelevant, inaccurate waffle.

GiantToadstool · 04/08/2021 15:17

Our local council do this. I think its a side effect of being stonewalled. Or getting diversity training from them/affiliated.

Chickenyhead · 04/08/2021 15:27

It's absolutely wrong.

No wonder people are so confused.

InspiralCoalescenceRingdown · 04/08/2021 15:43

Given how easy it is to copy & paste the protected characteristics directly from the legislation, it's surprising that anyone gets it unintentionally wrong.

Tanith · 04/08/2021 15:47

It’s because so many are still not referring to the legally defined definition, as set out on the UK Government website. They’re using other sources that had the definition quietly and insidiously changed.

You certainly should raise it and you shouldn’t worry about any consequence. I’ve done so with several of our training companies.
The Equality Act 2010 is law and it’s the mark of a slap-dash, unprofessional organisation to misrepresent it. Any decent workplace will be glad to correct this straightaway.

NecessaryScene · 04/08/2021 15:51

"Transgender" isn't even a noun, let alone a protected characteristic...

Original poster
parentalhelpline · 04/08/2021 15:57

@NecessaryScene

"Transgender" isn't even a noun, let alone a protected characteristic...

Well, exactly! I feel the offence against grammar and clear English, as well as against the definitions of the Act.

OP posts:
H8H8H8 · 04/08/2021 17:33

@Jaysmith71

Why do so many get this wrong? How hard can it be to get it right?

So I googled "Equality Act UK Protected Characteristics" and this came up top:

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/equality-act/protected-characteristics

Which seems clear enough.

("Sex. A Man or a Woman.")

Unfortunately they also define gender reassignment as the ‘process of transitioning from one sex to another’ so not all that clear 🙄
CatherinaJTV · 04/08/2021 17:39

this is the link to the relevant section

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/7

Gender reassignment
(1) A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other atributes of sex.

(my bold)

trans individuals, even before any gender reassignment will be able to claim protection under this section.