Another toilets one

[nowwhat50]

I've NC for obvious reasons. I think it's time to come out as GC at work.

Our Diversity and Inclusion policy makes no mention of Sex whatsoever. I've mentioned this to HR already, that they appear to have forgotten about sex as a protected characteristic, but not put it in writing. I got no response to my verbal comments, just a "oh really?"

We now have a new member of staff who is very obviously MtF trans. This isn't really a Trans issue as such, but my concern is the Equality Act. I have 3 different protected characteristics.

My workplace has a very recent history of not paying women the same as men for the same role. All new hires in to the same brand new team, the only female was paid £5k less than the lowest paid male.

They also have a very mixed history of supporting disabilities, removing adjustments without notice and making disabled employees fight for months to have those adjustments returned.

Homophobic and racist complaints where clear evidence of homophobia and racism have resulted in soft warnings rather than Gross Misconduct. I know this because I conducted the investigations and gathered the evidence on these complaints.

So my biggest concern in not where this new member of staff goes to pee, but holding my employer to account. The Equality Act is not optional, they can't pick and choose which bits to follow and I want to make that clear. I really didn't want to choose toilets as the hill I die on at work, but think this is what I'm going to have to do.

Can I have some advice please on how best to approach this? To assert my rights to single sex spaces and make this about the importance of adhering to The Equality Act, rather than making it about not wanting to share the toilets with a Trans person. TIA

The Equality Act 2010 does not give you any right to toilets which exclude trans people, so if you choose this hill to die on, you'll lose. Better focus on the issues of disability or homophobia in the workplace where you're actually in the right.

Just love how people patiently, calmly point out the exclusion of female people from female only spaces and ways to ensure all needs are met, and invariably someone comes back with the 'females LOSE, you have NO RIGHTS, male people can DO WHAT THEY WANT SUCK IT UP' post which completely misses all the points. And forgets eight other Equality Act characteristics. It's kind of like inclusion isn't really an interest at all, it's just enjoyment of upsetting women.

@Artichokeleaves

Just love how people patiently, calmly point out the exclusion of female people from female only spaces and ways to ensure all needs are met, and invariably someone comes back with the 'females LOSE, you have NO RIGHTS, male people can DO WHAT THEY WANT SUCK IT UP' post which completely misses all the points. And forgets eight other Equality Act characteristics. It's kind of like inclusion isn't really an interest at all, it's just enjoyment of upsetting women.

Yes, this. Where do people think those women who absolutely cannot share with the opposite sex are supposed to go to the toilet or change? For some women with particular religious beliefs or histories of sexual assault, sucking it up and using the space anyway will not be an option.

A bit like the girls who are getting bladder infections in primary schools because they are avoiding using the loo all day.

People seem to think we can be 'trained' to accept it. Many of us just can't.

@TerrifiedDancer I was going to say the same.

Also, religion IS one of the characteristics of the Equality Act. So where is the protection of the religious women?

My mum used to say: your freedom ends where other people's begins!

Ok I'm really confused now. I thought I had the legal right to single sex toilets in the workplace? Is that not the case?

@BlueberryCheezecake

The Equality Act 2010 does not give you any right to toilets which exclude trans people, so if you choose this hill to die on, you'll lose. Better focus on the issues of disability or homophobia in the workplace where you're actually in the right.

Incorrect ☺️

The health and safety at work act says employers must provide separate toilets for men and women, unless they are separate lockable rooms ( not cubicles).
I’m not a lawyer, so no idea how the Equalities Act affects workplace toilet provision, but it would seem proportional to invoke an exception to exclude a MTF from a female only toilet, to accommodate those who would reasonably feel uncomfortable sharing with a male, as long as the MTF were offered a gender neutral alternative.
Unfortunately, I suspect many transwomen would not be happy that.

Hmm deleted, I'll rephrase:

BlueberryCheezecake is incorrect in their interpretation of the Equality Act, as are Stonewall and others, unfortunately employers are being fooled into believing this incorrect interpretation.

All protected characteristics are just that - protected, one cannot override the other and they all count.

@nowwhat50

Ok I'm really confused now. I thought I had the legal right to single sex toilets in the workplace? Is that not the case?

As far as I understand it, in certain circumstances/settings, it is legal to have them single sex but is not illegal not to. I.e. a provider can choose whether to or not and both are legal. I think what Stonewall was doing, was making providers believe that they had to provide services etc without using the exemption.

Just going back to a PP re the 'faff' involved in asking the trans member of staff to use the disabled loo. Our company doesn't have its own radar key, it expects all disabled staff to have our own, which is actually reasonable. I use my radar key when out and about as well as at work.

It's caused problems with some people who have what they might describe as milder mobility issues and want to use the disabled toilet but have never purchased their own radar key. Those employees have complained that they shouldn't have to buy their own key to access the disabled toilets at work. I've actually provided a spare to our receptionist in case we have disabled visitors, but my employer doesn't give a crap. So not sure they would see it as appropriate to tell the trans employee to buy their own key and use that toilet. And if they provide a key for one member of staff, they will have to start buying them for everyone who wants one.

Don't want to drip feed but feel the need to add this:

Im disabled and make use of the disabled toilet when I really need to, but prefer to use the ladies whenever I can. I have been victim to voyeurism in a local shopping centre when a camera was placed in the disabled toilets to film people. I was one of many many people and the police were able to identify me because I had my work ID badge on at the time. My current employer doesn't know this and I don't want to disclose it at work. We didn't used to have radar keys on the doors but I asked when I joined for them to be added for this reason, to limit the number of people who could freely access the mixed sex toilet that I have to use at times. I don't want mixed sex toilets not because I think this trans employee will hide a camera, but because I want the clear boundary that only female women can enter this space where I'm partially clothed and feel very vulnerable.

[quote nowwhat50]@PlanDeRaccordement unfortunately that isn't possible. We are across multiple floors in a tenanted building, the landlord is responsible for the toilets and any remodelling. But it's up to HR to enforce those on our floors as single sex rather than mixed. They are the usual set up of multiple cubicles with open hand basins, so definitely can't qualify as legit gender neutral.

There is one disabled toilet on each floor that has a radar key lock, so we'd have to ask people who don't want to use the toilets matching their sex to get a radar key and use those. It's a bit of a faff really and I can't see it going down well with our soft and woke HR team. [/quote]
Trampling over the rights of people with disabilities in order to placate someone with a different protected characteristic is absolutely not on.

@nowwhat50

Ok I'm really confused now. I thought I had the legal right to single sex toilets in the workplace? Is that not the case?

Sex is a legal protected right. As is race, gender identity. religion, age and disability. You cannot discriminate someone based on these things.

Now a service provider CAN exclude people based on these protected characteristics. But only if there’s a relevant reason to.

Let’s say Your employer brings in a new shift pattern which means that everyone
has to work fewer days, but longer days.You have a disability that means you’re exhausted after two long days of working. So the new shift pattern puts you and other people who have the same disability as you at a disadvantage. Your employer will have indirectly discriminated against you if it can’t justify the new shift pattern.

@nowwhat50 it was me OP and you're right, it is a big faff. It does baffle me that your employer doesn't provide those keys to people who need them THAT looks to me like a huge issue! They don't seem too expensive so they definitely need to buy a handful and have them available to who needs.

Also if this bathroom is only being used by someone who has one of those keys, I'm going to assume it doesn't have a lot of traffic (correct me if I'm wrong). I still think it may be reasonable to suggest to the trans person to use that bathroom as well

Further to my previous post, with regard to just the toilets, have a look at the new guidance after the public consultation as IIRC places building toilets have to provide single sex as well as unisex, if they’re having unisex and any places currently with only unisex, have to partition them to make single sex ones

I'm not sure if this has been suggested already but why don't you try and get 'ahead' of any issues by suggesting that the male toilets are re-framed as 'gender neutral' leaving the female only toilets as female only (cite female needs in terms of menstruation, miscarriage, menopause & female specific health issues that require privacy & dignity separate from any males irrespective of claimed gender ID) and that also leaves the accessible/disabled toilets out of the equation.

The push to make female loos the ones that are gender neutral in these circumstances is what creates & causes the friction etc. Those who seek mixed sex loos surely can't complain of that is located in the formerly male only loos?

Connie, gender identity is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010. No, it hasn't changed. No, it hasn't been updated to include it.

@nowwhat50

Ok I'm really confused now. I thought I had the legal right to single sex toilets in the workplace? Is that not the case?

It's under H&S regulations, rather than equality legislation. As we found in a recent JR, the EA only permits single sex spaces to exist, it doesn't mandate them. Therefore I don't think that the protected characteristic of sex would be of much use in this category. Religion might be more useful but H&S regs are probably your best tool.

Gender identity is not a protected characteristic under the equality act.
Certain posters are propagating misinformation.

You can seek exclusion of the trans person from your toilet if there is a legitimate purpose.

But the thing with the quality act is no one of the categories outweighs the others.

The onus is on you to show a legitimate reason for exclusion. Eg if that person is violent or the like. Simply being uncomfortable with them being trans will not fly, and leave the company open to discrimination claims - thus they will not support your stance I would think, unless you can show that legitimate aim as per the EA Act.

The trans person is not by the way responsible for the rest of your company's shit behaviour to women by the way.

Or you could be a sympathetic human, and join together with the transwoman to fight for better rights for all, rather than make her life worse than it probably is right now.

@MishyJDI "Or you could be a sympathetic human, and join together with the transwoman to fight for better rights for all, rather than make her life worse than it probably is right now."

I thought I was clear that this is about my asserting my rights at work? Why do you think I'm not sympathetic to our new staff member?

It's the blurring of boundaries and allowing anyone to self ID in to women's spaces that I'm not ok with. I've already been a victim of a man using his access to a mixed sex toilet for sexual gratification. By not standing up for other women and asserting the single sex boundaries, it makes it harder for women to say no in situations they have good reasons to be uncomfortable with.

Or you could be a sympathetic human, and join together with the transwoman to fight for better rights for all, rather than make her life worse than it probably is right now

Op doesn't have to be sympathetic to the point that her own rights and safeguards are trampled over.

You can seek exclusion of the trans person from your toilet if there is a legitimate purpose.

The legitimate purpose is single sex provision for women's comfort and safety. Not single gender provision, which in effect makes the toilet provision mixed sex.

Can't see the issue with providing a third space. After all, it's only for people to pee in. Not a social club Right?

@MishyJDI

You can seek exclusion of the trans person from your toilet if there is a legitimate purpose.

But the thing with the quality act is no one of the categories outweighs the others.

The onus is on you to show a legitimate reason for exclusion. Eg if that person is violent or the like. Simply being uncomfortable with them being trans will not fly, and leave the company open to discrimination claims - thus they will not support your stance I would think, unless you can show that legitimate aim as per the EA Act.

The trans person is not by the way responsible for the rest of your company's shit behaviour to women by the way.

Or you could be a sympathetic human, and join together with the transwoman to fight for better rights for all, rather than make her life worse than it probably is right now.

Again, even slower, the issue is that not all women can share mixed sex spaces.

How male people feel about being excluded does not make it ok to exclude female people from any facilities to allow male people to be happily included in whatever choice they make from all the facilities. Can you really not see how basically hypocritical it is to go on about inclusion and kindness when you mean only male people and just refuse to acknowledge the other issues involved?

Multiple posts here saying designate some for mixed sex, some for female only, and that is actual inclusion.

And if you're expecting OP to go and champion the needs of the TW, why isn't the TW expected to be championing the needs of the female people who will also need provision that meets their needs?

And if you're expecting OP to go and champion the needs of the TW, why isn't the TW expected to be championing the needs of the female people who will also need provision that meets their needs?

💯

@endofthelinefinally

Gender identity is not a protected characteristic under the equality act. Certain posters are propagating misinformation.

Nope. www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/gender-reassignment-discrimination

The Equality Act 2010 says that you must not be discriminated against because you are transsexual, when your gender identity is different from the sex assigned to you when you were born. For example:

a person who was born female decides to spend the rest of his life as a man
In the Equality Act it is known as gender reassignment. All transsexual people share the common characteristic of gender reassignment.

To be protected from gender reassignment discrimination, you do not need to have undergone any specific treatment or surgery to change from your birth sex to your preferred gender. This is because changing your physiological or other gender attributes is a personal process rather than a medical one.

You can be at any stage in the transition process – from proposing to reassign your gender, to undergoing a process to reassign your gender, or having completed it.