Help! Employee is Transitioning!

[SoManyQuestionsHere]

Reasonably new user name here, so: no NC - but please be understanding about me still having to keep this sort of vague. Also, full transparency, I'm asking around elsewhere, too, to hopefully get an opposite view point.

My employee is, apparently, non-binary and is looking to make some bold, public moves!

Hired in as "male, with a clearly male name and a physical appearance that, while clearly leaning towards androgyny, reads 'definitely male'".

Currently changing name (previously: "George" - obviously NOT the actual name) to something rather more neutral and unusual, along the lines of "Kimye" (equally obviously also not the real name - but: it's not obviously gendered and comes with, sorry - not meaning to sound prejudiced here, I'm genuinely trying to be as pragmatic as humanly possible - connotations that the general public would interpret as "most likely seen on Jeremy Kyle" as well as "they/them" pronouns).

I'm in professional services. A.k.a. "industry that has employees face clients directly". I'm also responsible for a client known for their pretty conservative social values (as a benchmark: earning their respect as a female executive has been an uphill battle for me!). And our employer is, basically, whatever Stonewall's board considers an "ideal case".

Genuinely out of my depth, here!

How would you approach? Given that a) I'm personally a GC but hardly radical (doesn't really matter, I'm a pro and my opinions come last!), that b) I do want to support my employees and don't, personally, see a major problem with "Kimye" doing their thing, internally, c) have a job, which boils down to "make money" and hence necessitates "do not alienate clients" (who WILL feel alienated!), and d) have woman employees whom I cherish, wish to retain and most definitely do not want to ask to share a hotel room with "Kimye" on the grounds that it's one of their more feminine leaning days unless they're 100% cool with it?

Yes, I've asked HR. Apparently, our best official guidance boils down to "play it by ear - we trust our executives!".

Totally failing to understand relevance of case to the OP who didn't come across as wanting to bully or exclude the person In question but I thought wanted to know what implications might be and how to handle them

?

I don't really think it should be about the law ( except in clarifying perhaps what is a reasonable adjustment ) but what is human decency , how we would each like to be treated if some aspect of our character didn't fit the norm

@midgemagneto

Totally failing to understand relevance of case to the OP who didn't come across as wanting to bully or exclude the person In question but I thought wanted to know what implications might be and how to handle them

?

I don't really think it should be about the law ( except in clarifying perhaps what is a reasonable adjustment ) but what is human decency , how we would each like to be treated if some aspect of our character didn't fit the norm

I really think it should be all about the law.

Another trans advocate posts misinformation and you say well, what does any of it matter? Now you're saying the law doesn't matter.

It does, and women are going to reclaim their rights via the law. That's why you wish the law didn't matter.

You can't make it about human decency when rights conflict. Who are you going to choose to be decent to? There has to be a framework.

There is no evidence at all in this case that any rights conflict

The person has not asked to override single sex exceptions

The Jaguar case may possibly have been avoided if there hadn't been a culture of bullying

The right to not be discriminated against is not in conflict. How does a non binary employee affect any other employees rights to not be discriminated against? Sharing office space and facilities with non binary employees doesn't mean you've been discriminated against.

I don't really get your issue here.

Members of staff shouldn't be sharing hotel rooms.

Treat your colleague with respect and be professional.

Your clients will likely give less of a f**k than you think.

@midgemagneto

There is no evidence at all in this case that any rights conflict

The person has not asked to override single sex exceptions

The Jaguar case may possibly have been avoided if there hadn't been a culture of bullying

No. I was talking more about when they do. You have to have a legal framework for that.

@FortunesFave

Kimye should be given their own hotel room and you can play it as "We want Kimye to feel comfortable no matter how they're presenting that day"

If I saw someone getting benefit from a thing you declare yourself as, without the need for evidence, then I'd be having a gander at how I want to self id for a slice of that. I'm not in a situation where it affects me now. If I was younger, I'd be bookmarking my own reason for special treatment.

Especially since everyone will be prioritised ahead, and probably at the expense of women.

How would you treat a 'Kinggendered' person, op? I'll be having the Royal Suite for myself on any work sorties, thanking you. I'l act very professionally in my (cubic zirconia) diamond tiara crown, honest.

I get lost everyone and then datun 😀

I would comment, as I'm name checked midgemagneto, but I'm not quite sure what that means!

I think you quoted me and I tried to apologise ... I had lost the line of discussion /plot but then had fat finger issues so wrote gibberish ....

HR can't advise because they can only react when things get out of control. OP is anticipating that things may get out of control. In this situation all you can do is carry on as normal and react reasonably.

If something happens that causes conflict, which is currently unpredictable, then OP is being trusted to use judgement, which is an expectation when you take home the big bucks.

It's just indicative of the evidence before our eyes that identity when brought into the workplace can be unpredictable.

@midgemagneto

I think you quoted me and I tried to apologise ... I had lost the line of discussion /plot but then had fat finger issues so wrote gibberish ....

🤣

@MissTrip82

I just can’t grasp what it is that you want from HR. What guidance? What are your specific questions? If your question is about ‘conservative’ clients, what has been your approach when they’ve been sexist/racist/homophobic? Will that approach serve in this instance?

They might not have been before - hence why OP is asking. For them being sexist there’s already a clear precedent as she said it’s been hard to gain their respect. Strangely she hasn’t replied to any questions on this..

@MajorCarolDanvers

a) your personal views are not relevant just treat your employee with respect and keep your personal opinions to yourself. b) that is great that you want to support your employees c) what would you do if a client had a personal issue with any employee - if they didn't like women, old people, young people, black people, gay people? Handle it the same way you do in these situations. d) its ridiculous to expect any employee to share a room - cherished or not

Why is the non-binary employee allowed to push their beliefs and politics? Why are they allowed to demand others change the way they treat this person based on a completed unproveable statement that asserts that they believe something?

Would it be reasonable for me to assert religious privileges based on my new religion I announce one day and give no evidence to suggest I really believe in?

But mostly, why should someone be allowed to shove their beliefs in your face and your not even allowed to say that you will respect them but it's hard because you think their alleged beliefs are insane and bigoted?

The current set up is that the none binary has not asked for much beyond a different name . We cope with that all the time

That's hardly forcing beliefs

And not changing behaviour is the suggestion here,

Why should anyone care if z man wears what women are expected to wear any more than they care if a woman wears what a men is expected to wear? That's a full on GC attitude that is required. One that says outward expression of personality should not be constrained by sex

Yes, it could go further , they could demand different treatment, the could demand to override current sex based adjustments . But they haven't ( yet anyway )

why should someone be allowed to shove their beliefs in your face

Where is there any evidence that this is the case?

What a horrible post. There are complex challenging issues regarding 'gender identity' and related matters, for sure.

In this case, no accommodations are being asked or required, beyond a name change. It's really not an issue.

OP has been overly dramatic without saying what the actual issues are, if any.

I get where you’re coming from OP, I do. I use a lot of professional services.

Unless your clients are very rough and ready even if they find the Kimye set up very uncomfortable for them, and I can see how that could be so, I doubt they will expressly tag it as so. However that doesn’t mean they won’t either ask for other resourcing (“I would be keen to have a broader bench of juniors available”), express concerns about Kimye’s performance (“didn’t think Kimye really listened to me”) or possibly (if each matter is small) start directing them elsewhere.

So my one piece of advice is this - be VERY careful what you put in email. If any concerns are raised re K’s performance/staffing etc even if not tagged as concerning gender/presentation just bear in mind your emails could get disclosed under subject access requests if K feels K has been treated badly and it must be due to gender issues.

Perversely if you do have any conversations keep your own contemporaneous handwritten notes so you can defend yourself later if needs be.