@IvyTwines2
This is very intrusive. There seems to be this constant push to encourage people to lay all the details of their life out on a slab. In the case of someone in a customer-facing job, interacting daily with hundreds of strangers, this visual prompt for a stranger to start to think of them, not as a checkout worker representing the shop but instead an individual with this or that type of sexual behaviour is actually dangerous.
I don't like name badges for this reason. Creepy men feel a need to use a young woman's name when addressing her, and I've seen how disconcerting this is for the staff member.
I knew a man who worked for an employer who required him to wear his full name on a badge and a terrifying individual looked up his elderly parents with that information and sent them death threats.
No customers wear name badges, and shops manage to serve us fine, we produce ID when required (picking up an order, say). What we don't have is personal information pinned to our chest that someone could use to look us up online.
As for pronouns, it could go two ways. One, hardly anyone bothers putting them on and it becomes a non-story. Two, managers are somehow measured on compliance and shop staff end up all putting their pronouns on regardless of whether they agree, which of course makes anyone with non-standard pronouns a topic of discussion and outs them to hundreds of people they might not have wanted to discuss their inner gender feelings with (or compels them to put standard pronouns on to avoid conflict which undermines the whole point.)
It's a cheap trick for the company, and other retailers, who underpay female shop staff (see recent Tesco case), have hundreds of thousands of employees on tax credits as a result, who fail to ensure employee safety from abusive customers or violent shoplifters, and who often rely on minimal hours contracts which function largely like zero hours contracts. Where is USDAW or Unite on any of this important stuff?