Transwoman wins employment discrimination case against NHS for being treated differently from women in changing room

[Clymene]

I thought there was a thread on this but I can't find it. Maybe it was deleted? I shall choose my words very carefully.

The court found that the unnamed employee had been discriminated against because they were asked questions that a woman would not have been about whether they had been undressed in the communal women's changing area.

Judge Davies said: 'A concern about the woman's state of undress in the changing rooms was likely to be connected with the fact that she is a transgender woman.
'This was a communal changing room with a shower cubicle. It did not seem to the Tribunal likely that there would have been a concern about a cisgender woman in a state of undress while changing in such a changing room.
'The Tribunal therefore concluded that [the manager] asked the questions because of a concern that the woman as a transgender woman might be in a state of undress in the female changing room.
There were also several serious allegations against several female co-workers but while the Trust accepts these incidents happened, no perpetrators were ever identified.

There were a number of other complaints but they were dismissed by the Court.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11027471/Trans-NHS-worker-wins-discrimination-case-confronted-underwear.html

I am sure I'm not alone in finding this story very disturbing.

Saw the earlier thread, it was deleted as I was reading it. Want to find out what happens to this thread.

TL:DR blatant placemark for message.

However as I type it's over 200 posts so I hope it is able to be discussed in an 'acceptable' manner

I have bookmarked and saved this document, the judgement, because it is so illustrative of what is happening:

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/62cff0578fa8f50bfafb091d/V_v_Sheffield_Teaching_Hospitals_NHS_Foundation_Trust_1806836-2020___Others.pdf

Hell of an interesting read, as previous posters have pointed out.

This in a nutshell.

This whole thing has given me the rage. 'Shaking and crying?' How absolutely typical.

This case reminds me of the TW who asked reddit lawyer subreddit for advice because they wanted access to the women's changing room. They were given advice and were successful in their endeavour. A few weeks later they reappeared on the subreddit asking for more advice: apparently the female women had started changing in cubicles and they wanted to know what legal ways could there be to force the female women to change with them, as they felt it was discriminatory for the female women to change in a cubicle.

Nothing, I mean nothing, is ever enough.

Thanks @AdelaideRo The complainant was in a non clinical role. Is it usual for such employees to change at work?

I'm currently reading the document, and amazed at the very very special leeway given to this person, as to their employment

With all due respect I can completely tell the difference between a transwoman and a butch lesbian. My 7 year old daughter also picked up on some points as I had to distract her from someone she was staring at - my husband had a vague notion which was only because daughter was being so intrigued. To me it was highly obvious. I have known some older transsexuals - and that’s what they were called back in the day - but very different people and I can’t think how to put it but they were a middle aged woman but they dressed and acted as most middle aged women did and did look like a smartly dressed middle aged woman. Lost contact now but I’d imagine they are horrified with everything now

If a penis is in a woman's changing room, if I'm following the logic, it is de facto a woman's penis, and therefore welcome.

This has in one stroke eliminated the possibility of exhibitionism. Amazing. Women everywhere must be delighted! And some must be extra excited to hear this!

Realise I’ve put they but they were a she ! I had a lot of respect for her as I really feel she had gender dysphoria and it was right for her

If you're at all interested, it is really worth reading the judgement. It is so indicative.

But I have not yet reached the bit where, despite everything, this person cannot be banned from women's changing rooms, because they are man with vulnerabilities?

I think it might be worth an appeal. I would take the stance that the TW was not asked about the use of the changing room because of the protected characteristic of GR but for another reason.

it seems like it may not have been handled well by the employer, who should have been aware of single sex provisions under the Equality Act

I think it is always of significance to see who is telling females of all ages to accept a naked penis (over the age of around 8 years old) in a communal changing room.

It says everything we need to know about that person. Everything.

It doesn’t surprise me though. It seems par for the course.

Agreed

Thanks AdelaideRo The complainant was in a non clinical role. Is it usual for such employees to change at work?

it sounds like they were in catering, so yes they probably did need to change into their whites.

Bloody hell Misstache, thank you for that précis. What an absolute shit show.

The person obviously has endless issues and can't hold down a job.

But. It's trans ideology that has allowed them to run ridiculous, expensive, time-consuming, crazy rings around the NHS. That's simply not the normal reaction to a person displaying that behaviour.

All this is going to do is stiffen the spine of other employers. So, in the long run, it's probably a good thing.

Oh, I've just seen this! Lol

Apologies if this has been suggested before, but can the women who were exposed to this also take their employer to court? I'm sure many women would chip into a crowdfunder if they had a chance.

If I was one of the women that had to work with this person I would have left.
The comments in the newspaper article are not supportive. This case must go back on appeal.

Agree. Also, having read that judgment I have huge sympathy for the women involved, who've bent over backwards and were then punished by being dragged through the tribunal for spurious reasons. I do wonder if they still subscribe to 'be kind', or have this experience been a bit of an eye-opener for all involved.

Still have not finished reading the judgment yet.

But if it finds for the transwoman on the use of women's single-sex spaces - then yes; I will throw money at this judgement too, because it is wrong, and fails to take into account women's rights according to the Equality Act 2010 whereby there are single-sex exceptions, and males - all males, including those males with a GRC - can be legally excluded. Yes, even males with a GRC.

The Filipina woman should definitely sue.

If I’m reading the decision right, she heard about the incident in the change room and went out of her way to help. Without being asked, she wrote a letter explaining how she had seen the TW crying in the locker room at 8 and 9, and heard another woman say the TW was still in there crying at 9:30 (so at least an hour and a half of work time histrionically sobbing in the cubicles while everyone trying to change and get ready for shift.) Then she saw the TW again in the locker room, and saw hairnets on the floor by the locker and was like “here, I think you dropped these.”

For her trouble, she immediately got accused of transphobic hate crimes, perhaps because she also saw the TW in the cafeteria that day with face mask down and said to pull it over nose. one can interpret.

She should sue for racial harassment, humiliation for being publicly accused of being a transphobe, damage to her reputation, etc.

I am now on page 37 of the 61 page document.

For reference, I have worked with colleagues with disabilities, both physical and mental, which needed consideration at work. No problem. They were good people.

I've done maternity leave several times, including the death of one of those babies. I never got anywhere even vaguely near that much attention and consideration and concern from management, that the transwoman got, in: assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/62cff0578fa8f50bfafb091d/V_v_Sheffield_Teaching_Hospitals_NHS_Foundation_Trust_1806836-2020___Others.pdf

A sacred caste, indeed.

As I was reading the judgement, it struck me how many of the respondents were women and how much shit they got, even when they were demonstrably trying to be kind and inclusive.

Nothing was enough.

I hope they do sue.

I've worked in catering at a hospital and it s hard and thankless work on minimum wage. It's overwhelmingly done by women with a poor command of English as you don't really need to speak much to load a dishwasher or clear trolleys or dole out meal portions.

I feel enormously sorry for the claimant's colleagues

Clymene: yes.

If people read the actual judgement. This person was given way, way more leeway, than any ordinary worker, for days off, sick leave, compassionate leave, special days off, taking on a full-time job but then immediately settling down for 2 or 3 days a week.

This was accommodated.

Sacred caste.