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.

Genuine question,
how can transwomen be simultaneously completely indistinguishable from biological women and yet the most victimised minority in our society?
I mean, how can they suffer all this endless transphobic violence if everyone just thinks they’re biological women going about their business quietly?

Ok then, what is a woman, so I know if I need to self ID?

I’d be more affected by receiving a bigoted note from work colleagues then I would accidentally catching a glimpse of a willy

Well, the note was not great but I suppose it might annoy people that someone swops gender but changes nothing about themselves except the toilet they use, and then swans around naked from the waist down.

Exactly, it's a ridiculous system. Far better to do away with it in it's current format and move to simple self ID like Ireland has had for seven years and which Scotland is now legislating for 😀

Nope let's keep it as if you were born male, you're male and if you were born female, you're female. Use the correct facilities based on the sex you were born as.

"let's keep it as if you were born male, you're male".

Surely you mean "revert" because trans people have been allowed to be legally recognised as their true selves since the GRA was passed in 2004?

Keep up.

Yes bigotry in the workplace is never great.

Perhaps they were just out of the shower? Maybe they had cycled into work in 35 degree heat and wanted a complete change of clothes?

They had previously agreed to change in a cubicle.

Why did they renege on that agreement and take their male genitals out in the women’s changing room?

I'd like to know the answer to that one, too. All I seem to find are sexist stereotypes about femininity or supposedly feeling comfortable with retrogressive female gender roles.

As an aside, if we could actually pretend to erase biological sex, the question would rise why genders would exist at all or why anyone would feel the need to 'identify' with a gender.

What remains after you remove the sex basis for how genders are assigned by the cultures to female and male people are just bundles of personality traits. Not sure why those should get special attention at all.

But of course sexism etc. is not going to pretend that biological sex doesn't exist, so all the gender identity movement does is make sexism much easier to carry out and much harder to stop, as the group it victimises would no longer have a clear name.

The proper feminist approach, in my view, would be to reduce the impact of gender boxes as much as possible, so that most of the time people would be just viewed as individual human beings, while keeping sex-based distinctions in those areas where they truly matter (reproduction, sexual assault prevention, sex-related health issues etc.)

Reading the judgement with my IANAL perspective, it seems clear that:

• the claimant was a vexatious and unreliable employee
• the claimant has a shaky grasp of facts and the truth as evidenced by the number of claims that the court responded to with 'Did not happn'
• the Trust bent over backwards to accommodate every single condition the claimant made. If there were any discrimination, I'd say that actually they made a huge amount of accommodation that I suspect would be very unlikely with a new employee with any other background.
• a lot of the claimant's fellow employees also tried very hard to be inclusive but whatever they did was not enough. I really feel for them. This situation must have been absolutely horrible for them.

I would be interested to know what costs were awarded. I suspect they will pale in comparison to the enormous costs involved in people's time and energy in supporting the claimant to do their their low paid role.

Thanks again for the link @TastefulRainbowUnicorn. Really urge others to read it.

Nope. When the law was passed, exceptions were built in. Including sport, refuges and places where more than one women gather together.

Obviously, your comments do indeed highlight why the GRA should be repealed tho.

No one thought that males would try and say they are actually women with penises and can expose themselves in women's changing rooms!

It looks like @Hearach15 has all the answers!
Just not to any of the questions directly posed to them

Thanks again for the link @TastefulRainbowUnicorn. Really urge others to read

You are welcome, though I just saw @BreadInCaptivity posted the same link two posts above mine!

I agree it’s very worth reading. Quite a character sketch, though not one any novelist could get away with in 2022.

i haven’t RTFT but am confused. surely the question for the court is whether the individual was unfairly treated (against how any other male person would have been treated) if they were male and naked below the waist, in a women’s changing room? Ie they are a male flasher.
So I don’t understand how this case could possibly have been won. Even a GRC wouldn’t protect someone in this circumstance, would it?

Too busy defending a man who wants to flash women.

We are fucked.

So now, a biological male can walk into a women's changing room, walk around with his full male intact genitalia on display, and HE is protected if anyone dares to complain.
What if there had been children in there?
Where is the safeguarding?

The law is now PROTECTING indecent exposure.

If anyone has seen the video footage of the Wii Spa incident in USA, the women were all walking about modestly covered in robes and towels.
THAT is how normal women behave. Biological women have never felt the need to parade about with their genitals on display, even among other biological women.
Why is it that in these two incidents (and many more including the Lia Thomas accounts from her team mates), genitals suddenly have to be displayed?
What would be the reasoning behind that?

No other religious ideology has ever reached the upper echelons of law and legislation.
We are being FORCED to accept that a feeling inside someone's head allows them to subjugate the very real rights and protections that have historically been put in place for women to PROTECT their privacy, safety and dignity.

"Accidental glimpse"?

Piss right off.

What's the difference between a man penis and a lady penis so I know when not to be offended?

I work in the NHS and have to use a changing room daily. Our changing room is far too small for the number of staff using it. There are two toilets in the changing room and these represent the only private space to change.

Lots of my colleagues are observant muslims. They queue for considerable amounts of time to change in the toilet.

I would hate for their rights to be overruled in the way that those of the women in Sheffield were.

Absolute rubbish, I and most women can tell they are trans within a nanosecond.

The poster did say "I", so I'm not sure why you thought they were speaking for anyone except themselves.

surely the question for the court is whether the individual was unfairly treated (against how any other male person would have been treated) if they were male and naked below the waist, in a women’s changing room?

That’s the crux of it. The court thought that the question was whether they were unfairly treated relative to a woman behaving the same way.

Honestly I think a woman who’d been initiating inappropriate conversations about her underwear with colleagues, who was conspicuously naked in a communal changing room where normally people don’t strip off completely, might well get spoken to about it and told she was making people uncomfortable.

But of course it’s not at all the same thing as a dick owner getting “her”(!) dick out in the women’s changing rooms and the comparator should have been another male.

I don't that and even if you can many other people can't and that's causing quite a few problems:

inews.co.uk/news/uk/butch-lesbian-public-toilet-women-abuse-government-review-gender-neutral-facilities-833787

I really hope you change yours

ill just bet you do chum 😀

"I see the women as the victims here, even the ones who left the note/had those conversations."

Says a lot that you consider a known bully a victim in this situation.