Nightmare proposed trans policy at work

[GCWorkNightmare]

Work are consulting on a new trans and non-binary support policy. Policy states that trans people have the right to use whichever toilets and changing rooms they like and that anyone objecting should be educated and offered to use different facilities if they still object. When I queried it I was told that the Landrover case confirmed this as law.

Pointed out that this discriminated against women of some religions, victims of VAWG etc but they’re holding firm.

Can anyone give me info/links to refute this?

They also want a category of special leave without limits for trans people.

We are a National non-unionised company.

It was a few posts about a reddit thread re. Women using a different changing room rather than the female one with the tw. I think it was in Norway. Then there were posts a couple of days ago about not putting tw in private rooms rather than female wards because genderwoo. Any woman who complained was to be told there were only women on the ward. I presume by someone who smiled too much, didn't blink enough and stood too close.

But then the disabled facilities aren't as available for disabled people? That doesn't seem very fair.

@Helleofabore
Staggering that an employer/HR department could be so paralysed with fear.

The micro aggression aspect was discussed on here back in 2019. The civil service showcased their version of coercive control of women by lecturing them about the required facial expressions and body language that were required from any women who encountered a man self identifying as a woman in any women's facilities - toilet, changing room, showers etc.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3520371-civil-service-trans-policy-what-can-i-do

Well done for bringing it up.
✊

This isn’t supersafe. It’s unsafe to many women who have epilepsy, particularly catamenial epilepsy. Gaps at the bottom of toilet doors let people know if someone has collapsed and more likely to prevent something unsafe happening (sexual assault, drug use).

@RoyalCorgi
I don't think that the EA is unclear as to whether single sex means single sex and whether opposite sex transpeople can be excluded from those spaces or services. Both the former AG Suella Braverman and the EHRC confirmed those points. Not to mention the Inner House decision in the case of the Scottish census about the meaning of woman in the EA2010. Stonewall law is misinterpreting and the SNP administration in Scotland is challenging, but unless and until their interpretation is backed by a higher court, the meaning of SS, woman or man is clear.

Absolutely, the EHRC link in my post above clarifies that there is no general 'right' for trans people to access single sex facilites when their exclusion can be justified for reasons of privacy, dignity or safety.

So pretty much anywhere where sex actually matters - eg toilets, changing rooms, sports, prisons - all males can legally be excluded.

The problem now is that many so many people believe in Stonewall's misrepresentation of the law, or actually believe in trans ideology, so companies/organisations are not using the exemptions.

Because toilets at work are covered by Health and Safety at work, you DO have a right to single sex toilets.

This is insane.
People will be self ID ing just to get the special leave.
Surely that isn’t fair on non trans workers?

@BellaAmorosa thank you. If we all politely stand up to this and ask HR to do their fucking job properly we’ve got half a chance of stopping this batshittery. It’s no good just complaining on here anymore, we’ve got to speak up.
If not now, when? And if not you, who?

In all honesty, I've never met a trans person where I've thought they were not a trans person. And, they usually tell you !

@DrDinosaur , @RoyalCorgi
I forgot to address directly@RoyalCorgi 's point about GRCs!
The position is that if a space or service is declared SS, anyone of the opposite sex can be excluded, transpeople included. If a transperson has a GRC, they may also be excluded if that would be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim (eg dignity, privacy or safety). So the bar is higher but exclusion of opposite sex transpeople with a GRC from SS spaces or services is legal.

They also want a category of special leave without limits for trans people.

What!? Who wants this, the actual workplace? That takes "didn't think that through" to a whole new level doesn't it...

anyone objecting should be educated and offered to use different facilities if they still object
So that suggests there will be different facilities for people who want same-sex-only facilities - I'd ask them to clarify that. As discussed below, if this "education" means telling you you have to be subjected to males in your female space and also not leave the space because that's transphobic or mean, that's basically making a rule that women have to let men share space with them - which you can challenge. But if you can be offered an alternative, that means you can have a women-only space presumably. They probably haven't thought that through either though.

If I worked for an organisation like that, I'd be organising every woman to exclusively use the mens toilets. Preferably the Executive facilities.

You'd soon find that men don't like their privacy being stolen from them.

It was also only an ET decision so not legally binding

Oh like in the British Genius Site in Battersea park? Mens, ladies and disabled/weird Batman icon.

Why can't there just be a "I don't fit into category" toilet/changing room afterall I doubt there are large numbers.

I'm guessing the special leave is for surgery as strictly speaking it's not sick leave (most orgs don't give paid time off for plastic surgery) I don't have an issue with that myself as I have respect for those who feel that strongly to transition.

“dear line manager

in light of recent policy change, I’m now delighted to reveal I’m trans.

you probably already knew this because I’ve worn trousers, can drive a “stick” and my specialist subject is databases.

I didn’t mention it before due to persecution and micro-aggressions.

see you august!”

"educated" wow

anyone objecting should be educated and offered to use different facilities if they still object.

You might also query, OP, whether anyone objecting to women’s preference for single sex toilets will be “educated” and offered different facilities?

This would be amazing. It could be the GC version of Pregnant Then Screwed.

They also want a category of special leave without limits for trans people.

well I would identify as trans and have a year off. 😂

I would ask what the seperate facilities are or use the men's.
If the Tws are safely in the ladies and all the women use the men's (slap a gender neutral sticker on the door)Things may change if the men complain enough.

It's the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 that state that for toilets:

^separate rooms containing [sanitary] conveniences are provided for men and
women except where and so far as each convenience is in a separate
room the door of which is capable of being secured from inside.^

I think further clarification in other ACOPs now means that the separate room should contain both the toilet and hand washing / drying facilities/