New member of team at work and pronouns

[Ihopeyoudance]

I've recently recruited a new bloke to join my team, and in correspondence agreeing a start date, I can see he has pronouns in his email signature (as does his female current line manager).

He's joining a team of mostly women and we don't do that. I find it quite offensive in all honesty for a middle aged white man to be drawing attention to his privilege. I also think it's inappropriate in the workplace to make that kind of statement. I'd much rather judge him on his work performance but he's bringing in his political stance about gender identity and I do judge.
Anyway, from my conversations with him, I get the impression that he has them as those around him do and he thinks it makes him liberal and inclusive. I could be wrong though.
I really want to suggest he reconsiders this and highlight the negative perception it may evoke. He may be mortified and not have considered the alternative.
I'm the manager and don't really care about people's beliefs that don't impact work. I'm starting to put my head above the parapet though at work and don't want this kind of nonsense in my team as I find it really exclusionary. Does anyone have any suggestions for how to broach this?

Just leave it? Why even mention it? He obviously thinks it's the right thing to do and has probably come from a work place where it's standard practice. I work at a university and people are encouraged to put pronouns. I personally don't but couldn't care less if others do. I certainly wouldn't be offended or feel I have to say something.

It is not his 'right', anymore than it would be someone else's 'right' to overtly state that they are a scientologist or Buddhist in every communication.

It is a cultural expectation, not a right. Cultural expectations are the means and the method of how you embed ideology.

Because he's coming into a workplace in which it isn't, and because pronouns are an overt political statement, and a contentious one at that.

His previous manager used pronouns, not the OP, his current manger.

It’s ironic that you say you don’t want him bringing his politics to work (which he may not even do…he’s not even started yet, he may just be using a team template for his current email)…yet you want to stick your head above the parapet and bring your gender politics to work.

Leave it for now. Presumably you have a standard email template within the team? If not and he attempts to shoehorn them in then just say that you don’t use pronouns in your team as they are irrelevant to the work.

People who say they aren’t harmful are either ill informed, wilfully ignorant or disingenuous.

Important to bear in mind that the pronoun thing has the potential to have adverse impacts on employees with ASCs or LDs. Certainly I know my son who has ASD struggles with abstract concepts like « gender identity ». (So do I for that matter!)
important to remember that disability is also a protected characteristic.

@AgathaSpencerGregson that's a ridiculous stretch, does your dc not call people by their pronouns then ? Do they not call you 'she'?

In my experience the majority people who go along with this do so because they think it's 'inclusive' and the done thing. They have no idea about the whole debate.

Resistance to gender politics is just that. A resistance and a refusal to participate in a contentious issue that has been imposed without democratic consensus, and has no place in any workplace which doesn't choose it.

Let things slide may work well for some, but at the end of the day someone has to deal with the consequences. Best to nip things in the bud at the start.

I obviously don't know your company policy on political discussion in the workplace but if your employees email people outside the business they definitely shouldn't be imposing their ideology by having pronouns in their signature.

No pronouns in an email signature is the standard default position. Adding pronouns is an unprofessional political act and extremist gender ideology in itself.

Quite!

The resistance ( response) is not the same as the imposition ( initial action).

Imagine this man is a true believer in pronouns ( or even "doesn't see the harm") and at some point in the future decides he wants to use they/them pronouns. This sets up an expectation that people will have to refer to him in this way - making a super conscious effort in order to do so and to not get it wrong or " misgender" him. He sets himself apart by doing this; makes of himself as special case for whom different rules have to be applied.

If it concerns you that much you could always withdraw the job offer and recruit someone else

It’s none of your business what he does!

Chances are it’s just something his previous company does and he has no strong feelings about it, if that makes you happier.

More's the point....if pronouns are that big a deal to him then he might be better finding another workplace.

He might understand and be perfectly relieved not to have to use them.

Of course it is his manager's issue. Everything we do, or expect, on a social level is everyone's else's issue.

pronouns are an overt political statement, and a contentious one at that.

Agree with this. Perhaps a standard template sign off would be a good idea - explicitly kept professional, without indication of sex, religious beliefs, sexuality, political party, etc. It surprises me if any private company would willingly involved themselves in such a political minefield, tbh.

Yes, he does. I didn’t suggest otherwise. However, abstract concepts like « a different gender identity necessitating use of a set of pronouns other than those you would normally choose » are not accessible for
him.
can I gently suggest you might benefit from listening to those with different experiences from you more respectfully? You might be called upon one day to interact with someone like my DS.

If he wants to use it himself I have no issue but I would not male any special arrangements or ask others to do it

I personally think the whole thing is ridiculous but I don't like this control thing that is also happening, if my colleague wants to do it why do they have to stop?

Trans which way? MTF or FTM ? I think OP would have noticed, either way.

Sorry if I’ve missed it but it’s revealing that no one on this thread has suggested he has included his pronouns as he is a transman and wants to make sure people address him as such.

Which is the justification I always hear as to why we should include pronouns - to support trans people / those whose gender may not be obvious.

So if no one actually thinks that people include pronouns for the very reason the gender ideologues say they should, it makes a mockery of the whole thing! And definitely suggests to me that it’s all about virtue signalling first and foremost.

Say nothing, this has the potential to backfire on you massively.

Wait until he actually starts

I don't disagree but I meant a right in terms of current employment law & practice rather than an absolute right. If mandating no pronouns in emails was tested in an employment tribunal I think it would be ruled as belief discrimination. Don't remember the exact details but pronoun usage in work was discussed in the Forstater ruling with the expectation that observing colleagues pronouns at work was in most circs the expected professional courtesy. (Just as I, an atheist line manager, approved annual leave for religious festivals).