Hats off to Fair Play for Women.

[Thelnebriati]

''The equalities watchdog is urgently reviewing its guidance for employers on single-sex jobs as women’s refuges are “routinely” and “unlawfully” advertising positions to male-born applicants.''

I'll put the archived link in the next post.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/16/ehrc-reviews-employer-guidance-single-sex-jobs-trans-women/

Archived link https://archive.fo/ejSTW

Might get more attention if you added it to the existing thread about this as it explains the issue in the title? Just a thought.
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5029644-ehrc-urgently-reviewing-guidance-on-single-sex-jobs

Go FPW!!! Thanks OP.

I've such admiration for Nic Williams and FPFW. Tireless advocates for women's rights and sport.
It's such a pleasure to see so many thoughtful, insightful, politically activist feminist groups, courageously standing up to the relentless bullying and intimidation of women. As well as centring safeguarding children in the face of relentless efforts to gaslight them into believing their growing bodies are wrong and need fixing.

Dr Williams and FPFW have been very effective

They need to add Scottish Women's Aid to their list.

Also its not clear from this and the earlier article whether FPFW are talking about occassions when employment groups have quoted the exemptions that provide for single sex employees or whether they are complaining about jobs being advertised that dont reference the exemptions but say open to women and self identifying women.

Without naming anyone, I have been told of a women's sector group that rang the EHRC about jobs being (mis) advertised under the single sex exemptions by saying open to trans women. This was in relation to be asked to help share the information about the vacancy and what the implications would be in terms of knowingly sharing information that was breaching / misquoting the law.

The response of the EHRC was that they couldn't give this advice and why not contact an employers organisation and suggested who that would be. They also said they couldn't comment, and after being passed onto another 2 employment advice organisations gave up. (One of these being an organisation well known for arbitrating in employment rights disputes - where the telephone receiptionist had heard this was an issue but none of the "professionals" had)

And finally a feminist legal advice group they then contacted said they weren't interested in giving an opinion!

Excellent article by Shonagh Dillon;

''The campaigning group Fair Play for Women (FPFW) have been raising the improper use of Schedule 9 Occupational requirements in job adverts, with the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), since July 2021''

https://thecritic.co.uk/self-id-versus-survivors/

Think this is a really poor article and adds nothing whatsoever to what is actually happening.

As a puff piece for FPFW it is adequate but in terms of understanding what has and is happening is useless. Might have been groundbreaking 5 years ago, but for now useless.

Seriously, all these women who set themselve up to write article could save themselves a lot of time and their reputation by at least reading FWR which would make sure their knowledge was up to date.

Very good. More about Shonagh. She founded and runs the Aurora New Dawn women's refuge in Portsmouth.

twitter.com/ShonaghDillon

www.aurorand.org.uk/#:~:text=Dr%20Shonagh%20Dillon%2C%20CEO%20at%20Aurora%20%5B%E2%80%A6%5D

Is it that these organisations think they have to trans identified people under the law, or is that they want to allow them for ideological reasons?

RCCs aren't including trans women because they have to, but because they want to. The only people who could even technically be said to be discriminated against in these adverts are non-transgender men. The idea that they are including trans women because of fear of being accused of discrimination suggests she doesn't know the first thing about the policies of most RCCs. Beira's Place perfectly entitled to exclude trans women, the others are perfectly entitled to include them.

Dr Nicola Williams, director of FPFW, said fresh guidance on this issue was needed because many organisations are “misinterpreting” equality laws.
She said: “The Equality Act has exemptions which allow employers to lawfully restrict a job role when necessary, such as with positions in women’s domestic violence refuges, to people of the female sex.
“This does not include people whose sex is male even if they identify as women and have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.
“But domestic violence and rape charities are now routinely misinterpreting this law because of the mistaken belief that they must still invite trans women to apply for female-only jobs for fear of being accused of discrimination.”

This is nonsense. Women who need a female only service are being discriminated against. When asked, which is rare, most female survivors give this as their preference. You can't just erase that discrimination by ignoring that preference.

Nicola Williams knows plenty about this issue and FPFW have published research on it. Shonagh Dillon runs an organisation which completely values the need of most women for female only services. They do support both men and women who don't want to use a female only service as well, via different services.

@DadJoke Beira's Place perfectly entitled to exclude trans women, the others are perfectly entitled to include them

And what are the survivors who need to use these services entitled to?

Or shouldn't they expect their needs to be centred? Is there a 'greater good' to which they should be sacrificed?

As Lady Haldane ruled, the current position is that men who identify as women without a GRC are legally men for all purposes under the Equality Act. They are not legally a type of woman. They are unequivocally men. So any organisation which admits these men is a mixed sex service.

FPFW published this report in 2018, nearly 6 years ago.

https://fairplayforwomen.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/FPFWreportt_19SEPT2018.pdf