Disciplinary action for ONS female employees if they object to trans colleagues using their lavatories

[ChristinaXYZ]

This -

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/30/ons-female-employees-disciplinary-object-trans-toilets/

"Women working for the Office for National Statistics face disciplinary action if they object to male-born colleagues using single-sex lavatories and changing rooms, documents leaked to The Sunday Telegraph reveal.

A cache of HR policies, internal communications and posts from the ONS intranet show that the statistics body has been subject to “institutional capture” by trans activists, gender critical campaigners have alleged...

A set of ONS resources on “Gender Identity and Transitioning at Work” includes a manager’s checklist for supporting a transitioning employee with a section headed “use of single-sex facilities”.

It says: “Have you agreed when the employee will start to use single-sex facilities, such as toilets and changing rooms, appropriate to their acquired gender? This will usually be on the first day of transition.”

The document says that “if colleagues object to sharing facilities with employees going through transition, the situation should be dealt with through communication, discussion and education”.

“If colleagues persist with unreasonable objections you may need to manage the situation via grievance or disciplinary procedures.”"

Much more detail including a response from Sex Matters in the article linked above.

Interestingly I was chatting to a gay friend recently, who said he had no idea where the whole TQ stuff came from, and he loathed the word queer because of how it was used when he was a teenager.

So not in his name either, by the sound of it.

As for ONS, all I can say is, FFS. I am beyond reasoned comment.

Officially National shits!

Is it absolutely unthinkable that the ONS might have said, to the male employees, "This colleague is transitioning. Colleague will continue to use the sexed facilities, any objections to sharing facilities with employees going through transition, the situation should be dealt with through communication, discussion and education”.
Etc.

Men need to broaden the bandwidth of being male, to adapt a phrase. One of the ways to do this is to educate other men into accepting TW in their spaces without any of the consequences that TW put forward as the driver for needing to use women's spaces.

TW might even ask their male allies to be their shield against other men if they are apprehensive about the risk of visiting the work facilities.

This would have a far greater impact on acceptance than coercive control of women. If what you're interested in is social acceptance rather than the coercive control of women on every level from individual to social, legal, civic etc.

I suspect that there have been many effeminate men, and young men, and vulnerable men who have been similarly horribly abused in men's jails, despite not having a "gender identity".

Prisons are, by their very nature, violent places - and the male estate especially so.

Terrible as these assaults are, it doesn't mean that women should be subjected to sexual violence in order to protect men.

They need to address male violence, not put women at risk.

I suspect that there have been many effeminate men, and young men, and vulnerable men who have been similarly horribly abused in men's jails, despite not having a "gender identity".

Exactly. And the reason that this happened to this MTF trans person at the time was probably that horribly, it wasn't all that unusual in men's prisons for young men to experience that type of abuse, as you say,

Apologies I meant to quote @Emotionalsupportviper

There'll be sex offenders in prisons who are vulnerable, too.

There will be men who are in prison for non violent crime who could be a danger to others.

Thats why Nicola Sturgeon reframing isla bryson being placed in the male estate as because hes a rapist, rather than because hes male, was a lie. And ultimately unachievable.

There's an idea that prisons should be separated by violence of crime rather than sex. But even ignoring the obvious - women would still only make up 5% of the prison population therefore would be outnumbered in any non sex based prison category, there isn't a formula to determine the level of risk someone poses. The only thing prisons can do is estimate the risk to a given prisioner, and mitigate for that while in the correct sex prison.

“ONS follows statutory guidance and set out how to deal with employees who won’t accept that after it’s been communicated to them” is not really a story.

What statutory guidance instructs employers to subject female employees to disciplinary procedures if they object to a male colleague watching them get undressed in the female changing room?

Could you provide a link to it?

“ONS refuses to respect the safety and dignity of its female employees” is the story though @DadJoke

Not that you’d notice. Or care.

Please do just ignore posters coming here and talking out of their arse to spread misinformation because they hate women. This is a clear example of the type of thing the Forstater ruling was intended to address. The right not to believe men can become women on their say so is a protected belief. Single sex toilets in the workplace are not just subject to the Equality Act, either. Any harassment or discrimination by an organisation or its employees against women at work simply for requesting female only spaces for their privacy and dignity is potentially illegal under the EA.

This is clearly not legitimate. They are not providing a single sex space, and in that case where facilities are mixed sex the facilities need to be enclosed in single rooms. See Health and Safety at Work Act.

Women aren't objecting to "trans people" they are objecting to men invading their privacy and dignity.

Oh dear. With every post you type you show your utter contempt for women ( the actual ones of the adult human female variety). Is it intentional?

I'm glad everyone sees through his "more feminist and reasonable than thou" nonsense.

I was wondering whether he was a long-running psychological experiment or work of performance art: your theory is interesting also.

Occam’s razor in real time.

There's a certain type of man who glories in the contempt for women's rights that gender identity ideology has brought about. There's only one reason why any of these men hang about on a board where most women stand up against it. And it isn't a particularly nice or edifying one.

When the solution to a problem causes a bigger problem than that being addressed then it is reasonable to suggest it is neither viable or desirable to continue to follow that path.

This holds true for all minority issues whether that be sexuality, religion etc.

Silencing or punishing dissenting voices is an appalling tactic that is destined for failure.

Example from EHRC's 2022 guidance:

I'm reminded of this thread when reading comments from men advocating for women's boundaries to be breached:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5038366-men-who-harass-women-are-low-status-males

Well you could wonder to yourself if any of this lot spend any time scolding educating men on male dominated forums. Probably not eh. Then draw any conclusion you want, why that is.

😂😂😂😂😂

I've seen suggestions that FWR is subject to expts. involving Turing Test bots and I'm not finding that as humorous or far-fetched a suggestion as I used to (although it was tongue in cheek, iirc).

Study: How much will FWR posters continue to engage with community disruptor bots? (Discuss, if preference is for essay questions.)

But maybe this is an evaluation of performance art bots given some of the stuff that the Arts Council has funded…It could even be a mass chatbot re-education module given that so much of the population will need re-education with these employment policies as they spread throughout the land.

Every time I read that thread, certain posters come to mind.