The (large/wellknown) org I work for just joined Stonewall

[bathofbeans]

. . . and are now members of Stonewall Diversity Champions which will provide us with expertise and guidance to update our policies.

Can anyone explain to me what this will mean? What guidance will we be receiving? How could this change our organisations workplaces across England?

No unfortunately

We are charity sector.

I've just looked up SEEN and it looks really good. I'd like there to be something similar for us. It's clearly lacking and perhaps Stonewall are filling the gap . . . someone needs to close that gap!

. . . . meant say 'certainly NOT a national staff consultation'

That's a pity. I'm not sure how the coordination between the different groups happens but it might be worth contacting the original Civil Service SEEN to see if they know of an embryonic group. The charity sector is is real need. Being captured is the main reason I quit volunteering for one of the major charities.

Thanks Rozzers. I've started to read this but it's long so I'll need time to digest it.

What a shame. Good volunteers are so vital and valuable for charities.

Did you cite joining Stonewall as your reason for leaving your volunteering role?

With a large portion of volunteers in many charities being retired women, I wonder what the capacity loss is to organisations?

Would being a member of Stonewall be the decider if you chose a new charity to volunteer with?

Whether an organisation has bought into Stonewall's or similar ideology is a definite deciding factor for me. It's also one that is affecting my decision making about where I will leave money in my will which I really need to remake.

Wow, it's a gamechanger then.

I think the organisation I work for would definitely be severely affected by that stance. We are purely public funded and legacies are a vitally important part of that.

Oh dear. They could be in for a rough ride.

I think this paragraph in particular from Naomi Cunningham's article is particularly damning and it's this side of the Stonewall interference which worries me the most:

''. . . if you are a public body, your policies and public communications will matter more widely, and some of them will be amenable to judicial review. You will be bound by the public sector equality duty at section 149 of the Equality Act, and you will generally be required to act rationally and lawfully, and not to place improper or arbitrary fetters on the manner in which you make decisions, in the performance of your public functions. Policies that misstate the law or are based on an erroneous understanding of the law may themselves be unlawful. ''

'certainly NOT a national staff consultation'

Not sure which part of the charity sector you are in, but surely the primary purpose of the organisation, are its aims.

Does Stonewall's objective have any relevance to the aims of the organisation?

Also it isn't for the Board or HR to say you have to have an agreed set of beliefs to work there.

And law cases have made it clear that both trans and gender critical "beliefs" are equally protected so as the employers should not be putting one in front of the other.

However, suspect that the charity sector is even more captured than any other sector - sadly.

Sounds like you are being very sensible and informing yourself.

Are there any other members of staff you can talk to, and share concerns.

And yes if you are a unionised work place the union should help ... but many of them have been captured.

I would have thought the potential of reputational damage to the charity would be a good angle. So many newspaper reports about groups disaffiliating.

One of the things with the charity sector @bathofbeans is that trustees and senior managers often circulate around within it bringing their stonewall culture with them

so the current CEO of The Samaritans used to be CEO of the girl guides which is stonewalled to the eyeballs.

its always worth looking at your trustees to see if they have stonewall links as well

and I wouldn’t volunteer for an org on the stonewall list either

As to costs, it's not merely what the organisation has to shell out to be bullied by Stonewall but also the time taken by the unfortunate employee who has to do all the work. That has costs attached to it.

Does Stonewall's objective have any relevance to the aims of the organisation?

None that I can decipher. I'd be seriously gobsmacked if they could dovetail them somehow.

I have an immediate colleague I can chat to 'off the record' that I know is also sceptical, but no-one higher up. I overheard a serious conversation a few years back where someone was saying 'there are at least 57 genders don't you know' and the other person saying 'really wow I had no idea, that's absolutely fascinating'.

Hence my username for this thread 😄

I've had a search - can't see any obvious links so far.

And another loss for the volunteer teams. I wonder how many people feel this way? I wonder if we will lose volunteers? They are our lifeblood

Yeah, I wouldn't want to be on the EDI table right now.

Such a shame too as there is still so much work to be done in EDI to support and represent people with disabilities. I guess that will remain on the back burner indefinitely once the stonewall demands start rolling in.

Had this thought that if you had the time and inclination you could start a blog or twitter account or something and chart the progess of a charity being Stonewalled!

And it could be called "Bath of Beans"!

If you search for the National Trust and Stonewall, or Oxfam and Stonewall, you can see the kind of problems that major charities have faced. eg. https://www.thetimes.com/uk/article/backlash-over-oxfams-trans-guidance-hjmz0f86c
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/14/national-trust-tells-volunteers-wear-rainbow-face-paint-glitter/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/hundreds-of-national-trust-members-quit-in-protest-over-gay-pride-campaign-a7878131.html

I used to have a monthly budget for charitable donations. I now spend half of it on supporting crowdfunders instead (including donating to LGB Alliance) because the charity that mostly benefited from the other half went overboard with its pride display window. I dont boycott all captured organisations but I use them as little as I can,. Also I'm in the process of redrafting my will now Sex Matters is a charity, just need to tweak it a bit and get it witnessed.

Affiliation to Stonewall is definitely a factor when deciding where people donate then.

I wonder how many people have changed their donation preferences due to this?

@DrSoupDragonsFriend and @anyolddinosaur - did you let the charities know the reason you are planning to change your will / diverting your donations elsewhere?
I wonder how aware they are that they lose money over this?

I also wonder if the donation shortfall is made up by an increase in donations from 'allies'. In fact - could donations from 'allies' be a reason for the stonewall affiliation in the first place 🤔

Same as me: I preferred it when charities and NGOs were either apolitical or non-partisan in their politics.

I refuse to fund a charity or NGO that is signed up to queer theory-inspired boundary-destroying aims.

Both disabled and elderly people in our society have not seen decent improvements in support, care and funding despite the DDA (Disability Discrimination Act) and the Equality Act, and it frustrates the hell out of me that charities, NGOs, government, public transportation, shops and corporations are more happy to throw money at organisations like Stonewall than they are to seriously address proper reasonable adjustments for people with disabilities or to fund decent care for the elderly.

I work for an executive agency as a civil servant. I was shocked to receive an invitation to celebrate Pride Month, attached to a fundraising effort in favour of Stonewall. I was shocked that Stonewall hadn’t been outlawed for such events. I guess some branches of society are oblivious to the criticisms from Nolan and others.

OP: can you check your company diversity statement as it exists now? Get a screenshot and save it for future reference. You never know when you might need it.

Is there going to be a Champions company brought in for every protected characteristic?

We are supposed to be apolitical/non partisan. (can anyone define the difference between these two for me?)

Does joining Stonewall mean that we are no longer apolitical/non partisan?

I totally agree with the lack of focus on/facilities for disabilities. I am going to raise this at every available opportunity.

Apolitical means not interested in politics
Non-partisan is politically engaged but not supporting a particular party

I think

I always think it's good to muse aloud to less informed but well meaning types that it seems rather shocking a black lesbian and victim of sexual abuse would feel Stonewall had leant on her employer to discriminate against her because of her opinions.

Good call @AlisonDonut - I've made a copy

Can anyone help me complie a list of who would be a good champions companies for the other protected characterisitcs:

disability
mental health (Mind are already stonewall affiliated)
religion/belief
race
sex (sex matters I guess?)

I'd really like to see us joining all these, rather than single out just one, to guide us with our EDI policies.