Council worker sacked over pronouns

[mcduffy]

Can't do a share token as telegraph

The worker has lost a tribunal

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/07/17/gender-critical-council-employee-sacked-over-pronouns

A “gender critical” council worker was sacked after protesting the use of pronouns on his email signaturee_.
James Orwin was left furious when Caroline Lacey, the council’s chief executive, invited employees to “consider adding pronouns to your email signaturee_, should you wish to do so”.
In “protest”, Mr Orwin, an IT project officer, changed his email footer to “XYchromosomeGuy/AdultHumanMale” rather than he/himm_.

Can't read properly as it's a paywall but I assume it's because he was arsey about it, not that he didn't want to display any pronouns.

They were only asked to 'consider it' too - doesn't look like it was actually required - so he's acted pretty unprofessionally (on the basis of the few sentences in the OP).

I wonder if he represented himself so didn't have the benefit of a SHL.

I never understand why names that are obviously male or female have to have the pronoun added. In what circumstances would James be a she? I suppose he could be a they? Or an it? If you’re living as the contradictory gender, wouldn’t you change your name, too, to fit? There was that bank worker who changed gender weekly, I suppose

Basically he was fired for being an arse when asked to remove

The judge said the implementation of the policy was “poorly thought through and badly executed”, but added: “However, this does not detract from our conclusion that the purpose and intention of the policy was to comply with [the council]’s public sector equality duty.”
Given Mr Orwin’s refusal to change the footer, the judge concluded that the council had been left with “no choice” but to dismiss him.
Dismissing his claims of discrimination, he said: “None of the treatment he experienced was because of his beliefs or expression of beliefs. The treatment – all arising from hi’s refusal to remove the email signature – was because he used a provocative email sign off that was not acceptable to [the council].”

He was suspended and eventually sacked after repeatedly refusing to remove his protest pronouns

There we go then. It wasn't just 'not displaying them'.

Every employee should've gone for Juan/cur.

I often feel uncomfortable in my own body, extremely uncomfortable, but that is because I am autistic. I never considered that I might be trans, and I never will. This promotion of trans-identity and use of pronouns confuses a lot of autistics And can lead to them, taking permanently life changing and body altering medications to change their “gender”.

Yes, I’d be up in arms for him if he’d been compelled to state his pronouns. He wasn’t though, it was optional, so there was no need for him to kick off about it.

He sounds a bit dim tbh. He made his point but then stupidly dug himself into a corner with it. Big mistake.

He should have changed them weekly to various wild and wacky iterations and pleaded ignorance every time to see how long he could’ve got away with it. The whole thing deserves mockery so I applaud him for that at least.

Seems like a reasonable response by the council worker to me. it would have been better if he’d put fuck/off.

The council claimed his actions put trans people at ‘serious risk’. Where do they get this rubbish from? Would any of out TRA lurkers like to explain this risk to me?

Yeah this! He made his point - that was enough but he was a dick about it. Council didn’t have much choice

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/66952029a3c2a28abb50cf74/Mr_J_Orwin_v_East_Riding_of_Yorkshire_Council_-6000146-2022-_Final.pdf

This is the judgement. I agree it seems like their policy included neo pronouns, no pronouns etc and the opportunity to change them at different times and in different contexts. (See point 20).

What an idiot. It clearly wasn't compulsory, staff were just invited to consider adding pronouns. If he didn't agree with it just don't add them

What was offensive about what he wrote though? It's all completely true. He is an adult human male, he does have xychromosomes. Why is it provocative to state the truth?

I don't understand why it's ok for a biological male who is trans to put she/her when it's not true and just what they want people to pretend - but he's not allowed to make up something he wants people to use.

https://www.eastriding.gov.uk/news/article/?entry=65577424da1f3f61494fae42

presented without comment.

Absolutely Beth216

Everyone is allowed to identify as whatever they want … unless we don’t agree with your identity, then we’ll sack you for it.
see also:
-TWAW, right up until they rape or murder someone, then they were just men pretending (although that never happens, so let’s just keep it quiet).
-You can choose to identify as whatever you want, unless we decide you’re ‘cis’, then that is your identity however you feel about it.

The council worker was right to show up a nonsense and discriminatory policy.

WickedSerious · Today 18:56

Every employee should've gone for Juan/cur.

😂

That's probably better than mine: Fo/Ad

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/news-opinion/what-chief-executives-departure-means-8922491
“The Local Government Association's (LGA) Peer Challenge Review claimed that the council was inward-looking, with power concentrated in the hands of long-serving officers.”

”It also alleged that bullying behaviour had been witnessed during the visit of the Peer Challenge team. Although references to bullying were removed from the final version of the report, the council's failure to keep a count of cases admitted by Ms Lacey was branded unacceptable.”

I would say having to read she/her, he/him etc at the end of emails is “provocative” if like this man you don’t believe in trans ideology. I think he did well to stick his neck out and only wish more people would do the same.
If he had written something rude like trans people are idiots at the end of his emails then I could see why he was sacked but simply to state the biological facts as he did is completely acceptable in my view.

I think this is firmly in the bucket of play stupid games win stupid prizes.

I also think some autistic people are likely to be more adversely affected by policies that expect them to play along with a pretence.

How does this sit with the Forstater judgement? I hope he appeals - it's an outrageous decision. He stated the truth - XY and adult male. WTF is xi/xin/Ze

I despair that local government put so much energy into this crap when their care services are failing, teachers are supplying their own colouring pens, roads are crumbling and there is fly tipping everywhere because they are reducing waste collection.

And I don't see where he was being a dick.

I think there's more to this than just being 'arsey' about his choice of pronouns [they're nouns actually..] and refusal to remove them.

Look at the reason given for suspending and sacking him:
He was suspended and eventually sacked after repeatedly refusing to remove his protest pronouns after bosses warned that they posed a “serious risk” to the transgender community and the council’s reputation. [my emphasis]

It is obviously nonsense to suggest that by using mocking but accurate pronouns this worker was in any way a 'serious risk' to trans people, it sounds like our old friend 'literal violence', doesn't it?

It's also a very serious accusation to make against a worker - not that they are being arsey or a dick, or refusing to follow orders, but that they are behaving in a threatening way, posing a 'serious risk' to members of the public.

Being asked to remove your choice of pronouns because they are irritating and OTT is one thing; being told your are behaviour is so dangerous and threatening to trans people that you're going to be sacked is something else.

"In “protest”, Mr Orwin, an IT project officer, changed his email footer to “XYchromosomeGuy/AdultHumanMale” "

Noone likes a troublemaking smart arse.