Oh NC is setting this up well.
ED is behaving a certain way because shes supposed to and thats whats shes been trained to do.
So how is anyone more junior supposed to speak up and say anything against training because if they do they will merely be sent for retraining because ED can't say no to Upton?
Circular argument time.
Hope that NC is going to the full hog on this.
ED's job isn't to ask if anyone is uncomfortable. As their superior and due to training they can't say anything. She should be acting on behalf of staff in assuming there may be someone with an issue because sex is protected and changing rooms are explictly mentioned in the equality act as an area of exception. ED as the senior person should automatically be preempting this by saying NO to Upton and making other arrangements to preserve the privacy and dignity of ALL staff. Because this is in line with safeguarding training. She has the duty to protect ALL staff and ALL view points on this - there are multiple protected characteristics here. Sex and gender reassignment are BOTH protected under the EA. Religion would also possibly be a consideration in this scenario too. ED SHOULD know this.
She shouldn't be expecting junior staff to speak up to object. Its a power imbalance situation.
This is the whole argument about kids being asked by adults about objecting and there being a problem with hierachical and social pressure to conform meaning there is undue pressure - thus 'consent' may not necessarily be valid.
A manager who had done safeguarding training and has learnt about the idea of consent should be able to see power imbalances and undue pressures placed here.
I hope NC goes down this route in time. Its relevant