EHRC Interim Guidelines post Supreme Court ruling are the ones employers and "other duty bearers" should follow

[IwantToRetire]

The Supreme Court ruled that in the Equality Act 2010 (the Act), ‘sex’ means biological sex.

This means that, under the Act:

• A ‘woman’ is a biological woman or girl (a person born female)
• A ‘man’ is a biological man or boy (a person born male)

If somebody identifies as trans, they do not change sex for the purposes of the Act, even if they have a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC).

• A trans woman is a biological man
• A trans man is a biological woman

This judgment has implications for many organisations, including:

• workplaces
• services that are open to the public, such as hospitals, shops, restaurants, leisure facilities, refuges and counselling services
• sporting bodies
• schools
• associations (groups or clubs of more than 25 people which have rules of membership)

In workplaces, it is compulsory to provide sufficient single-sex toilets, as well as sufficient single-sex changing and washing facilities where these facilities are needed.

more details about toilets and to download the guidance for employers etc., go to https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/media-centre/interim-update-practical-implications-uk-supreme-court-judgment

Just posting as it seems many are finding employers etc., are thinking the court ruling is just a topic for discussion - or something they can interpret - rather than follow (to the letter of the law)!

Will bump each day there is a thread where a discussion starts about what are the implications of the court ruling and / or an employer, council or whoever says they dont know what to do.

Have to admit that all these companies and organisations (the Co-Op/the WI for example) who take it upon themselves to issue a sombre statement on the SC Ruling not only make themselves look laughable but let me know how deep their misogyny runs - which means I’ll avoid them like the plague from now on.

Bye bye milk dash to the Co-Op - you’re overpriced anyway 👋

Rather than giving up on the Co-op please make your voices heard. It’s a member owned organisation with an AGM coming up open to all members

Bump for NEU!

And for new thread today about disappointing response from work.

Also a reminder that Sex Matters have a long article about toilets aat work! https://sex-matters.org/posts/publications/workplace-toilets-know-your-rights/

Just bumping again because of new threads about toilets.

The interim guidelines does include guidance of toilets.

So any institution that fails to follow the interim guidance straight away could be sued for sex-discrimination? And their insurers will not be happy (vis-a-vis legal liability insurance).

Of course they will also need to ensure adequate and dignified provision for trans people, to avoid gender reassignment discrimination too.

So there's hard practical work to be done. Let's hope they don't waste any time or effort on second-guessing the ruling or guidance or trying to make political capital out of the situation with extravagant displays of indignation and pandering! As if they would.

So any institution that fails to follow the interim guidance straight away could be sued for sex-discrimination? And their insurers will not be happy (vis-a-vis legal liability insurance).

If you do a quick search of the internet you will see most firms of solicitors are all giving advice on following the interim guidance.

And it could be said they are drumming up business but equally they wouldn't gain a good reputation if they advised clients only to find out later they didnt need to make changes.

And as this is about following the law, and people who talk law language are advising following the interim guidance I dont understand why anyone thinks there is any question!

Although Sex Matters thinks some of this advice is over complicated
https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/why-are-lawyers-encouraging-confusion-about-the-law/

Special bump for the House of Commons who are ignoring, but cant explain why, the Interim Guidelines!

This thread places undue importance on the Guidelines. Compliance with the Act is what is needed. The Guidelines are practical discussions of same but no more.

Undue importance!!!?

It is a way of logging how or who had taken any notice of the EHRC.

The EHRC is the Government appointed body to provide guidelines.

It isn't a discussion point.

Why would anyone think that having this thread is saying it is THE important point.

Get a grip.

It is a way of logging who thinks they should comply with the conventions set up via the UK political system.

And who doesn't.

And the far larger group who are flapping around saying we dont know what to do.

Does this help you get a perspective na understand its purpose.

When has any thread on FWR claimed its focus is THE focus.

And it is also a useful reminder to those who dont know or whose employer tells them they dont know the link they need to follow.

And each time a thread is started which is about my employer says I dont know what to do about toilets I will continue to bump it.

You of course, are welcome to ignore it!

Bumping again because 2 new threads today about toilets.

Not against the threads, but just shows how many are ignoring the very clear guidelines from the EHRC.

So clear that even the Scottish Government is following them.

Although realise that with so many deliberately briefing that the EHRC has gone to far, or its not final or whatever some might be in doubt or find this "doubt" a convenient excuse.

I am sure there were many threads during June with lots of institutions and TRAs saying it was all impossible, rushed and unfair. But forgot to add to this thread.

But the reality is the Interim Guidelines still stand, and for a change today there was one thread with a commercial company illustrating how the guidelines could be implemented.

But, as if it would be any different, Islington Council complaining it cant be done, should be stopped, etc., etc..