Work disappointing response to the Supreme Court ruling

[thistlewhistlewheest]

I'm feeling very disheartened and a little worried this morning after reading a work communication from our Head of HR responding to the Supreme Court ruling (below).

I wasn't sure what the corporate stance was before, although the company "women's" group is very clear in its mission statement that it includes all gender IDs. now I guess they're making it clear.

In terms of segregated spaces it won't be a big deal here in our head office as all our toilets and shower/changing are completely enclosed individual unisex rooms so there's no safety/privacy concerns, but this won't be the case in our smaller offices.

I'm also worried as I recently (before the ruling) opened up to some colleagues with my terf views and didn't get a great response, now with the language in the communication below I feel worried that I may be reported and it could harm my career.

I haven't been here very long but am in a relatively senior leadership role. I was really hoping I could start openly supporting women in the organisation by taking a more prominent role in the women's group but now I think I'll need to stay quiet even longer.

Anyone know any links I could share if I'm feeling brave that counter the two links below in a reasonable / balanced way??

"As leaders and managers here at xxxx, you set the tone and right now, following the recent Supreme Court ruling, it’s more important than ever that we show what inclusion really means in practice.
Let’s be clear, discrimination, bullying or disrespect towards anyone, including our trans colleagues or customers, has no place here. It goes against everything we stand for, and we will not tolerate it.
If you see or hear anything that feels off, whether it’s a comment, a joke, or something more serious—you have a responsibility to step in. That means addressing it directly where safe to do so and always following our processes for reporting and managing concerns. Ignoring it isn’t an option.
We also ask that you create space for your teams to talk, ask questions, and share how they’re feeling. You don’t need to have all the answers—but you do need to listen, lead with empathy, and point people to the right support.
You’re not alone in this. If you’re unsure what to say or how to handle a situation, reach out to our colleague network group leads, members of the EDI&B steering group on xxxx or HR and our resources on the xxxxx we’re here to help.
How we respond now matters. Together, we can make sure this stays a workplace where everyone feels safe, seen, and supported.
There’s some great resources available on how to be a trans ally, and we encourage you to take some time to access them: https://www.amnesty.org.uk/.../gender-identity-beginnerss_
https://www.stonewall.org.uk/.../the-truth-about-transs_

And in the meantime a few odd mentions of people losing lawsuits for not following the EA...

I think it is worthwhile to point that technically they are breaking the law if they don't provide certain facilities as single sex and you want a clear statement how to explain this if someone complains

That’s grim whistle and Stella, so sorry you’re surrounded by the Spanish Inquistion. Sounds like they are going to follow the law, albeit with bad grace. Fingers crossed your jobs are both safe but - at a minimum - keep copies of all of these letters/policies outside any computer your work has access to. As we saw in the Jo Phoenix case, ETs aren’t impressed by these documents and are pretty good at correctly interpreting them as harassment against GC beliefs.

As senior manager, you could frame a query in terms of your concern around exposing the company to liability around GC employees and/or women who expect their sex-based rights to be enforced under the following the SC ruling.

The resources they’ve provided to you don’t adequately address the balancing of (protected) GC beliefs, sex-based rights and trans rights, and you might express that this is an incredibly complex area of law in which people will inevitably have competing interests that can potentially open the company up to discrimination claims from all sides (e.g. Darlington nurses, the Forstater case, Allison Bailey).

I know they will say they’re waiting for the EHRC guidance first, but it’s pretty short-sighted to actively encourage you to discuss this with your teams in the meantime, as it’s a recipe for disaster.

It might be worth reading a few of the relevant sections of the SC judgment (whichever bits are most relevant to your business and setup) before you say anything, so you can quote the SC on anything they might otherwise try to twist into ‘transphobia’.

Overall, I would frame your approach (if you decide to make one) as needing more guidance to protect the company and to handle this in a balanced and sensitive manner.

The other option is to wait until it inevitably arises in practice (from employees talking about it, an issue with toilets, etc) rather than initiating a conversation about it based on hypotheticals, especially as the focus won’t be on you as the perceived ‘troublemaker’ that way. I agree the Legal Feminist advice posted upthread is very helpful.

@thistlewhistlewheest in your shoes with an email like that I would keep my head down.

The only other option is a question along the lines of

"As a leader/ manager I agree that we set the tone and right now, following the recent Supreme Court ruling, it’s more important than ever that we show we follow the law and apply it fairly and consistently. This means treating all colleagues and customers with dignity and respect irrespective of their protected characteristics and beliefs.

Trans colleagues and customers are protected from discrimination by the gender reassignment protected characteristic in the same way as people with gender critical beliefs are protected under the religion and belief protected characteristic.

How do we as leaders/manager’s take the heat out of the debate and ensure that no one is discriminated against, bullied or disrespected? “

I am sure someone can soften what I’ve drafted.

Yes, i agree. But we must also be pragmatic.
We need to feed and clothe ourselves and our families. Keep a roof over our and their heads.

I would also add for OP as long as she isn't encountering anything untoward herself, either as a one-off or regularly, it won't help anyone, least of all her, to say anything. Keeping your powder dry - also for "selfish" reasons - is a good strategy.

Thank you @Harassedevictee @LonginesPrime very well worded. I think I will be keeping my head down for now. But I am a bit more prepared.

I could have written your post OP. Not a Manager anymore and whilst I am disgusted with what is coming out from EDI and the Women's group) at work (e.g.JK Rowling is a bigot, need to protect trans folk, lesbians can be men, Supreme Court is wrong etc) I know I will be managed out if I say anything. I need a job and feel so isolated and quite frankly angry that no-one is reigning this in and protecting women.

Yes. But also an email asking HR etc to be fair and respect all views as well as women, politely framed , would not hurt at all

oh i agree that if OP feels able and won't be putting her head on the block, a quick note along the lines of "isn't it great we have clarity, and have been reminded that our trans colleagues/customers are protected under 2 characteristics. Have we made sure we have taken all steps to protect us from any complaints re single sex spaces etc?" is really showing willing but not compromising OPs beliefs.

But again, we all have to know when to do that, and when to keep stumm. In my last job, even that would have had me managed out.

@SugarPlumFairyCakes sorry to hear this 😔

As a prudent manager do ask if the insurers were consulted
Under the employment act female employees are guaranteed single sex toilets and the Supreme Court determined transwomen are men. Ergo your business is a slam dunk win for a lawsuit.
Money always talks, just look at the FA. They don't suddenly care about women; the insurers told them they wouldn't pay if they continued.

I would target two routes, depending on your time, energy or appetite.

1. Workplace liability. The regs have not changed at all - the SC judgement merely clarified them. I would raise this as a backside-covering measure as single sex toilets are statutory and whilst its fine at your workplace, its not fine at your other sites. You are open to indirect discrimination on grounds of sex and direct discrimination on grounds of religion (e.g. Muslim and Jewish women who need privacy on those grounds). Point out the shitshow in the NHS and ask them if they want the reputation damage and expense.

2. If the women's group is that captured, I would either: a) manoeuvre myself to take it over or b) start my own mentorship group outside of it. This wouldn't be an ostensibly GC group, but instead looking at career opportunities, upskilling and ways to support women in the workplace after maternity leave, through menopause and through caring duties. You can frame this as a way to retain employees and tackle the gender pay gap.

In each case, keep the focus on women (because you won't win the trans argument as its based on feels, not facts). You want to make it really, really hard for HR and the CEO to say no because it sounds so reasonable and helps the company.

Firstly I would go back and express concern that they seem to be implying that the Supreme Court ruling was ‘bad’ in some way for inclusion, when actually it sets out how the Equality Act protects everyone from different types of discrimination.

Secondly I would point out (with statistics) that actually, in any given population, the number of people who are likely to benefit from this ruling far exceeds anyone who may be feeling hard done by. The statistics I would use to do this are:
ONS census stats which almost certainly overstate the transgender population but at least provide a starting point vs

Yougov polls showing what the entire population thinks about this subject (showing their messaging may be a little off - most people agree with the SC)

And then women - using statistics that show the prevalence of women who have been sexually assaulted.
Men and women of various religions (census stats again may be useful).

Sorry OP, but it looks to me like your organisation is totally captured. I honestly think you are on a hiding to nothing trying to challenge this statement and could put your own job at considerable risk to do so.

The fact the links are to well known trans advocacy organisations sends a very strong message and the emails as a pp says is full of menace.

I think it is a case of keeping your head down for now. Try discreetly winkling out other allies (they will be there), and adopting a watchful waiting policy. If the org persists with breaking the law, you will have receipts to act, but for now, keep your powder keg dry!

I absolutely understand why you may not yet want to put your head above the parapet. However if you do I put a few bullets together that may be useful to you

Think all these are helpful ways to frame it so it is not combative. instead inquisitive and thoughtful.

(yes I got chatGPT to help me put them together, I hope thats ok here?)

Legal and Policy-Focused Actions
• Request a Policy Review: Raise a formal query with HR or Legal about whether the company has reviewed its facilities, inclusion statements, and training materials in light of the Supreme Court ruling and the EHRC interim guidance (which clarifies the lawful provision of single-sex services under the Equality Act).
• Request Insurance Input: Ask whether the company’s insurers have been consulted about liability risks around single-sex facilities, belief discrimination, and conflicting rights (e.g. as seen in the Darlington NHS case).
• Highlight Statutory Requirements: Politely remind the business that under workplace regulations, women are legally entitled to access single-sex toilets. This is not optional and may create liability if not met, especially in smaller offices or client-facing locations.

Framing, Tone & Strategy
• Keep the Framing Corporate: Don’t lead with “gender critical” ideology—lead with risk, law, and the need for a balanced, lawful approach. You’re not objecting to trans inclusion—you’re asking for clarity on how to include everyone without breaching the law.
• Point Out the Legal Balance: Emphasise that both gender reassignment and gender critical belief are protected characteristics under the Equality Act. Ask how the company plans to uphold both rights fairly and without hostility.
• Ask for Specific Guidance: As a senior leader being encouraged to have conversations with your team, request guidance or scripts that are legally accurate and do not lead managers into potential legal hot water (especially around belief discrimination).
• Ask About Single-Sex Provision Across Sites: Express concern that smaller offices may not provide legally compliant single-sex toilets or private spaces for religious or vulnerable groups. Highlight that ignoring this could open the company to indirect discrimination claims.
• Gently Challenge the Framing: Ask whether the HR team believes the SC ruling itself is in conflict with inclusion goals, and if so, why? Frame your question around ensuring alignment with UK law while maintaining respectful workplace culture.

Data & Communications Strategy
• Use Stats and Polling: If you do get into conversations or discussions around comms, have these to hand:
• ONS Census 2021: 0.5% of UK population identify as trans
• Women: 51% of the population, with 1 in 4 women experiencing sexual assault
• YouGov (2023): Majority of UK public supports single-sex spaces, women’s sport, and the SC ruling
• Consider a Women’s Initiative: If the existing women’s group is ideologically captured:
• Propose a parallel or complementary group focused on professional development, menopause support, maternity returners, carers, etc. Frame it as a talent retention and gender pay gap initiative.

Soft Strategy (If You Choose to Wait)
• Don’t Raise Hypotheticals: If you’re unsure whether to act, it may be wise to wait until something concrete happens (e.g., someone raises a concern, or policy is applied unfairly). That way, you’re responding to a real event, not creating a perception of disruption.
• Keep Notes: If you do feel worried about your views being used against you, document all interactions, meetings, or incidents. If discrimination ever arises, you’ll have a paper trail.

Everyone is providing loads of fantastic info, it'll be useful for anyone else in a similar situation and I suspect there will be loads more coming out the wood work in the next few months.

In principle, you’re right. But you are speaking as a man (if I am remembering right from your other thread) and the OP is (I think) female. While it should not matter, what has become really clear from the reaction to the SC ruling that there are a lot of people and a lot of organisations that really see women as sub-human, and are likely to react more negatively and more punitively to that sort of feedback from a female colleague rather than a male one. I know it’s unlawful, but I do think there is a greater risk of OP being discriminated against if she raises this in an environment where everyone is in the “all hail the mighty trans” zone.

OP - I feel for you. It is so hard really wanting to do something and feeling you should but also feeling you are too scared of people’s reactions and the personal consequences. I hope you find an outlet soon that you can feel constructive about.

Absolutely get that, and not trying to be pushy at all. I do understand the real privilege I (sometimes) benefit from! I also have a habit of making a fuss, occasionally too much

@AlexandraLeaving thank you 🙏

I think the outcome of Sandie Peggie and the Darlington Nurses cases will have an impact on employers.

Ask for Specific Guidance: As a senior leader being encouraged to have conversations with your team, request guidance or scripts that are legally accurate and do not lead managers into potential legal hot water (especially around belief discrimination)
This is probably worth thinking about. The bit in their statement about 'have conversations, lead sith empathy' is unbelievably naive. They haven't understood the landscape here at all.

Very very true.