Unions threatening strike action if males with a trans identity not allowed access to female toilets.

[GargoylesofBeelzebub]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14717831/amp/Civil-servants-threaten-strikes-transgender-toilets.html

I'm genuinely perplexed by what they hope to achieve here. The outcome can't be for the government just to ignore the law.

Will we find out how many members do actually support the Supreme Court ruling as surely a vote will be required?

I think the activists in the unions will have a shock if they are expecting people to lose money for this cause.

Let them vote on it. Please.

It might force people to actually say something.

This'll definitely get the public behind them....definitely

Lots of people I know are still furious with PCS for rejecting a very good pay offer a few years ago. They would rather play act as revolutionary rather than actually represent their members.

Generally the people who go to conference are the pretty committed zealots, aren't they? So I've a nasty feeling this would pass. But whether the normies are prepared to actually strike over it is another matter.

Seriously, does anyone know of a proper public services union that actually recognises women's rights?

Why is it so important to Unions to try to ignore the law and the SC clarification and insist on destroying women's rights. Their trans identifying male members must be a tiny minority. Why would the demands of a tiny minority be far more important to them than women's rights and also, you know, the law!

Are people really going to strike over this? Mortgages, cost of living crisis, school holidays looming, will men who want into women's toilets really be more important than wages? I think not.

Most union members in the department I used to work for never went on strike even for pay disputes. They are not going to lose a day’s pay and reckonable service for this. It is virtue signalling by people on 100% facility time who get paid to virtue signal.

The PCS will claim that it’s their responsibility to look out for the interests of this ‘marginalised’ minority. They will ignore the concerns of the majority of their members especially the female kind

It'd be funny to see a union conference vote for it only for all its members to cross the line or defect to a less battshittery union.

They would have to ballot members, members who dont strike over pay, so good luck with that one.

This reminds me of the video clip of a conference in the US. The audience members were so busy virtue signalling and complaining about everything that the introduction went on for ever. Everything from reminding speakers to use pronouns to scolding the audience about clapping and calling out loudly as it upset the autistic members with auditory sensitivity. It was like a fictional parody but unfortunately it was not.

They have lost their collective minds but remember the union types are often 'beardy nice guy I'm a feminist' types until you scratch the wafer thin veneer. The rape and death threats aren't far below the surface.

Can't see this getting through a ballot.

Not only do you have to get a majority of votes but also over 50% of members have to submit ballots - and it's a postal vote.

Strikes cost you money - can't see people being willing to lose money because a small number of people are unhappy about toilet facilities.

Seriously, does anyone know of a proper public services union that actually recognises women's rights?

I would be interested in this too. I know the Darlington nurses are setting up their own union but is that just for nurses?

And factoring in the percentage of Union members who are women.

Oh it's this guy again:

https://gendercriticalwoman.blog/2023/06/04/saorsa-amatheia-tweedale/

Anyone in UCU? I can totally see them upscaling to "five fights", the idiots.

He's always reminded me of characters from one episode of BtVS, but MN keep taking down my post if I put up a picture to see if anyone else can see the resemblance 😟 So this time I'll keep quiet 🤫

This absolutely won't happen, they will not get anywhere near the members needed to even get to a ballot to strike. The unions are flexing their muscles but if they went to their members to say lose money over this particular issue they'll be laughed all the way out of government.

Their demands sound utterly batshit, most likely even to people who prefer to sit on the fence e.g. their stance on women's sports and puberty blockers.

I hope this gets through the ballot as a yes and people in the union have full transparency over what they are being asked to strike over.

Bring it on ☀️

I actually hope the unions do have a vote on this, and that they do vote to strike. It will be very interesting to see how many of these Righteous virtue-signallers will actually put their literal money where their mouth is. And even more interesting to see how a strike for this cause goes down with the general public.

Reform will have good fun making Labour squirm on this.

Icake.
The Gentlemen perchance?

Or Kemi Badenoch in the next PMQs....

"Is the Prime Minister aware that the largest union for civil servants is considering strike action over males no longer being allowed into women's sports and changing rooms and vulnerable children no longer having access to puberty blockers? How does he plan to lead this country when its government departments are advocating against its laws?"

I am a PCS member and rep.

It is a democratic union where any member can put something forward, and if it is endorsed at a branch meeting and doesn't break any rules it can go forward to conference. Personally, I think this is a good thing- motions put forward in previous years came from GC women when 'no debate' was the TRA line. Now we get the opposite.

Most motions will not be considered by conference, they will time out. If it does pass, (and it may well pass if it comes to a vote) it will probably disappear into a myriad of committees for consideration, and no ballot will ever take place.

If it is put to a ballot I would say very few members would vote to take action on this, and many reps wouldn't bother to campaign to encourage them to do so.

I don't know if that is helpful info or not, but my view is this is a variation on the annual Daily Mail theme of 'let's see which motion put forward to conference this year seems most rage inducing, and then mislead people into thinking all civil servants support it.'