Work Code of Conduct - Help!

[FanFckingTastic]

I work for a decent sized US-led company. As part of our annual training we have to complete a code of conduct and confirm that we are compliant. This year there is a section on gender identity that makes me feel uncomfortable.

Firstly, there is a short video describing what gender identity is, this, of course, is presented in a way that implies that everyone believes in a gender identity in the first place...

There is an information section around revealing someone's gender identity without their consent "It's important to remember that if Barbara is trans, saying that she 'used to be a man' is not accurate. Transwomen are women, and they've never not been a woman. Their gender identity just doesn't align with the sex that they were assigned at birth"

Finally there is a topic question that must be answered around toilets. "Rebecca is transgender and today is her first day in the office since her team were told of her transition. When she goes to the ladies restroom her female colleagues see her and say that they don't want to share the same toilet as a man and walk out. Is this an example of harassment or discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity?"

I'd like to keep my job... but I also feel that I should say something here. Any tips for addressing? Has anyone else seen this and how have you handled it?

I think the computer wrote a letter that's longer than it needs to be, but It's got about the right tone to it. You might add that you're aware that there have been lawsuits, expensive and damaging to employers, which have established workers' rights to their own opinions about gender issues. And also mention that regarding the toilet issue, there are cases in court right now which (per the recent Supreme Court judgement) employers seem doomed to lose.

It would also be nice to add, "I carry no hostility towards any of my colleagues, but..." (followed by "I'm entitled to my own beliefs, and to women-only facilities".

@FanFckingTastic bit more time to give you a potential draft response. The key is to appear supportive. I’ve actually managed to focus it. Please feel free to amend.

Dear HR
Code of Conduct Training

I have just completed this training and realised it may have been written from a US legal perspective.
As a UK based employee there maybe an issue regarding compliance with UK employment law.

My primary concern is for the companies reputation and the potential risk of costly legal action. In addition Board Members, managers and employees can be held personally liable.

In Forstater vs 1. CGD Europe 2. Centre for Global Development (a US company) and 3. Masood Ahmed (CGD President and Chair of the Board of Trustees of CGD Europe). In summary the complaints against all three respondents were upheld and they were jointly required to pay compensation of over £100,000.00

The Supreme Court (UKs highest court) ruled that Scottish Government misinterpreted the Equality Act 2010. They have been ordered to pay costs of (anyone have the figure).

Currently in the UK there are two Employment Tribunals where trans people, who are employees, have been named as respondents along with their employers. It is clearly very distressing for these employees and I would not want UK based trans colleagues to find themselves in a similar position.

Is it possible to get the Code of Conduct reviewed by a UK/England lawyer to ensure it is compliant with UK employment legislation.

Thank you

"Rebecca is transgender and today is her first day in the office since her team were told of her transition. When she goes to the ladies restroom her female colleagues see her and say that they don't want to share the same toilet as a man and walk out. Is this an example of harassment or discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity?"

I'm going to assume confirming that it is indeed harassment, by Rebecca of his female colleagues, wasn't listed as an option on the question?

Sorry, wrong quote

OP, I would stick to the legal position, the risk of litigation and the implications for their insurance. That way you can raise it out of concern that the company acts according to the law rather than highlighting your personal position

Banned from what exactly?

I also agree with this. I would be sending that email anonymously and reporting them if they try to enforce the toilet stuff. And I'd keep emailing and reporting them if need be.

But I defo wouldn't ruining my career on behalf of trans activists. That'd be an own goal.

OP - easy for other people to tell you to stick your head out & risk your job, and this is what you would be doing

Anonymous reporting a good idea of you can keep it anonymous…

No: US companies don’t just fire UK employees

First they decide your face doesn’t fit
Then they downgrade your performance assessment/put you on a bogus PIP/make you redundant if you are lucky

Source: bitter experience

OP: I totally appreciate your point but think you should tread carefully

This isn’t correct - OP’s employer can still fire her!

The dismissal may well be unlawful, and OP might be successful at a tribunal later, but it doesn’t mean they can’t fire her and leave her jobless in the meantime.

There was a great tweet from the legal feminist (I think) a month or so ago that had some really useful advice on standing up for your rights (and when not to) at work, which is worth looking at. I can’t seem to find it but there was a thread on MN about it.

OP, since you want to keep your job, my advice would be to jump through the compliance training hoops to ensure you’re able to continue working, and then consider how to raise this separately afterwards (ideally anonymously in the first instance). This will at least ensure that any disciplinary action taken against you is definitely about your GC views and can’t be spun as being about non-compliance with mandatory policies (however unjust/unlawful they may be).

Anonymously raise your concerns with the training and guidance not being compliant with UK law.

US companies must comply with UK employment laws. The training was probably put together months ago before the SC ruling.

suggest you sign it off just to keep HR /manager happy (who has probably not given this any thought) & just emailUK HR to confirm your understanding of UK law on this matter & do the US need to update the material.

Am I unusual in having a third person anonymous whistleblowing link on my company intranet?

I don't think it's a case of 'not having the courage of your convictions.' I think a lot of people who don't follow all this still have this image of 'old school transexuals' or female passing transwomen. I think many aren't prepared for the reality of a bloke with a big beard walking into the changing rooms and getting his 🍆 out when they're getting changed with their young daughters or an elderly relative.

I feel most people would not be particularly keen on this yet the hate for JKR still seems quite prevalent. It feels a bit like objecting against Black Lives Matter where I know the organisation is a bit shady with somewhat hidden agendas (like spending loads of the money donated to fight racism on their 'defund the police' program) but if you object to it people assume you're a racist.

I'd absolutely do it anonymously or make it all about concern for the company making themselves liable. I wouldn't want to damage my career and reputation by trying to make an argument most people just won't get. It needs to be undertaken strategically rather than just alienating everybody IMO.

Sometimes I think of that young guy who deliberately entered and won that women's race to highlight the absurdity of it all, and I almost wish there were a few big hairy blokes with the balls (pardon the pun) to do the same in changing rooms. Big hairy blokes walking into women's changing rooms left, right, and centre would possibly change the public attitude rather swiftly, even though it probs wouldn't be nice for those that had to witness it.

Yup. In other words managing people out. It's often fairly easy to do when you're experienced. My old boss did it to several people and it was like you described.

The UK Supreme Court reaffirmed the legal relevance of biological sex in R (on the application of Fair Play For Women) v Registrar General (2025)

AI doing its AI thing in the middle of that letter, and reassigning a Scottish Court of Session case from 2022 to the UK Supreme Court in 2025.

Could you please explain what you mean? Banned from what?

I really feel for you. I'm joining the chorus of those who are warning to be careful and circumspect. I would dearly love to say "of course you just challenge it" but it's too easy to say that to a stranger on mumsnet, there's no consequence to all of us strangers if things go tits up for you in your job. I know from my own bitter experience that companies can and do fire people illegally, and that employment law is set up to protect the employer 9 times out of 10. If you have been with the company for less than 2 years and if they have any sense at all and they want to get rid of you, they'll give a non-reason around performance and you have jack shit rights. Even if you have a clear case, doing anything about being illegally sacked is a long and potentially expensive process with many pitfalls and not many benefits to the individual.

With that in mind, the reality is that I think I personally would sign on the dotted line and only challenge it if I could do it anonymously. I've just had a search to see if there is an external body you could report it to anonymously; have a look at this: Whistleblowing | EHRC

Cowardly? Yes, but I'm an individual, I'm not actually responsible for toppling the system, especially when there would likely be direct and significant consequences for me as an individual.

HUGE amounts of respect to those who would feel able to challenge it directly.

This thread is 6 months old.

No, international corporations have a legal obligation to comply with local laws and regulations. If the UK ees are employed under UK contracts then UK law applies. It is better to raise the issue respectfully because you dont want the company to get into trouble.

I can't see how you are subject to US laws in the UK - they are out of their jurisdiction. Unless you are dealing with someone in the US and they have to comply with US laws and you are complying with local (i.e. US) laws in what you are doing/sending etc?

Writing stuff like that which is an anti-trans dogwhistle, presumably. Afaik you can't get AI to say anything anti-trans, so I think they're barking up the wrong tree.
Mind, it's going to put a lot of people out of jobs: scriptwriters and illustrators for starters.
Unless we do something.
That's it. Get the ruddy stuff banned for being anti-trans. 😀
I know this is serious and the advice being given is spot on - esp the idea of expressing concern for the company's reputation and legal position.

Yes, US companies operating in the UK are subject to both UK laws (like employment, data protection/GDPR, corporate) and certain US laws (like FCPA, sanctions, export controls, tax on worldwide income), creating a complex dual-compliance environment where US jurisdiction often extends to foreign subsidiaries, especially for anti-bribery and sanctions, and UK operations must follow local rules but also US rules if they touch US commerce or securities.

Do you feel as brave as Sandie Peggie?

@FanFckingTastic what did you end up doing in the end?

"Rebecca is transgender and today is her first day in the office since her team were told of her transition. When she goes to the ladies restroom her female colleagues see her and say that they don't want to share the same toilet as a man and walk out. Is this an example of harassment or discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity?"

Obviously your employer wishes you to answer ’yes’ to this question.

Yet, the ET judge in the SP case specifically highlighted how no other woman complained as a reason to rule against harassment. But this ^^ shit is why women don’t speak up. They know they risk losing jobs or being sidelined at work if they don’t play along with having their rights removed. In the scenario above you’re not even allowed to leave a situation that makes you uncomfortable. It’s all so very chilling.