question for fellow DEI advisors

[cigarsmokingwoman]

how are you managing this?
I was a DEI advisor in the public sector for about 10 years, it was all normal until the last 2 years prior to redundancy (2018-2020) when stonewall etc were really having an impact. So redundancy kind of came as a relief as I was pissed off with it all. I moved into the charity sector, working in an HR non DEI role, but then I've been made redundant again after 5 years there. Not having any luck whatsoever getting a job in HR, L&D, commms (all the things I'm qualified for) so started applying for DEI roles again and have an interview next week for a part time FTC role in a small national charity.
But I'm nervous about having to handle the TQ+ shit again. I've looked at the company online, they mainly deal with another PC group, but they've put out some 'solidarity' statements following the SC ruling and have an active LGBTQIA group. My potential new manager, head of HR, appears to be TWAW
So I'm just curious to know how other DEI advisors are managing this, what resources are out theere, how do you be EQA compliant whilst not becoming a target for the trans activists in your organisations?
I'm quietly GC. I don't publicise what I believe although I do follow sex matters etc online and donate anonymously. I can't use their resources etc though because that would totally out me as GC.
Again, for those who may say get another job, I've bloody tried, but I need money and I need it fast, and I do enjoy the other aspects of DEI.

Is it possible that being a reality-based, law-informed DEI advisor is now a strong competitive edge? Boards and management are waking up to the legal position, and even if for now it’s only a minority of firms that would actively seek someone like you out, you have almost no competition and the tide is only going to go your way.

I would have thought that DEI gets to decide the approach, not the other way around? It's always seemed akin to the tail wagging the dog where I work. In your shoes I would aim to be the neutral voice pointing out that eg that training isn't compliant and this policy is in breach of the law, change this, tweak that, until compliant.

IMO making the workplace accessible to all (especially around mobility and class/background) are better causes to champion and be known for. Good luck OP!

If I understand correctly, you're interviewing for the role and wondering how to approach?

I think it might be a tricky one as you don't know if they're looking for full alignment with their views.

Personally, if you have evidence to suggest they are fully TWAW, a middle approach might work where you focus on "I've watched everything going on and it looks like those who are TW are really struggling with all the changes". So emphasising on how you think they might feel without reflecting it on yourself. Once you're in the role you will then be informed as to what attitude you need to present to them, but equally you can ensure that the law is followed.

I can understand that you need the work, but do bear in mind that working in an atmosphere that doesn't align with your beliefs and having to present compliant behaviour is very wearing 😬

It could be a test case. The OP could choose a charity she doesn't especially want to work for (i.e. not first choice) and create an application that mirrors her standpoint in a non-combative, matter of fact way. And then wait for the answer. And if they are interested, cast the net wider to other organisations :-).

I think this is a good approach. One risk is that if OP does it widely then she is broadcasting her 'dangerous' views and may get frozen out of the sector. Then again, she only needs one job, and it will be so much more comfortable to work for a firm that has actively chosen her approach than one where she needs to triangulate the whole time. Also, if she's looking for a senior role then taking a distinctive position is the best way (almost impossible to get hired into a senior role from a cold application without some sort of distinctive narrative).

Not a DEI advisor but... given the endless legal challenges and the increasing doubts about DEI that have been coming up, someone like you who has a broad HR background and who isn't pushing any specific ideology would probably be a hot property!

Right now I would put the big emphasis on professionalism and not on any specific beliefs at all. On supporting everyone with all the protected characteristics. We're in a period of change and adaptation and I would expect a DEI lead to keep up with the current changes and clarifications in law and policy and guidance as they come out, and make sure that the organisation has robust policies and procedures that support all staff and clients (if that's in the role) or at least to make sure that whatever DEI does is within the law and doesn't lead to the discrimination cases we are seeing right now. Also on really knowing the range and the limits of the role and consulting with other professionals in HR and in legal.

I'd want you to see your role as making sure you create the best work environment so a diverse and inclusive workforce can all work together to deliver (whatever the goals of the charity are) to the broadest and most diverse range of people possible across different (list some assorted protected characteristics) Making sure that the organisation respects a diversity of viewpoints and includes people from diverse backgrounds. And that people with conflicting needs or views are treated respectfully and treat each other respectfully, that the organisation listen to a borad and diverse range of views, that we can include people with contrasting backgrounds and characteristics and views, and that we can all work together to promote (charity goals) to the most diverse/inclusive population possible.

And then you could ask them if there are any particluar groups or characteristics that they want to target for support either within the organisation or in their client base / charitable aims? That leaves the ball in their court.

Could you emphasise a desire to push for more disabled inclusion, or address the increasing need of older people to be supported because they want / need to work longer, whilst acknowledging the difficulties younger people can face when starting their careers? What about the charity’s stance on supporting women hitting their 50s?

There’s a lot more to cover than the ‘rainbow’ (which is well / over served already, when you compare resources applied to (actual) impact suffered IMO).

^https://www.charityjob.co.uk/jobs/shelter/head-of-equity-inclusion-and-anti-racism/1030665?tsId=2^

I think the roles are still very waffly, if this role is any indication.

Op. Have you looked at internal comms / employee experience type jobs? I might be nice pivot away from DEI.

In HR your job is (let’s be honest) to protect the company’s interests. That means creating a positive atmosphere, welcoming all talent and enforcing regulatory compliance. HR has always been a balancing act. The last few years of “my way or the highway” have been an anomaly.

So don’t take any kind of position, not in your application and not in your interview. If they want a position, it’s not going to be yours. Hold yourself out as a common sense voice of reason, balancing everyone’s point of view and keeping the company square legally. If they have any sense, they’ll see which way the wind is blowing.

What do you think of This Isn’t Working? E.g. https://thisisntworkingpodcast.co.uk/whos-ignoring-the-supreme-court-ruling-and-why/ It’s at one remove from the coal face of HR but it makes some helpful points

I'm not a DEI advisor but have worked in charity and on DEI projects in other very 'woke' businesses and learned to walk the fine line between being seen as right thinking without ever having had to lie.

At interview stage, you need to be strategic rather than bring your whole self and Speak Your Truth. You need the job. We all need quietly GC people in DEI positions. Make sure you have examples to hand about how you've driven inclusion for LGB people if the topic comes up and steer in that direction.

Focus on areas that interest you (might be maternity discrimination, disability inclusion etc) and find STAR examples that reflect that. If TWAW comes up stick to EA2010. If pronouns come up keep the standard FWR neutral line about people have the right to state theirs but you are worried about forcing people to out themselves before they are ready.

If you have to fudge it, don't worry. It's one battle you have to concede to win the war. There's no point having a lot of proud outspoken sex realist feminists if they are unemployed and have no influence.

Not being a DEI person myself what suprises me from this conversation is that charities don't seem to see DEI as a whole they seem to see it as picking a particular characteristic for inclusion and everything else is an afterthought? Like "we're going to do anti-racism" or "we're going to do trans inclusion". The Shelter role even has its own acronym - "Anti-Racism, Equity and Inclusion". I understand that different organisations might need to focus more on different characteristics, and maybe there are other DEI staff in Shelter with a different focus, or maybe Shelter have identified race as the biggest problem in housing.

But if this is how all charities do DEI then I can see how vulnerable even big charities must be to one-sidedness.

Also not a DEI person (sorry Cigar) but I remember the day when the DEI people used to say "I'm the person who saves you £££ in damages and makes sure you don't appear on the front page of the papers" (not NHS Fife obviously). Every company needs someone who knows the law and is grown up about it. They may wish to express their (moral) alignment with protected group A, but this is not the same as opening themselves up for prosecution by breaking the law for protected group A.

I don't think you have to take sides at interview, I do think you can show how your knowledge protects the company.

@cigarsmokingwoman
I would go along the lines of -
"It's becoming increasingly clear from recent judgements that DEI is a fine balancing act to ensure everyone is equally treated with respect. Nuance and understanding of all rights is necessary to avoid conflicts and escalation."

One impression I get as an outsider is the DEI is it's a very one size fits all approach. You subscribe to the DEI delivery service, and boxes turn up weekly. Every DEI subscriber's box has exactly the same contents. The DEI staff fed off these DEI boxes are fungible, utterly interchangeable, disposable especially in today's climate where DEI is going out of fashion. They bring nothing as individuals because they have no individuallity. No thoughts besides what's delivered to them in the DEI boxes.

Surely a DEI professional should be looking at all people as individuals, and working out how to make everyone's life better.
If you have a person working on the shop floor of a factory who's got a good can do attitude, but comes from a disadvantaged background and has no qualifiactions, and that's stopping them from promotion. Get that person the training and qualifications that will let them shine and do even better. It shouldn't matter if that person is black, white, or purple with green polka dots.
Instead DEI feels like it is purely the implementation of the progressive stack, the more oppression points you have the more you'll get. No oppression points = fuck you straight white male.

Anyway my thoughts as an outsider. Bring some sense and thought to a DEI role as an individual, don't be just another disposable DEI drone.