Custody officer job withdrawn for GC beliefs - Gribbon (SP legal team) is his solicitor

[InterrobangsArePureBias]

I wonder how many more of such actions will be launched. To adapt Jimmy Doyle’s phrase, “the spectacle of this nation’s [lanyard classes] enforcing moral auto-lobotomy as a condition of entry to [employment]”.

A prison custody officer who was sacked for saying he would not address male-born transgender inmates as ‘she’ or ‘her’ has launched legal action against one of the UK’s largest security firms.
Army veteran David Toshack, 50, was dismissed by GEOAmey during a training course only days before taking up a role as a prison custody officer (PCO) at Kirkcaldy Sheriff Court.
The father of three told a safeguarding workshop that he would not be comfortable using a transgender inmates’ preferred gender pronouns and expressed his belief that a man could not become a woman.
It sparked a horrified reaction from bosses at the firm, which employs thousands of justice workers across the UK, who said his views were against the law and company policy.
…
He said: ‘I’m just a normal, working class person who’s never been in trouble with the law before, not got a criminal record, lived a good life. I’ve been prepared to go and fight and die for my country, and then I have come back here and been told that there’s certain things you can’t think or can’t say.’

https://archive.is/bxjqC

Original story about David Toshack in Daily Mail: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14963309/Prison-custody-officer-sacked-refusing-call-male-born-trans-prisoners-her.html

When they introduced blind auditions in professional orchestrasthey started to hire more women. That's why unconscious bias matters and assumes that women are less competent.

Not knowing the player's sex led to better performers being hired, irrespective of sex.

I've never had unconscious bias training so couldn't comment on the usefulness of it, but it seems to be a good thing.

This is what I was getting at when I said it wasn’t going well for him… unconscious bias is a real thing, for all sorts of different protected characteristics, so saying you think UB training is a waste of time doesn’t look good for his credibility.

I think he may be lumping it all together with LBGTQ+ training.

Part of the problem is that DEI is done so badly in some organisations.

When you see bias and people being treated badly on a daily basis but then the organisation makes a big deal of the latest UB training package and putting the rainbow flag on the intranet. It does feel like a box ticking exercise. The cheap option is often trans inclusion policies rather than supporting some of the other protected characteristics.

The RAF were found to have broken the law with one of their recruitment campaigns recently which doesn’t help the negative view some people have of DEI.

The HR and DEI staff at some recent tribunals don’t exactly promote public confidence that they understand their own internal policies never mind understand and uphold equality and H&S legislation.

Thanks again Myrtle

Is anyone observing and able to comment on how he's coming across in person? From the tweets he seems quite consistent and credible, is that a true reflection?

I think most people would accept that unconscious bias is a real thing and that it is helpful to have awareness of it. But wrapping it up with a set of beliefs about what is virtuous, right and proper and what is not, which is what often happens, annoys them.

I am consciously biased against transgenderism as I believe it is false and harmful. I am consciously biased against men who try to appropriate womanhood to the detriment of women. I think this is a reasonable and morally correct position.

YY, exactly.

I don’t agree (that it’s not going well for him). Everything he said is well within the bounds of mainstream political opinion. It might be wrong or we might disagree with it but there’s nothing surprising or unusual there.

Yes, he is firm in his answers and is sincere.

From TT

Part Two of Morning Session Thursday 29 January in Toshack vs GeoAmey

We return.
MM - I want to turn now to why you applied to GA for a job
DT - I thought it would be interesting and challenging job, seeing what when on in the courts.
MM - we've heard about your strong beliefs on sex and gender, given your strong views, did you give any thought

to having to deal with trans prisoners
DT - didn't really cross my mind, didn't give it much consideration
MM - but you have these strong beliefs
DT - I didn't give it a lot of thought, no
MM - <turning to contract> effective from 25 nov 2024, that's when you started

DT - yes
MM - signature box, dated and signed on 8 oct 2024, a good while before you started
DT - yes
MM - policies, employees must comply with policies and procedures, even it contractual, offers links to policies, did you try and get hold of these before starting
DT - no

From TT

MM - <module notebook> ; we see IND point 8, E&D on 25 Nov, week one
DT - day one
MM - who gave that session
DT - CH, Chris Hutton
MM - called 'acting inclusively' in GA, have you heard that
DT - probably have but don't remember if it was that day

From TT

MM - <slide deck of that session> you referred to death by powerpoint, but can you recall these slides,
DT - don't recall them specifically
MM - you said that people were a wee bit shy in speaking out about concerns, you were first to speak out
DT - yes

It is interesting to see how EDI is perceived "in the wild" by an ordinary person in a non-academic, non-office role. If enough people think someone has only got their job through quota fulfillment, lowered standards or box-ticking, then racism/sexism/ableism etc hasn't been resolved, it's just been repackaged and pushed further along the line.

Was this ever seriously in doubt?!

Nobody wants to be a DEI hire, it would be humiliating.

From TT

MM - <explains that he will go over ground from yesterday but also put things his witnesses will say, DT can agree, disagree or have no recollection>
DT - understood
MM - CH says that you brought up your religion
DT - I don't remember that
MM - says you did and that sent the

group off on a tangent but also recalls that you speaking up got everyone to start talking.
DT - I don't remember that
MM - he reiterated GA policy on treating everyone as they wish to be treated
DT - I don't recall that but he may have said it
MM - no alarm bells ringing for

From TT

you in that session
DT - it was a general discussion, not about specific policies,
MM - what did you say
DT - refers to y'day: diversity was a way of forcing conformity, and those who disagree are excluded
MM - nothing about refusal to use pp (preferred pronouns)

I would be impressed if he could reach his testicals with his teeth.

From TT

DT - no don't recall it came up
MM - two discussions about Tiffany Scott, tried to bite off own testicle
DT - he tried to cut off his own testicles
MM - yes, but first time he used female pronouns, and then in subsequent conversations used male pronouns
DT - yes

MM is confusing the incident where he bit his own wrists.

From TT

MM - he's going to be adamant that neither of these convos were with him, are you sure
DT - I'm absolutely positive it was CH
MM - it wasn't another trainer
DT - no
MM - what was the context
DT - sharing experiences about handling difficult prisoners, not just trans

From TT

MM - so about challenging situations not specifically about trans
DT - that one was about Tiffany Scott so about a trans prisoner
MM - now session with PH, no problem with your training up to that point, you haven't expressed objections to trans pronouns at this point

Agreed. Believing in meritocracy is a perfectly legitimate and ordinary belief. I disagree with him strongly, but still don't consider his belief to be even close to verging on extreme.

From TT

DT - I'm sure that must have come up beforehand,
MM - you didn't raise that yesterday, now you're saying that it must have come up, what are you saying
DT - I think it must have come up, but i cannot recall it specifically
MM - on 7 Jan SH was delivering 'safer custody' slides