Custody officer job withdrawn for GC beliefs - Gribbon (SP legal team) is his solicitor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

But the employers policy then excludes NB people and anyone else who doesn’t identify as male or female.

The only logical position is that M/F on the PER form relates to sex and not gender.

And if reps from GEO Amey want to sit in that chair and state under oath that they do not record prisoners sex accurately when the choice on the form is a binary choice then fair play to them for being prepared to humiliate themselves because of company ‘policy’ and a ‘law’ that they will not be identify.

I expect DH will put some of these questions to DT's formers managers :)

I think his surname was Weir?

But the employers policy then excludes NB people and anyone else who doesn’t identify as male or female.

True (as is the rest of what you wrote) but, in the context of an employment tribunal, irrelevant. It's not a PCO's job to try to fix the system.

The only logical position is that M/F on the PER form relates to sex and not gender.

"The logical position is whatever the hell I say it is, corporal."
"Yes, SIR!"

Think that was me. My understanding is that MM is claiming that either CH or the safeguarding presentation woman will say that DT said he wouldn’t search a transman. I didn’t say that DT said he wouldn’t.

He actually said he would be happy to search anyone. If I remember rightly he linked it to his army experience.

Yes, and I think he's credible on that point.

She is safety lead in the training in a high risk profession.

Men kick off into violence without warning and kick off more likely is if stressor is applied

MM - she said that you reacted in an aggressive manner, and said that you would not be searching a transgender prisoner.

Both are in a classroom with others

She follows him to a secondry location with no witnesses or backup

Canteen [(edit) = time to get cross]

Then he went to a room with CH and HR woman to be sacked.

No security measures
His stuff still within the classroom.

But was agressive in the classroom over a work training issue

Not a problem or a physical risk 🤨

From TT

We resume. MM Good pm Mr Toshack. I want to look at a couple of policies. The 1st on p119. Take a look at this. Its the SPS Operational Guidelines dated Feb 24. In the introd section says [reads re ensuring T ppl rights are protected and a safe and incl environment]

From TT

MM The pre-amble says [reads about the contractor and the initials that rep GA. SPS requires GA to follow its policy re TG prisoners] DT Yes MM On p131, re recording data [reads re accurate and consistent info must be recorded and staff shld accurately record that preferred name and pronouns are respected during time in custody

FROM TT

We resume.
MM Good pm Mr Toshack. I want to look at a couple of policies. The 1st on p119. Take a look at this. Its the SPS Operational Guidelines dated Feb 24. In the introd section says [reads re ensuring T ppl rights are protected and a safe and incl environment]
MM The pre-amble says [reads about the contractor and the initials that rep GA. SPS requires GA to follow its policy re TG prisoners]
DT Yes
MM On p131, re recording data [reads re accurate and consistent info must be recorded and staff shld accurately record that preferred name and pronouns are respected during time in custody

FROM TT

DT Yes
MM On p156, as part of the same document. Use of names and pronouns in official paperwork. They're legal name shld be used in paperwork. If not legally changed name can record preferred name and pronouns. These are the rules set down
DT Yes

Do you want to do the honours @ickky ?

FROM TT

MM Terms commonly used [ reads re respecting w what the prisoner wants. It's disrespectful and may be harmful to use the wrong terms about ppl. It's important to ask for the language they want and understand language is constantly evolving. Dignity and respect is vital. U see this
DT Yes

@BettyBooper I may as well. I'll do it until @MyrtleLion is back.

Thanks for doing it!

FROM TT

MM This is the overarching policy of SPS dated 2023. Point 1 is the intent [reads re obligations of SPS that seeks to ensure safety and wellbeing of prisoners]
Point 2 is policy principles [reads re mgmt and support of TGs and their GI will be recognised and respected wherever they are accommodated

FROM TT

MM You'll see yr position is against the SPS guidance
DT It seems reasonable for me to use their name and I dont need to use PP. It's treating w dig and respect
MM You've said yr passionate about this issue and said it's a form of mental illness, a many FtM as sexual

FROM TT

J I said at risk of being. You used the word potential re sexual predators
MM U cant guarantee y'll always use their name. Cant guarantee this and cld misgender
DT I wldnt misgender anyone
MM U cant guarantee y'll always use their name
DT I dont see why I cldnt use their name

FROM TT

MM Wld u abolish the GR legislation and GR as a PC, if u could?
DT I dont know about legislation
MM Come on. Y've been v candid. It's a PC under the EA2010. Should it be a PC?
DT I dont know if I agree w the EA in and of itself. In my mind, the only ppl...Nobody's equal
DT Some are born into poverty. I'm not absol sure if I agree w the act
MM U know the EA aaplies to lots of PCs [lists some] U dont think there's discrim against these ppl and they need protection
DT I'm sure there is. I'm happy to treat ppl w respect regardless of yr PCs

FROM TT

MM Why dont u agree w the EA if u agree there's discrim
DT [missed]
MM We see a diff side to yr views now. I think you're anti-trans
DT Thats not a fair comment
MM Y've called it insanity and some ppl as sex predators. Called DEI shite and insanity and used tranny & weird in

Nope

Playing to unconsious bias

GA cant have known reactive staff in the frontline service.

If he is agressive when hs is challanged he cant be trusted to safely handle reactive/agressive/violent men

This guy questioning has no idea what he's on about.

FROM TT

posts
DT You say I'm anti-T and have a problem w indivs. It's the ideology
MM I havent said u have antipathy to partic indivs. I'm saying yr against the whole community
DT Absol not
MM It's about the whole ideology that you can be BITWB
DT I dont beleive it. I'm not anti it

DT I dont believe it. I'm not anti it

If only more people understood that distinction...