Custody officer job withdrawn for GC beliefs - Gribbon (SP legal team) is his solicitor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

Well, there is that. Legal madness seems to start at the border.

From TT

Do you remember these slides
DT - We were sitting in front of power point slides for hours at a time, death by power point, I don't recall any particular set of slides
DH - now referring to a leaflet about women in custody being discussed during your training

DT - I honestly don't recall this, it may well have been discussed.
DH - do you recall any discussion between you and SH about who might get a copy of the women in custody leaflet
DT - I don't recall
DH - it may be put to you that you would refuse to give this leaflet to a TW

Yep

https://www.sps.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2024-02/Management%20of%20Transgender%20Prisoner%20Operational%20Guidance%202024.pdf

From TT

someone you didn't consider to be a real woman.
DT - I don't recollect that, but I wouldn't refuse to give a leaflet to anyone.
DH - did you say to anyone SH, CH, that you would refuse to give out the leaflet
DT - I have no recollection on this
DH - how long did you spend

4.1 Searching decisions at admission.
Upon admission, a transgender individual should be searched in line with their affirmed
gender identity unless the individual requests to be searched in line with their sex
assigned at birth and/or unless there are overriding risks or concerns, including to the
health, safety or welfare of the individual or staff carrying out the search or to the
security or good order of the prison.
The Officer should discuss the searching process with the individual and ensure they
are sufficiently informed of the immediate arrangements and the process outlined
below regarding longer-term searching decisions to be decided at the initial TCC.
If the individual is to be searched in line with their sex assigned at birth, officers should
record this on Part 1 of the Searching and Sampling Arrangement form (Annex 4).
All subsequent searches in the period before the initial TCC takes place should be
conducted in line with this arrangement

Dying to find out whether Sarah knows what sex she is. Will she need to check her chromosomes?!

This is dated February 2024. Has there been an update?

From TT

talking about this in the training room
DT - less than five minutes not long
DH - what was the tone of the meeting
DT - amicable, calm, just like any other module, any other training course
DH - what was it like when you raised your objection

From TT

DT - I had the impression that she was not happy that I was challenging her, that I had the temerity to disagree
DH - how did you form that impression
DT - it was a very different feeling, not an open discussion, not a topic for debate
DH - how did you behave during this?

From TT

DT - I was just standing up for myself and my beliefs, I may have been speaking with some passion because I was standing up for my beliefs.
DH - were you using any objectionable language
DT - I didn't swear or use derogatory terms, I've used those on my Facebook but wouldn't in

that situation
DH - were you being aggressive to SH
DT - absolutely not
DH - what happened after the verbal exchange had finished
DT - she asked me to leave the room and wait outside
DH - did you do that
DT - yes
DH - how did you feel

https://www.scottishlegal.com/articles/geoamey-to-lose-scottish-prisoner-transport-contract-after-series-of-failings

From TT

DT - I felt embarrassed like I had been admonished and treated like a child.
DH - did SH explain why you were to leave the room
DT - no, just told to leave the room
DH - from your recollection were you expressing yourself and your beliefs any differently than you had expressed

them to CH?
DT - I don't believe so.
DH - you are now standing the corridor outside the classroom, how long were you standing there.
DT - a few seconds at most, she came out straight away
DH - what did she say to you
DT - went over it again, her saying it was policy, law
DH - how did you feel

Oooh!

As far as I can see this is the latest policy.

However AI is coming up with 'it evolving ' and 'interim guidance ' which seems to saying that those with a GRC have the right but those who don't can request it but only if both parties agree.

I'll try to find source docs for this...

Has it been mentioned that David Hay KC representing the claimant was the same KC who represented Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre in the Adams case.

From TT

DH - did you say anything in reply
DT - just repeated what I had said inside, she then said something like did I think I suited to the role, and I said yes I thought so.
DH - any suggestions before this that you weren't suited to the role
DT - no

That is interesting!

Apologies, I thought I'd posted the previous two tweets.

Edited to add - I did! Weird behaviour from Chrome.

From TT

DH - how long did the discussion in the corridor last
DT - 3 or 4 minutes
DH - what happened next
DT - she asked me to go wait in the canteen
DH - did you
DT - yes
DH - how long did you wait
DT - 5 or 10 mintues
DH - what happened next

DT - another trainer came in, Lee, and indicated I should follow him, we were going upstairs, I asked where we were going, he said to a meeting
DH - did he tell you what the meeting was about
DT - no
DH - who was there;
DT - CH and a woman from HR

DH - did the HR woman say much
DT - no, one or two things, but mostly took notes
DH - how did CH open the meeting
DT - asked me what had happened and to give my side of the story
DH - and what did you say
DT - I repeated what had happened and then why I wouldn't be using pronouns

From TT

DH - what did CH say
DT - at one point he said I know the law, I had mentioned my protected beliefs, he did the hypothetical scenario of searching a transgender prisoner, I got on with CH, quite liked him and I said to him you know this is a lie and he said because of your

That's what I thought. SPS press release was yesterday. Interesting timing :)

I've been doing this for three hours, so errors are creeping in. Apologies.

You're doing an amazing job!

From TT

strong beliefs you can't work here.
DH - you've mentioned a couple of times, that CH said "I know the law' do you have any recollection of him identifying any particular law in support of his position or in opposition to law.
DT - there's a lot in the training about the law

You're doing a great job @MyrtleLion

The gerbils are waiting in the Bluestocking to serve you with whatever takes your fancy when they break for lunch 😁