NHS Scotland E&D module... Surprise surprise

[Sittinginthesunwithmycoffee]

For context, I work in NHS in Scotland. Completing my mandatory training today. Once For Scotland training module on ED&I produced by NES. For the section on sex as a protected characteristic it tells me that a GRC changes your legal sex... Aaaargh!! The supreme court ruling was almost a year ago, how are people still mis-representing the law, and in our compulsory training that I assume is nationwide? Am I the only person to have spotted this so far?
Have sent my comments in the feedback but don't know how soon it might be corrected.

Well, it does - except when it doesn't, for example, for purposes of the Equality Act...

The judge who read out the clarification made it quite clear that there's a difference between biological sex and certificated sex, and that biology defind the characteristic in the EA, that a GRA does legally change someone's sex but that doesn't make them the opposite sex in reality.
If the training gives people a different impression than that, then it's shoddy training and should be challenged.

I'm public sector Scotland, last EDI training (before the supreme court clarification) was total nonsense, the protected characteristic was listed as gender not sex, they'd even included gender identity 🙄.

I've been sent an automated email to complete the new training, will report back if it's the same nonsense or if it actually is correct this time.

Honestly it's embarrassing now how our government are just trying to stick their fingers in their ears, pretend the supreme court clarification didn't happen and just carry on peddling nonsense across our NHS, public sector and education.

Ok, should have clarified that this was specifically in relation to the Equality Act 2010.

.....or as the training calls it, "Equalities Act"

We have a new work online training suite and it does reference FWS 2025. I had to mention using gender, not sex as the Protected Characteristic when proofreading though.

The term "legal sex" is usually used in relation to men who have aquired a GRC.

What the Supreme Court ruling clarfied, or rather confirmed because it was always that, is the the word sex when used on is own in the EA refers to biology.

This use of the phrase "legal sex" came up in the Lady Haldane ruling, but she also clarified (and this was before the Supreme Court ruling) is that even if someone had a "legal sex" via a GRC, this did not mean in terms of the EA and single sex services, that a "legal sex" was the same as biological sex.

ie even thought many TRAs will try and tell you differently, the "legal sex" of a GRC is not the same as actual sex as a protected characteristic and in relation to provision of single sex services.

So not sure about the training your refer to, but what would have been wrong is if the trainer, or training material tried to say that "legal sex" via a GRC then meant the person concerned was then the same as women who are part of the protected characteristic sex.

My NHS EDI training last month told me that the 2010 Equality Act recognised 3 sexes- M, F and NB. I have written to the training provider.

I think you should write to whoever in HR commissioned this as well. Someone actually paid for this.