Employer-Initiated Coercive Control (EICC)

[BridgetPhillipsonIsACowardlyJobsworth]

As a tangent to another thread:

Page 11 | Biggus Titus of Oxford University | Mumsnet

And following on from posts made by @fromorbit and @MrsOvertonsWindow , I thought that the concept of Employer-Initiated Coercive Control (EICC) was worth exploring in its own thread (first mention on the thread p. 11 was a post on X)

I guess something just clicked when I read that, because I had never pinpointed it as part of this whole ideology. Is this part of Denton's playbook? Or an unintended, yet desirable, consequence of the whole trans/queer movement?

Reading about the lecturer at Oxford, it occurred to me that most employers, including in HE, have Dignity in the Workplace policies, or their equivalent, which are supposed to protect their employees and give them recourse. Wouldn't that apply here? (I'm talking of course about this man's colleagues, both men and women, because Matt Rattley seems to have all his "dignity" already catered for).

Employer-Initiated Coercive Control (EICC) seems to me to be exactly what all these recent court cases have been about (Sandie Peggie, Darlington nurses, various professionals who have been hounded out of their jobs because of "wrongthink").

Wondering what everyone's thoughts are, especially if there are any legal people (particularly HR bods in HE) who have ever come across this concept. And whether you think this could ever be applied to future legal cases, because it hasn't been mentioned (that I have noticed) in any of the recent tribunals.

If there's already a thread specifically on this concept, would be helpful if you could signpost to it, thanks.

Well, the original concept came from a Twix post that was mentioned in the Oxford thread (upthread in my OP), so I guess it's already out there as a concept??

I was intrigued, hence stating this thread. Mainly wondering if anyone else had heard of it and whether it could conceivably be something to build a legal case on.

I wonder if this could go into a tweet tagging off the top of my head, Naomi, Ben, Aku Reindorft, FWS, JKR...... the word needs to go out and some broadsheet articles need to be written.

She is followed on X by lots of Terfy people, including Naomi C.

x.com/Psychgirl211

Coercive control is a criminal offence only in relation to intimate and family relationships.

Coercive control by an employer could justify a civil claim for constructive dismissal, but case law is already building for claims based on illegal discrimination as to sex and protected belief, and can more easily be applied analagously to service providers, as well as not requiring the claimant to resign before bringing action.

The underlying problem is that our relationships with employers and service providers are governed by civil law, and the state is reluctant to get involved.

The state is not blameless though, because it has acted in ways contrary to Article 9 ECHR (freedom of religion and belief). The recourse would be an application to the Administrative Court for a declaration of incompatibility under Section 4 of the HRA. The target would have to be the GRA. I do not know what we could do about the state's many infringing practices, such as allowing schools to teach, and public sector organisations to adopt, a minority metaphysical belief system as if it were material fact.

The recourse would be an application to the Administrative Court for a declaration of incompatibility under Section 4 of the HRA. The target would have to be the GRA.

Thanks for this, it explains a lot, especially why we have not seen something like EICC argued in cases recently. This is going to be more difficult than I had anticipated.

But, surely there has to be a way of defending yourself against an employer who is determined to humiliate you and put you in unsafe situations as a part of your job! Is there nothing beyond bullying and harassment that an employee can charge an employer with?

I do not know what we could do about the state's many infringing practices, such as allowing schools to teach, and public sector organisations to adopt, a minority metaphysical belief system as if it were material fact.

This is very worrying. If our only recourse to dealing with an enabling government which chooses not to obey and enforce the law, is democracy (i.e. elections), then this will never stop until a) the government of the day decides to stop or b) people literally start taking to the streets and removing power from government.

I feel thoroughly depressed right now.

I feel thoroughly depressed right now

I agree. The law (civil/criminal/regulatory) is broadly speaking on our side (apart from the GRA which should be repealed), as are up to 80% of the public.

Yet the institutions are intransigent.

In any normal conflict there would be negotiations, but not here. My trans friends characterise such suggestions on my part as tantamount to asking the Jews to negotiate with the Nazis. They are bloody infuriating.

It pains me to say it, but I think we are going to have to accept that we are actually in a culture war, not just a political or legal conflict.