Co-op removes trans inclusive toilet policy

[IwantToRetire]

The Co-op’s previous internal policy stated: “If the toilets where you work are gender-specific, you should use the ones you feel safest in. We’ll never expect you, or ask you, to use the disabled toilets instead, but of course if you feel most comfortable using them, then that’s fine.”

These sentences have been removed from the policy, which now states: “We know that for people who identify as trans, or non-binary, or intersex, it’s [sic] may be difficult to feel comfortable and/or safe using gendered toilets. For the comfort and privacy of all colleagues, wherever possible we will provide gender-neutral individual lockable units, with inclusive signage.”

It is not clear yet what this will mean in practice.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/6772d1ec-d619-4e4f-b952-395e268f63bb and archive at https://archive.ph/9JMRb

You are conveniently ignoring the uncomfortable truth that the whole subject of toilets has only arisen on here at all because a certain cohort of gentlemen have a "creepy obsession" with peeing in the Ladies' rather than the Gents'.

The 1992 Workplace Regulations require employers to provide separate male & female toilets (& changing rooms if required). If the employer allows trans identifying men to use facilities for female employees then they will be breaching the Equality Act 2010 by permitting the sexual harassment of female employees.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents

Trying to patronise people isn't assisting you.

Why is it a problem to have blue hair?

It’s unclear how the full policy abides by the law.

“We know that for people who identify as trans or non-binary or intersex, it’s may be difficult to feel comfortable and/or safe using gendered toilets.
For the comfort and privacy of all colleagues, wherever possible we will provide gender neutral individual lockable units, with inclusive signage. Where separate facilities are provided, this is to support privacy, dignity and safety. Any decisions regarding access will be made sensitively and on a case-by-case basis.” My emphasis.

I remember when the co-op had superstores (I shopped in one) and owned acres for their farms, which were ethically run. It's a pity that has gone and we have far less ethical supermarkets that rip farmers off and send their profits out of the country. As to the trans issue, I think if the co-op polled its members (I am one) they'd find their trans inclusive language was not supported, but that the majority of us are sex realists (like the rest of the world).

Are you in the UK? You don't seem to understand our laws. The 1992 Workplace Regulations refer to Workplaces (the hint is in the name). Employers must provide separate male & female toilets for employees. If Employers allow trans identifying men to use the Ladies then this is harassment of their female employees under the Equality Act 2010. The Co-op must tell their TIM employees not to use the Ladies on pain of dismissal.

I see we have another sour new poster to Mumsnet, dominating a thread, forced teaming (us, we 🙄) the predictable darvo and and hurling around teenage level insults at the mummies they despise so much. 😂

Poor dears. Imagine spending their summer sneering at women just because men aren't allowed in women's single sex spaces. Their fury is quite the spectacle.

Discrimination against Man City supporters obvs. Outrageous.

ColorMeSurprised It only becomes a problem when the GC Cult get involved.

I'm plagiarising a poster on another thread by saying this, but even with a choice of only two ends, you've managed to get the wrong end of the stick!

This would not be an issue if a small but noisy, often aggressive and sometimes violent group of men and their allies hadn't started to demand to use facilities that were not designate for them.

Why they did this, why a tiny % of the male population took it into their heads that they were entitled to use the facilities designated for women - who knows? it's so irrational that future students of mid-21st century Western society will have a field-day trying to explain it!

The TRA obsession with peeing in the Ladies' is so overwhelming that even the FWS/UKSC case, which was about something else entirely, has been received by the trans community as [a] all about them and [b] all about not being allowed pee in the Ladies'.

Peeing is so central to so much of the TRA discourse that one would be forgiven for thinking that when the 'T' was stuck onto 'LGB', it actually stood for Toilets!

A cunty woman? I love it! I vote for that to replace 'cis'.

How true.

All the available data backs up that the population are generally sex realists - the exception being some of the young who've been relentlessly bullied by those who can only sneer and threaten as they try to impose their narrow beliefs on an unconsenting population.

I'll respond.
You appear to be in a right old froth about women wanting single sex spaces.
The Co Op is a big employer. The Regs apply. Hth.

I noticed your attempted deflection talking about small retail stores but ignored it as we are talking about use of staff toilets.

BTW You didn't answer my question.

He didn't answer mine. Not really engaging in good faith imo just looking for a ruck it seems by the tone of his posts.

Yeah. Well I've got to go and watch some paint dry in the women's bogs, so fill yer boots mate but I won't be joining you.

Lots of identical phrases to recent PBPs it seems.

Fucksake.

If a service is restricted to one sex or the other, it must be according to and on the basis of biological sex.

Otherwise, it is discrimination.

Equality Act.

I don't know what you wrote but MNHQ didn't like it.

BTW You still haven't answered my question.