Said something 'offensive' about sex/gender at work, meeting on Wednesday. Hand hold and advice needed.

[Grubble]

I've NC and I'm going to change some minor details to avoid outing.

I hope this is the right place to post - I'm after help about the work/employment issues I'm facing, rather than anything to do with the sex/gender debate.

Here goes:
I do MMA and am 'senior level'. The gym I train at is mostly men. Men and women don't spar together. There are only two other 'senior' women at my gym that I can spar with. If we find a class that two of us will be at, we'll both agree to definitely get to that class so we get chance to spar.

Last week, I declined an evening event at work because I'd booked a sparring session with one of these women.

A colleague asked me why I wasn't going to the event. I explained. As I was explaining I said "Obviously men and women don't spar with each other so when there's a chance for me to spar with one of the senior women, I take it".

A couple of other colleagues were standing around and heard the conversation. One of them said "Why obviously?" and I answered - men are bigger, men are heavier, men's bodies are shaped/composed differently, there's lots of holding/grabbing, men can't fully throw themselves into sparring with women so its a bit of a waste of time for them, and ultimately its just gym policy anyway.

Today I've received an email from HR asking me to attend a meeting on Wednesday about 'offensive comments' I made last week. I've followed HR up this morning and they've told me that my 'offensive comments' were about my explanation of men/women not sparring with each other.

The lady in HR said its likely to be a informal chat to identify why my comments were offensive and to 'find a way through' (her exact words). She said it didn't look like there'd be any question of formal disciplinary action.

So, basically I've been summoned to a bollocking.

I've worked here 9 years and have an impeccable record. I've never been told off or had any sort of HR intervention before. So I'm not sure what to do or what to expect. I'm not in a union.

I wonder if anyone has any advice on the situation. What should I expect on Wednesday? How should I handle it? I'm completely clueless. Thank you!

TLDR: Been summoned for a bollocking on Wednesday because I told colleagues why men/women don't spar together at my MMA gym. What should I do?

Definitely say as little as possible. Having previously cross examined witnesses I can tell you the hardest ones are those that say the least. Answer as briefly and factually as you can.

Don't mention the trans issue. Let them bring that up. But you haven't done anything wrong, men and women are different and anyone who thinks otherwise needs a refresher of their science GCSE.

I think the advice to say you can't remember having this conversation at all is very good. If it gets taken any further than the 3 C's above is also excellent advice. I would start with absolute silence though, let them do the talking.

HI OP
HR person here. The wording the HR person used to you may have been badly phrased or misinterpreted. If I said that I would mean "so I can understand why the complainant may have been offended". So not judging in advance simply based on what complainant has reported, if you see what I mean.

If they've said it's informal then take them at their work and don't go OTT as other posters have suggested, like asking for it ot be recorded. That just gets backs up and it escalates to formal faster.

However do be careful what you say. Less is more. Do let them do most of the talking. Relate it to yourself "I was explaining MMA to people who don't know much about it so used simple language". "MMA is a very physical , even dangerous sport and I was explaining what that means" I get to choose who to spar with to ensure it is an even match. At my gym that also means men don't spar with women."

I mean presumably if there was a much bigger, stronger [biological] woman fighter with a longer reach than you, you might decline to spar with her too? You could say that if it comes up, minus the biological caveat.

I like the advice from @k1233 Definitely don't get into discussion of trans issues and if it comes up, be clear the conversation in questions was nothing to do with that subject.

Also, ask them what is the next steps after this 'informal chat' i.e who decides what happens after this. Remember no warning can be issued unless it's a formal disciplinary so you are long way from that - grievance has to be heard first, it has to find that you were offensive and then IF there is grounds for a disciplinary that then has to be held, which might/might not find something to warn about. Don't agree to anything being put in writing about the matter that might go on your ffile e.g an apology. Unless perhaps a "sorry if you felt offended" said in person, and only if you think it's the best way to deal with it.

Be aware HR have no choice but to act on complaints, no matter how trivial they can seem (and I've seen a few!). It doesn't mean all of us immediately assume the complainant is right or has a case. Most of us ask straight away "so what would resolve this issue for you" and half the time the complainant doesn't even have a suggested resolution they just wanted a moan and to feel validated somehow.

Also, in most organisations HR don't have the authority under polices to give a bollocking or a warning or whatever. Our formal role is to advise and support line managers as the Chair of a hearing. I may 'gently encourage' someone to try a different approach/think before speak or whatever, but never bollock. Like you I'm GC but not overtly 'out' at work for fairly obvious reasons though do try and put balanced views forward where I can.

*Today I've received an email from HR asking me to attend a meeting on Wednesday about 'offensive comments' I made last week. I've followed HR up this morning and they've told me that my 'offensive comments' were about my explanation of men/women not sparring with each other.

The lady in HR said its likely to be a informal chat to identify why my comments were offensive and to 'find a way through' (her exact words). She said it didn't look like there'd be any question of formal disciplinary action.*

Can I just ask @Grubble did the email/communication say your had made offensive comments? And do you have in writing that they want to chat about why your comments were offensive? Because if so that is a massive assumption on their part - that whoever complained was right!

I would print this out and take it with you and do one of your 3 cs "I am confused as to how HR have worded this email . I am concerned that there seems to have been no question as to what may have happened - but it was just accepted that I said something offensive. I am curious why there is no indication that there could be an alternative side to this. That I may have said something offensive. Or that the complainant may have taken offence at something inoffensive"

I would steer clear of pointing out that men are physically stronger.
Your colleague may have flagged this from the “trans men are men” perspective.
So from that argument your language was not inclusive as you were only referring to strong biological males and not trans men with whom you could potentially spar?
Not saying that’s correct but that might be the argument that is put before you.
Therefore I would just emphasize you were talking about the specific people at your gym who you know. It was not in reference to trans people. It was in reference to your situation and your private circle who are happy to be referred to as men and women. That’s the inclusive way to speak about them and how they wish to be described in third person. You were using their desired labels/ pronouns.

Same!!

Unfortunately, if someone makes a complaint then the organisation has a duty to investigate it. The usual process would be to find out whether there is any evidence to support the allegation, and then speak to the complainee in an formal preliminary investigation meeting, prior to which the detail of the complaint should be in a formal letter of invitation - plus all the blurb about representation, reasonable adjustments to attend meeting, confidential counselling - all of that.

Totally agree with the advice above though. Don't volunteer anything other than the comment you made (which you aren't denying) but supplying the context in which it was made.

Your personal views are exactly that - personal - and do not be dragged into any discussion on them. You did not express a personal view, and keep it that way.

Also tangentially, I was appalled to read an MMA gym wax on about how transwomen were women and welcome to fight 'other women' a while back. Thank goodness yours is more sensible.

Bloody hell this is insane. It’s deeply concerning that you can’t say actual facts at work surrounding biological sex.

what a time to be alive.

Take a scan or a photo of it - or do they have a website with it on?

If the offence is from a trans men are men angle, I think rather than get into how to personally define a man, you’re better off stating that you think it would be incredibly unprofessional to get involved in a completely unnecessary debate about gender at work, when it had absolutely nothing to do with the situation you were discussing. That makes you look mature, and the complainant look like a trouble causer (which they are).

@BrowniesnotBlondies

The email said that I'm asked to attend a meeting about alleged offensive comments that I made on Wednesday 29th March.

I don't have it in writing that they want to talk about why (i.e. rather than whether) my comments were offensive, this was on the phone to an HR lady.

I'd say you don't understand why what you said was offensive, could they explain.

Potentially the complainers complaint is actually offensive in itself. You said men and women can't spar, if he's chosen to take that as trans woman can't spar with other women then it's not you that's saying something offensive - that's on him. He's the one then putting trans women in the men category. I assume from your wording that you didn't do that.

Whatever your personal opinion is, I assume if you don't broadcast it at work then it's not something HR can get involved in.

I'd be letting them explain what was offensive, and then be like 'is he saying Trans women aren't women?'

Or is he really offended that you said men are generally stronger? I mean, that's an actual fact isn't it?

If this is BJJ, no gym near me imposes segregated sparring. Some offer women-only sessions, but if you're a woman you don't have to attend them; they're optional.

Adding my agreement to those saying don't bring up trans issues, there's no need. If right-on bloke interpreted 'men' as 'transwomen' when he was eavesdropping on you, he's the bigot not you. 😊

Good luck OP and the 3 C's are fabulous advice. I can see HR looking rather flustered and confused on Wednesday as to why they have asked you in to explain.

The ONLY sport where both males and females compete equally is Equestrianism.

@allmyliesaretrue No, the 'policy' is just word-of-mouth gym rule. I think something about it might be buried on their FB page somewhere. When you're ready to spar, the trainers hook you up with someone evenly matched. When I was ready to start sparring properly, the trainers just said in passing about having to match me with one of the other ladies, because I can't spar with men.

It's just so obvious that I doubt the gym ever felt the need to formalise it.

But I could get them to put it in writing, even just on an email.

It's not a proper 'gym' like a nice David Lloyd or LA Fitness. It's in a unit on an industrial estate. There isn't even a website. LOL.

@LemonGelato Be aware HR have no choice but to act on complaints, no matter how trivial they can seem (and I've seen a few!). It doesn't mean all of us immediately assume the complainant is right or has a case. Most of us ask straight away "so what would resolve this issue for you" and half the time the complainant doesn't even have a suggested resolution they just wanted a moan and to feel validated somehow.

Also, in most organisations HR don't have the authority under polices to give a bollocking or a warning or whatever. Our formal role is to advise and support line managers as the Chair of a hearing. I may 'gently encourage' someone to try a different approach/think before speak or whatever, but never bollock. Like you I'm GC but not overtly 'out' at work for fairly obvious reasons though do try and put balanced views forward where I can.

100% asking what would resolve this for a complainant brings a lot of them up short! Half the time they don't know, and it's clear they're just taking a potshot because they can! So tiresome. Then there's Jim complaining about Mary who relates the opposite tale of events and doncha just know it, nobody ever saw a thing... sigh.

This probably isn't under a grievance procedure - it fits more under Dignity at work. HR need to tell you that too! A complainant can opt for a informal or a formal investigation of their complaint and you don't know that either?

What I don't understand here @LemonGelato is why it's HR carrying out this meeting? Surely it should be a manager at an appropriate level, probably the immediate line manager, with support from HR? We also 'make' (!) the managers chair of any meetings and we are the advisers.

Our HR does bollock on a daily basis but only its own staff.... the stick is king and there are zero carrots!!

When they aren't actually concerns yes, they should be spoken to for attempting to cause trouble with spurious claims.

@Grubble I think you just hit the crux of the matter, "When you're ready to spar, the trainers hook you up with someone evenly matched."

If you can get anything written down for the benefit of the terminally brain-dead that might be useful - but I think what you said sums it all up really!

Hope it helps you to know that so many of us are mad on your behalf lol!

@HarlanPepper No, its not BJJ. In MMA there's far more standard boxing and kickboxing techniques than you'd see in BJJ which is mostly ground work.

That could potentially be an outcome of any DAW process.

There is this image, physical diferences in speed, strength etc between men and women. Sixth post down has an illustration.
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4313060-Physical-differences-between-the-male-and-female-body-that-justify-sex-segregated-sport-Shall-we-make-a-list

Thanks @allmyliesaretrue I am so deeply appreciative of having all you lovely, supportive and angry women in my corner

OP you've done nothing wrong. In any case GC beliefs are protected these days in employment law, even though I think it's barmy that it may cause offence to point out obvious biological differences.

Agree with the other posters about not bringing in transgender issues unless HR raise them. If so, the larger and richer sports are looking at this and have the resources to undertake the studies, draw finding together etc. The closest sports are World Rugby and Boxing as it isn’t just an issue of fairness but safety. World Rugby after an extensive consultation and assessment of the evidence would not allow transwomen to compete with women at an elite level. See link below. Regulation of levels below elite level is with country level, e.g. England Rugby who are now starting to follow World Rugby. Basically it’s safety as well as fairness etc and they detail the differences.

https://www.world.rugby/the-game/player-welfare/guidelines/transgender

Have a look at Roos Tucker, Science of Sport who is a sports scientist and was involved in drawing up these guidelines.

Also look at World Boxing Coincil. See Mumsnet thread below. Sport is split by sex and they are explicitly looking at setting up a separate transgender category.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4707922-telegraph-exclusive-boxing-to-introduce-new-transgender-category

Good luck