BlueOutlier’s Post

Did you know it could be considered unlawful to intentionally misgender someone at work? How is your organization staying compliant with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's new guidelines? New Guidelines! Harassment Definition: Includes offensive or derogatory remarks about a person's transgender status or gender transition. Misuse of Name and Pronouns: Intentionally and repeatedly using the wrong name and pronouns can contribute to an unlawful hostile work environment. Client-Facing Assignments:  - Employers covered by Title VII cannot fire, refuse to hire, or reassign employees based on customers' or clients' preferences regarding sexual orientation or gender identity.  - Employers cannot segregate employees based on actual or perceived customer preferences (e.g., keeping LGBTQ+ employees out of public-facing positions or directing them to certain stores or areas). Gender Identity and Presentation: Prohibiting a transgender person from dressing or presenting consistent with their gender identity constitutes sex discrimination. Access to Facilities: All men (including transgender men) should be allowed to use men’s facilities, and all women (including transgender women) should be allowed to use women’s facilities.

Some reflections in the light of Elspeth Duemmer Wrigley’s crowdfunder, co-chair of the original SEEN in the Civil Service. (Link to the case is in the comments). 🔍 As far as we know, the Civil Service is the first employer in the world to recognise the validity of its employees holding Gender Critical views - (Gender Critical views being the recognition there are two sexes and a non-belief in the concept of gender identity). 🔍 That there are two sexes is nothing new, but recognising that there are in the face of the emergence of a more recent belief in gender identity is what is new. 🔍 The concept of gender identity is a relatively recent concept. It has been adopted by organisations and workplaces across all sectors, where workplaces have been replacing policies that affect people on the basis of sex in compliance with the Equality Act with concepts based on self-declared identities. The civil service SEEN has inspired the setting up of other independent SEENs, such as SEEN in the City, Police SEEN, SEEN in Stem, SEEN in Journalism and of course our own SEEN in HR. Members should not be bullied, harassed or discriminated against on the grounds of their lawful beliefs. Employers need to foster a culture where competing beliefs in the workplace are managed where employees are not infantilised. Psychological safety is about employees being safe *to* disagree, not being safe *from* disagreement. ##BeSEEN #SEEN #HR #HumanResources

It's not about whether only woman menstruate. It's what it tells us about the training on the Equality Act given to civil servants. One of the posts about which SEEN’s Chair is being sued lists the EA's 9 protected characteristics ("pc's") & states that gender expression, gender identity & gender are not pc's, folllowing errors in staff training where some or all of these were included. So we appear to have:- - Training to civil servants misrepresenting the law. - No-one spotting a basic error before the training was given. Or, worse, approving it despite knowing it was wrong. - Inaccurate training paid for by taxpayers which will inform how civil servants do their job, including the formulation of policies & advice to Ministers & their outward-facing roles. The legal action claims that stating accurately what the law says creates “an unsafe place of work for employees with that protected characteristic” (tho' these are not pc's). Even assuming this just refers to employees with the gender reassignment pc, it is extraordinary to claim that accurately describing what the law says for work purposes makes that workplace unsafe. It is histrionic nonsense. It also fatally confuses what employee networks are there to do. They do not - should not - exist to instruct employers on how to comply with their legal duties under legislation towards the public. Essential to such duties is that training of civil servants should accurately describe what the law says, not what some might like the law to say. The legal action seems to want a government department to continue misleading its staff on what the law says simply because this might make some staff feel “safe”. It is an absurd - and dangerous - demand. It puts that department at legal risk if it acts - or makes civil servants act - on the basis of misleading legal advice. More importantly, it risks depriving citizens of legal rights they enjoy under this legislation. Some Questions - How other training sessions have been given with the same errors? - To which government departments? - Who gave this training? - Who authorised it? - Who reviewed it? - Did anyone spot the errors? - Did anyone correct them? - What steps are now being taken to ensure that all Equality Act training accurately describes what the law says? In particular, what steps are now being taken to ensure that such training is given by those who are expert in equality law and not one-issue lobby groups seeking to change the law or who have misrepresented the law in the past? - What steps are being taken to ensure that any policies drafted or advice given on the basis of incorrect training is reviewed to ensure that such policies and/or advice is based and, if necessary, amended to reflect - accurately - current law? It is not enough to defeat this misconceived legal action but to ensure that problems caused by inaccurate training are both corrected & cannot happen again. We all have a stake in this.

Following on from our recent session on Gender Identity in the workplace Philip Pearson-Batt share his thoughts on the matter and some pretty shocking statistics from CIPD. Check out the article with Penguin PR below… And if you happened to miss the recent session, get in touch and we’ll be more than happy to share the slides and recording with you! #doinglawdifferently #genderidentity #trans #lgbtq #employment #law #hr

On the back of our inaugural DEI report launch, we wanted to share something practical and useful on IDAHOBIT Day, the International Day Against LGBTQIA+ Discrimination. In the DEI report, there were many accounts of persistent discrimination in our industry, including towards the LGBTQA+ community. This guide on using pronouns at work is helpful and pragmatic, explaining why they’re needed and how to start using them appropriately. While it doesn’t address bigger systemic problems, it’s a great and educational guide. Change starts with us, and education is key. Learn more: https://lnkd.in/g8jrauUQ #IDAHOBIT #LGBTQ #PerthMarketing #WAMarketing #WeAreWAMA

Exciting news: Federal rules from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission state that LGBTQ+ employees can't be misgendered or denied access to bathrooms at work! The latest guidance from the EEOC strengthens protections for transgender and nonbinary employees in American workplaces for the first time in 25 years. Under the new guidance, employers who consistently call workers by the wrong pronouns or names could be found to be creating a hostile work environment. Similarly, denying an employee access to a bathroom or other sex-segregated facility, such as a lactation or changing room, appropriate to their gender identity could be committing workplace harassment. The guidance goes into effect immediately. Check out the full statement linked in the article below! Credit: them.us #TransRights #TransInclusion #Diversity #Equity #Inclusion #EEOC

An expansion to the "Don't Say Gay" bill is on the table in Florida, now targeting the workplace. HB599 basically prohibits employers (and their employees) from inquiring about or addressing employees by anything other than the pronouns they were assigned at birth. It would also expand the existing bill's current provision that prohibits employers from mandating employee training on matters of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression to apply to organizations that receive state funding, even further restricting funding for #LGBTQ+ or #equality-focused nonprofits. And just like the original, it's vaguely written and proposes steep penalties - so even though this applies to government and government contractors, it creates legal implications/considerations for private employers in the state as well. From an #HR perspective, this bill is a proposal to allow unlawful hostile work environments to exist in Florida. Plain and simple.

"Why are serious organisations full of serious grown-up professionals... willing to submit to these time-consuming indignities?" I asked that question nearly three years ago, when I did a deep dive into the capture of our institutions by Stonewall after Maya Forstater asked me to write "a few hundred words" on "Sex Matters in Law" for the not-yet-launched Sex Matters website. I was so shocked by what I found when I started to research the effects and reach of the Stonewall Champions and Workplace Equality Index that Maya had to wait for her few hundred words while I wrote the 5,000-word essay "Submission and Compliance" first. Sex Matters has come a long way in those three years, but the question continues to baffle me. How do the highly-educated, high-achieving people who fill in these pious questionnaires and jump meekly through these ever-more demanding hoops square that performance with ordinary self-respect? Where's their backbone?

It’s #transawarenessweek, Being a small company or large, #TransAwareness starts with some basic things. -Conversation: when was the last time you had a LGBTQ2S+ advocate come in for sensitivity training? -Compassion: Do you have steps for support or benefits in place for Trans employees? Do you allow for gender affirming living in the workplace (dress code etc)? Do you ask for Names and pronoun preferences? -Corrections: Do you adequately hold others and yourself accountable to keep your Trans employees safe from harassment or harm in the workplace? Even if you don’t believe that you currently have any trans employees, you might. Feeling safe enough to be able to be yourself in the workplace is a major barrier to being able to be your authentic self. Having these conversations will open doors and remove barriers, and increase your employee engagement and retention.

The intersection of state laws and federal guidance on pronoun use in the workplace has become a complex issue. Some states are enacting legislation that restricts the use of preferred pronouns, while the EEOC emphasizes inclusion. This leaves us HR professionals in a challenging position. The Bostock decision provided protection from discrimination for LGBTQ+ employees under Title VII, but it didn't address misgendering or the use of preferred names. The EEOC's proposed guidance aims to address this, but it might face legal challenges. Employers must navigate this complexity by following the law that offers the most protection to workers. In some cases, state laws might offer broader protections than federal ones, especially for age-related issues. Ultimately, our role is to provide protective policies in line with federal regulations to ensure an inclusive workplace. #HR #Inclusion #Pronouns #Diversity #Workplace #EmploymentLaw