Women working at a major NHS Trust say they feel 'intimidated' after its leaders told trans staff they can still use women's toilets and facilities. In spite of clear guidance on single sex spaces which came into force on Wednesday, the Midlands Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust (MPFT), which serves 1.7 million people and employs over 10,500 staff, said there would 'no immediate changes' to its policies.
Well, why not? They know full well that so many institutions and politicians have been captured by this vile perverted cult that there will be few real consequences for open defiance.And there will be challenges, JK Rowling's offered assistance guareantees it.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC)'s new code of practice, which reinforces the landmark Supreme Court ruling that sex in equality law means biological sex not gender identity, rules that organisations must provide single sex spaces reflecting that.It says that only providing mixed sex facilities could amount to direct or indirect discrimination against women or lead to unlawful harassment.
And when they lose at a tribunal, who pays? The poor old taxpayer!
The trust told staff it is awaiting further guidance from NHS England.
Well, that's something the Health Minister can put on his to=do list.
In its email to staff, the Trust said: 'We understand this may be a difficult and anxiety-provoking time for our trans, non-binary and gender-diverse colleagues, service users and communities, and we want to reassure you that we stand by you and remain committed to being an inclusive organisation.'
Committed is what you should be...to a mental health institution.
5 comments:
"......Who pays?" Shirley, it should be the members of that Trust who made the decision to allow ' cocks in frocks' into female toilets and changing rooms? Let them put their own money where their ultra woke mouths are.
Penseivat
"...our trans, non-binary and gender-diverse colleagues."
I wonder how many colleagues we are talking about here? Would it be cheaper and easier just to provide them with their own bog? That way they can prove that they took reasonable steps in the same way as you have to take reasonable steps for example wheelchair access.
Stonyground.
"...our trans, non-binary and gender-diverse colleagues."
I wonder how many colleagues we are talking about here? Would it be cheaper and easier just to provide them with their own bog? That way they can prove that they took reasonable steps in the same way as you have to take reasonable steps for example wheelchair access.
Stonyground.
Given that it was a ruling of the Supreme Court (and thus beyond appeal), then any organisation deliberately declining to implement its ruling is, ipso facto, in contempt of court, leaving its managing board jointly and severally liable for prosecution, not only for the contempt but also for conspiracy to commit that contempt.
Contempt of court carries a significant custodial sentence, conspiracy would add further sentence weight.
Lock 'em up.
Yep.The one back home.
Post a Comment