It’s not uncommon nowadays to join a company or even a social media website and be asked your pronouns. But after four years of working in the automotive industry, I still see hundreds of people who, although they have the best intentions, have a terrible understanding of why it is – and should be – important to be seen as the norm. That’s why I’ve decided to write this blog post.
First off, I’m not speaking for everyone here. As an HR Specialist, it is my responsibility to ensure my values are to embrace and learn. This is simply my contribution, built from studying equality and diversity since 2009, learning how to implement this in the workplace since 2012, and spending a lot of time on personal development.
As an employer, it is vital to be informed to protect not only yourself and your business but, most of all, your employees. If you know someone who doesn’t respect equality and diversity, then don’t be their ally. Separate yourself from those who do not respect this subject.
The difference between sex and gender
I recently heard the comment: “You are born male; you can’t just decide that you are not male.” Let’s unpick this…
Key Fact: There is a difference between sex and gender.
As quoted from the National Office of Statistics 15.11.2022:
The UK government defines sex as:
· referring to the biological aspects of an individual as determined by their anatomy, which is produced by their chromosomes, hormones and their interactions
· generally male or female
· something that is assigned at birth
The UK government defines gender as:
· a social construction relating to behaviours and attributes based on labels of masculinity and femininity; gender identity is a personal, internal perception of oneself, and so the gender category someone identifies with may not match the sex they were assigned (due to their physical biology) at birth
· where an individual may see themselves as a man, a woman, as having no gender, or as having a non-binary gender (identifying as somewhere on a spectrum between man and woman)
Gender fluidity is when a person doesn’t have a fixed gender and is flexible in regards to the gender with which they identify.
Understanding the definitions makes all the difference. For example, if someone says they don’t identify as female, this does not reference their biological attributes. Instead, this is usually them referring to their gender to stop the presumptions that they are [insert feminine quality] because they are female.
People have experienced so much discrimination and harassment that we actually now have laws to make it clear to people what is not acceptable. So if someone is born male (sex), they can decide to identify as any or no gender because it is their right to do so, which is now backed up by law.
An example at HR Vitals:
Our HR Vitals’ Assistant is called Charlie, and many ask if Charlie is “male or female?”. This question is fine as it is a polite request from my clients to find out whether they should refer to them as he/she/they. This question aims to help build a picture of who they are communicating with and prevents them from making the wrong presumption. Because what if you presumed incorrectly?
We have a saying in our house: “Presumption is the mother of all mistakes.”
In the garage:
Thinking about the difference in gender and sex and asking about pronouns, can you see why so many companies are (rightfully) asking their employees what pronouns they use?
The ability to work in a garage is not dictated by sex or gender. We know that. But there are more subtle examples of what to be aware of.
Think about how your customers act when they speak to a female on the phone. Sometimes they ask for a technician or the owner, expecting them to be a male and, therefore, have more knowledge of cars. Unfortunately, this example of gender stereotyping is common in our industry, where gender norms are based on socially constructed masculine or feminine traits.
Social constructs have no basis in fact. Instead, they are developed by society and perpetuated through cultural and social practices. We are taught to behave a certain way from birth: boys should like blue and violent games, and girls should like pink and dolls. Most people tend to conform to these stereotypes without any issues. However, those who do not fit into this neat, cultural box can lead lives filled with discomfort, and a lack of self-worth and self-respect, potentially leading to anxiety and mental ill health.
Stereotypical gender roles can have a negative effect on anyone and everyone. As a male mechanic, you may feel uncomfortable in the kitchen. But consider the impact this has on those who already don’t fit comfortably into societies’ “two traditional genders” to begin with. As you can imagine, it opens a bigger kettle of fish!
What non-binary people are saying is that they don’t want to be associated with behaviour that promotes these potentially damaging gender roles. And by being an ally, you are saying that you know these behaviours are old-fashioned, too.
I know you see it is a problem too, so let’s embrace non-binary and pronoun awareness.
Jaguar Land Rover recently made the news
For a case raised by an employee who gave examples of discrimination due to their gender identity. The tribunal said it was clear that Parliament intended gender reassignment to be a spectrum moving away from birth sex and that a person could, at any point, be on that spectrum, whether an individual described themselves as non-binary or gender fluid. As a result, JLR paid a compensation of £180,000 to Ms Taylor.
As an employer:
Introduce equality and diversity policies and procedures into your workplace, and think about every opportunity you have to make a change or support those who prefer to choose their pronouns.
The industry needs an influx of trained people. If you are clearly promoting equality and diversity, you will change and boost the industry from the inside. (This is also why you will see a rise in people putting their pronouns on email signatures and LinkedIn.)
As an employer and a business owner, it is imperative that you do not discriminate against your employees due to their gender identity. It is against the law and unethical to do so. There is literally no limit to the amount payable for discrimination under Section 124 of the Equality Act 2010.
There are numerous ways to prevent discrimination, such as:
· Removing any gender-specific language
· Requesting a blind CV (A CV with no gender information requirement)
· Providing “male, female and other” on any forms
· Protecting all members of staff from bullying or harassment and promoting a culture of zero tolerance towards discrimination of any form
· Including non-binary protections in your policies
· Becoming an ally for anti-discriminatory rights
The most important aspect of ensuring your employees feel safe is offering respect. It is common that your first encounter with someone who is non-binary/trans/etc. causes anxiety. This is usually down to not wanting to offend. It is also understandable for you to have questions and to want to try and understand the issues around gender identity, but it is essential that you do so in a respectful and appropriate way.
Offering your employee a private space to discuss their needs within the workplace is a great start, and using their chosen name and pronouns is essential.
To conclude:
My point is to help and to highlight that if someone identifies as non-binary, they are potentially saying, “Don’t presume anything about me just because of my sex.” This is wise advice.
Putting this into context at work, doesn’t it seem ludicrous that someone could have a problem with a colleague/employee saying that they don’t identify as a female? Make sure you have a workplace that embraces equality and diversity. I have seen first-hand how well it works for you, your business, your employees and your recruitment.
Useful links: https://transequality.org/issues/resources/understanding-non-binary-people-how-to-be-respectful-and-supportive
For help on how to show that your workplace is up to date with the right way to do things – then please contact me for next steps :
Call : 01726 247347
Whatsapp : 07494 596 409
Email : jennifer@hrvitals.co.uk
Facebook : jen_hrvitals
Go straight to Jen’s calendar for a call , click here
Full JLR Case :
Taylor v Jaguar Land Rover Ltd ET/1304471/18
gender reassignment discrimination | definition of gender reassignment | gender identities
In Taylor v Jaguar Land Rover Ltd, an employment tribunal held that the definition of gender reassignment in s.7 of the Equality Act 2010 covers employees who identify as non-binary or gender fluid.
Practical tips
While this is only a first-instance decision, it is the first time that a tribunal has confirmed that protection against gender reassignment discrimination extends to gender fluid and non-binary persons.
Employers should review their procedures to check that they protect and support employees with different gender identities or gender expressions.
Employers must ensure that their diversity and inclusion policies are fully implemented and that managers and employees receive training on them, including the importance of using appropriate and inclusive language.
Employers should consider, where space allows, providing some clearly marked gender-neutral toilets for any employee to use.
Ms Taylor worked for Jaguar Land Rover Ltd for 20 years.
In April 2017, Ms Taylor informed her line manager that she was transgender and that “this is an umbrella term, and in my case, the precise word would be gender fluid”. Ms Taylor told him that she had no plans for surgical transition but she wanted to fix a date when she could start attending work in female clothing.
Ms Taylor’s line manager described her situation as “not normal” and he told her to use the disabled toilets.
In the following months, Ms Taylor was subjected to unacceptable and offensive comments from her colleagues, such as asking her if she was going to get her “bits chopped off” and if she was dressing for Halloween.
Ms Taylor raised her concerns about this treatment with Jaguar and she asked for managerial support during her transition. She recommended some measures that the company could take to create an LGBT-inclusive workplace. She had numerous discussions with HR and management but her work environment did not improve and her grievance did not result “in any plan or outcome”. Ms Taylor resigned in response.
Ms Taylor brought claims of gender reassignment discrimination and harassment in the employment tribunal. She also claimed constructive unfair dismissal.
Jaguar argued that Ms Taylor could not bring a claim of gender reassignment discrimination because she was gender fluid and was not undergoing gender reassignment.
The tribunal began its deliberations by looking at the statutory language. Under s.7(1) of the Equality Act 2010, a person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if they are proposing to undergo, are undergoing or have undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning their sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.
The tribunal noted that “proposing to undergo” could be interpreted in a number of ways. The tribunal said that, as there was no legal authority on the issue, it must consider the intention of Parliament when it enacted s.7. Reviewing the comments in Hansard, the official record of parliamentary debates, the tribunal found that gender reassignment was described as “a personal move away from one’s birth sex, into a state of one’s choice” and because it is “a personal process” there need not be “something medical, let alone surgical, to fit the definition”.
The tribunal said it was clear that Parliament intended gender reassignment to be a spectrum moving away from birth sex and a person could be at any point on that spectrum whether an individual described themselves as non-binary or gender fluid. The tribunal concluded that it was beyond any doubt that somebody in Ms Taylor’s situation was protected because she was on a journey that would not be the same in any two cases.
Having determined that it had jurisdiction to hear Ms Taylor’s discrimination claim, the tribunal found that she had been subjected to offensive comments over a long period of time and that Jaguar had failed to provide her with support and protect her from serious harassment. The tribunal said that the proposals for Ms Taylor’s use of toilet facilities were inadequate and insulting and exposed her to potential confrontation and embarrassment.
The tribunal held that Ms Taylor’s claims were well founded.
Turning to the issue of remedy, the tribunal said that Ms Taylor’s case “cried out” for an award of aggravated damages because of:
- the egregious way in which she was treated when subjected to serious harassment, which was “frankly unconscionable”; and
- the insensitive approach taken by Jaguar in defending Ms Taylor’s claim with some of the points put to her “bordering on the offensive”.
The tribunal added that the failings in this case were not the responsibility of the individual managers as they were out of their depth and Jaguar had not given them the tools or support to deal with the situation. The advice from HR was “woeful” and the managers could not be blamed for relying on it.
The tribunal thought it astounding that Jaguar had not had anything in place in the way of proper support, training and enforcement on diversity and equality. The tribunal found that Jaguar’s culture was not aligned to its policies, agreements and statements of intent and that it had never seen such a “wholesale failure” in an organisation of that size.
After reaching these conclusions, the tribunal made a statutory recommendation that Jaguar’s directors read and discuss the tribunal’s decision at a board meeting on 1 March 2021.
The tribunal noted that Jaguar had agreed to pay Ms Taylor £180,000 in settlement of her claim and to take specific steps to achieve diversity and inclusion within its organisation.
