Thank you. I thought what I had done was right after previously being told that “just pasting the whole text is confusing”.

TLDR? They're attacking the bulwark against Fascism. There's only one reason anyone would do that. It's not a good reason.

In some ways an attack on the ECHR is as big a threat to trans people as Badenoch’s rantings. It's an attack on everyone's human rights - but those who lose out first are the groups vulnerable in other ways.

Bluntly, the way it was handled stinks. I’m sorry that you had to deal with it and the fact that it had this impact just shows how badly it was done.

There’s a lot of case law on hostile work environments which I would look to in drafting a suitable policy to prevent it.

I hope I have made clear I think it’s wrong to see transphobia as somehow “okay” in comparison to other bigotry, both here and elsewhere. What’s ironic is because there’s no hierarchy of protected characteristics my position is law… …and yet there’s an attempt to argue the opposite in the report.

That’s not widely applicable but a focus on the procedural fairness would be very worthwhile where it’s possible and the case is basically a “how to”: www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/u...

The solution is to ban all manifestations of the bigotry. That way, people can believe what they like but can’t manifest those beliefs in a way which impacts trans people at work. Unless the nice rule in Ali v Green Party (2024) applies in which case? You can kick someone out as long as it’s fair.

Yes. Being racist but not enough to be an outright Nazi is protected in the same way as transphobia (which belief is similarly limited in theory but that’s not showing in the case law in the way it should). So is being homophobic and many other beliefs.

4. Even if you bury the law in a morass of special pleading, being transphobic enough to create a hostile workplace is unlawful. Thats GC transphobia in its nasty toxic little box.