Hi @SussexUni @adamtickell @profsaulbecker @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk

The
Equal opportunities monitoring form in your job application asks for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:

Male
Female
Other.

https://t.co/DbKgiLN5yG

1/10

'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.

https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u

2/10
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology - 'other' is not a valid option.

https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF

'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.

3/10
Asking about a personal characteristic such as 'gender' that is not a protected characteristic under the Act, may be in breach of the GDPR by processing personal - and potentially Special Category - data without a lawful basis.

4/10
If you choose not to gather data on specific protected characteristics (such as sex), you cannot have the information required to ascertain whether or not you could be discriminating on protected characteristics in recruitment. This could be vital in an employment tribunal.

5/10
If you choose to discriminate on characteristics (such as 'gender') that are not protected characteristics under the Act, you may inadvertently indirectly discriminate on protected grounds.

6/10
Given these errors and your use of incorrect terms, it's not clear how you can meet your Public Sector Equality Duty or how you have met it in the past given your data could have been corrupted by those who didn't provide their sex.

7/10
Nor is it clear how you can have had due regard to the other duties given the data you have collected.

8/10
Language and meaning of words are important and proper use & understanding of terms is vital so that the public is aware of what rights they have and what your duties are. Any confusion or inconsistency over meaning may prevent people from accessing their rights in law.

9/10
Will you undertake to correct these errors and to review all your other policies, documents, reports, etc to ensure compliance?

Please respond.

https://t.co/RJAWJ1vJ6s

10/10
@threadreaderapp unroll

More from sexnotgender.info

Hi @derbyspolice @DerbysPCC @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk

The Equal Ops Monitoring section in your job application asks for the 'Sex (Gender)' of the applicant with options:

Male
Female.

1/12


'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.

https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u

2/12


Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology.

https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF

'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.

3/12

You also ask about 'transgender'.

'Transgender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.

4/12


There is a protected characteristic of 'gender reassignment', but the term 'transgender' is not used or defined in the Act.

https://t.co/2o53ufahzA

5/12
Hi @bmj_latest @bmj_company @trishgreenhalgh @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk

The EEO section of your job application has 'gender' in what appears to be a list of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.

1/11


'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.

https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u

2/11


Sex is the protected characteristic under the Act, but that is not on your list.

'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.

3/11

You then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:

Male
Female.

4/11

'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.

https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u

5/11
Hi @EdinburghUni @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk

The DIVERSITY INFORMATION section in yr job application mentions 'legal equality duties'. You then ask "What is your gender identity?" with options

Female
Male
Non-binary
Not-listed
Other

1/13


'Gender identity' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.

https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u

2/13


Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology - 'non-binary' and 'other' are not valid options.

https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF

'Gender identity' is not a synonym for sex.

3/13


You then ask "Does your gender identity match your sex registered at birth?"

4/13


Again, 'gender identity' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.

https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u

5/13
Hi @EdinburghNapier @ProfAndreaNolan @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk

The Equal Opportunities section in your job application asks for the 'gender' of the applicant, with options:

Female
Male
Unspecified.

cc @dr_ciaran @BBCWomansHour

1/9


'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.

https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u

2/9


Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that.

https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF

'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.

3/9


Asking about a personal characteristic such as 'gender' that is not a protected characteristic under the Act, may be in breach of the GDPR by processing personal - and potentially Special Category - data without a lawful basis.

4/9

If you choose to discriminate on characteristics (such as 'gender') that are not protected characteristics under the Act, you may inadvertently indirectly discriminate on protected grounds.

5/9

More from Society

global health policy in 2020 has centered around NPI's (non-pharmaceutical interventions) like distancing, masks, school closures

these have been sold as a way to stop infection as though this were science.

this was never true and that fact was known and knowable.

let's look.


above is the plot of social restriction and NPI vs total death per million. there is 0 R2. this means that the variables play no role in explaining one another.

we can see this same relationship between NPI and all cause deaths.

this is devastating to the case for NPI.


clearly, correlation is not proof of causality, but a total lack of correlation IS proof that there was no material causality.

barring massive and implausible coincidence, it's essentially impossible to cause something and not correlate to it, especially 51 times.

this would seem to pose some very serious questions for those claiming that lockdowns work, those basing policy upon them, and those claiming this is the side of science.

there is no science here nor any data. this is the febrile imaginings of discredited modelers.

this has been clear and obvious from all over the world since the beginning and had been proven so clearly by may that it's hard to imagine anyone who is actually conversant with the data still believing in these responses.

everyone got the same R

You May Also Like