How to improve gender equality in the workplace: actions for employers

The office for Equality&Opprtunities published (11/08/2025) the research&analysis report entitled-how to improve gender equality in the workplace: action for employers. Gender is used instead of sex. All protected characteristics are mentioned not gender reassignment.

www.gov.uk/government/p...

We’ve also written to the Women and Equalities Committee and the Joint Committee on Human Rights to raise our concerns. The EHRC’s direction must be scrutinised. We hope others will join us in making their voices heard where it matters.

(4)A failure to comply with a provision of a code shall not of itself make a person liable to criminal or civil proceedings; but a code— (a)shall be admissible in evidence in criminal or civil proceedings, and (b)shall be taken into account by a court or tribunal in any case in which it appears to the court or tribunal to be relevant.

The Code of Practice is subordinate to primary legislation. Under the Equality Act 2006, sections 14–15, a code of practice issued by the EHRC is guidance only. Section 15(4) makes clear that failure to follow a code is not, in itself, unlawful, and that the actual law must prevail.

Screenshot of text that reads: "5 General (1) Where a full gender recognition certificate is issued to a person, the person's gender becomes for all purposes the acquired gender. (2) Subsection (1) does not affect things done, or events occurring, before the time when the certificate is issued; but it does operate for the interpretation of enactments passed, and instruments and other documents made, before that time (as well as those passed or made afterwards)."

Draft Gender Recognition Bill - July 2003

"Where a full gender recognition certificate is issued to a person, the person's gender becomes for all purposes the acquired gender."

web.archive.org/web/20030917...

Screenshot of text that reads, "Clause 9: General. 27. Subsection (1) states the fundamental proposition that once a full gender recognition certificate is issued to an applicant, the person's gender becomes for all purposes the acquired gender, so that an applicant who was born a male would, in law, become a woman for all purposes. She would, for example, be entitled to protection as a woman under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975; and she would be considered to be female for the purposes of section 11(c) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, and so able to contract a valid marriage with a man."

"These notes refer to the Gender Recognition Bill [HL]
as introduced in the House of Lords on 27th November 2003 [HL Bill 4]"

publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200304/...

Text describing the commitment to transsexual people's assimilation, stating, "We are committed to facilitating, as fully as possible, transsexual people's assimilation into the gender to which they feel they belong. We share the Court's view that society may reasonably be expected to tolerate a minority of individuals living in dignity and worth in accordance with the identity they are driven to assume. We do not seek, however, to erase all trace of their former identity. We have concluded that there is no need for transsexual people to be given new National Insurance numbers on registering in their acquired gender. Nl numbers give no indication of gender, and employment and data protection legislation should give adequate protection against careless or malicious disclosure in the rare instances where the number enables a link to be made between former and current identities."

"Government Announcement on Transsexual People". 13 December 2002.

In relation to the cases of Goodwin -v- The United Kingdom and I -v- The United Kingdom.

web.archive.org/web/20031001...

web.archive.org/web/20031203...

Screenshot of text outlining options for rectifying breaches of international law. "Option 1: Do nothing. The Government is obliged to rectify breaches of international law. A declaration of incompatibility with the Convention can be made by a UK court and its effect is similar, i.e. if the Government does nothing, the pressure to legislate will continue to build and further challenges and claims for compensation will continue to be brought. Option 2: Remedial Order. Ministers may amend a provision in primary legislation if it is incompatible with a Convention obligation of the UK. Amending s.11(c) of the Matrimonial Cause Act 1973 in this way would enable transsexual people to marry in their acquired gender, i.e. one of the human rights breaches could be rectified. Option 3: Primary legislation. This is the only way to rectify all human rights breaches, establish a rigorous and credible process for gender recognition and ensure full legal recognition in the acquired gender across the range of situations in which gender is significant in law. These options were analysed in the Partial RIA, published at the same time as a draft Bill, and the third was shown to be the most appropriate. Primary legislation. A Draft Bill was published for pre-legislative scrutiny on 11th July. The Joint Committee on Human Rights is expected to publish its report shortly. Using primary legislation is the only way to rectify all human rights breaches and ensure full legal recognition in the acquired gender across the range of situations in which gender is significant in law. Business sectors affected. There are potential impacts on: Employers, Providers of insurance and private pensions, Sporting bodies, Charities that work with or represent transsexual people, Professional organisations, Religious organisations, Solicitors' firms, Other Government Departments, Not-for-profit legal services providers."

Final Regulatory Impact Assessment Gender Recognition Bill - Nov 2003.

"This is the only way to rectify all human rights breaches...ensure full legal recognition in the acquired gender across the range of situations in which gender is significant in law."

I think the EHRC has simply changed - it is a Gender Critical Ideology body now, which was deliberate. When I sought to apply to be an unpaid committee member at the EHRC they told me I would need to contact whoever was the operator of any building the meetings were in to find out their loo policy.

JK Rowling's silence on Gaza's murdered women The children's author has spent more time ridiculing my ADHD symptoms than condemning Israel's crimes against Palestinian women

Supposedly, she defends women's rights, and attemps to protect women & girls from violence.. really.. here is her real face..
Clearly she suppots & pours money on Gender Critical Ideological women.. not women but a tiny ideologically granted ones
open.substack.com/pub/owenjone...

How & why did Ms. Phillipson appointed the chair of the EHRC, Dr Stephenson, who is involved in the Gender Critical Club & aiming at erasing a tiny trans community?Ms Philipson should answer the question & should be scrutinised by the MPs. She has clearly abused her powerful ministerial position.

Thank you for contacting us about the article you've seen, We want our stores to be inclusive and welcoming places for our colleagues and customers. We have written to this customer and explained that our colleagues typically work across all departments in our stores and customers can always ask to speak to the colleague they feel most comfortable with, We also explained that our colleague was asking a customer if they needed help; they were not working on bra fit or offering this. Thank you again for getting in touch Kind Regards Your M&S Customer Service

With the M&S email included.

Share share share!

A tiny gender critical club is free to commit hate crime, aiming at erasing trans community from society in direct support of people sitting in powerful positions, i.e. Ms Phillipson, PM, EHRC, the Supreme Court & all other courts. All is violating our human rights & abusing their power positions.

Unbelievable. Expressing our views peacefully is not allowed by Ms Cooper & whole labour cabinet. Are we living in a democratic country & governed by a democratic government? Our freedom of Speech?? Our liberties?? Our human rights?? All are taken away by whom? Do we stand against??

Look at today's UK & Iceland..
Why has the UK become so right wing, authotarian: violating human rights at every way?

Defining legal sex, the Supreme Court failed to address vital wording in the Equality Act 2010 TLDR:

The Supreme Court ruling is full of contradictions as we all know. Why is everything based on this ruling, who is pushing. As we know Baronees Falkner & Sex Matters relationship but why have Ms Phillipson & PM determined to follow their path/actions?

screedvault.neocities.org/post/2025042...

Tbh, I think Labour has a vested interest in releasing all the documents, because they would largely vindicate them against the Supreme Court’s irresponsible accusation that they passed ineffective laws.

Good news: one of the archived ministerial and senior official files on the Gender Recognition Bill, previously misclassified as secret and not due for release in our lifetime, has now been made public.

Another despatch box full of receipts.

Ms. PHILLIPSON HAS POWERS TO STOP THE TRANS EXCLUSINARY POLICIES. SHE IS WORKING FOR THE GENDER CRITICAL BELIEFS THAT ARE AIMED AT ERASING TRANS COMMUNITIES, TRANSWOMEN FROM EXISTENCE. IMPOSSIBLE BUT THEY TRY EVERYTHING WITH Ms PHILIPSON

Totally agree. Ms. Phillipson has failed to fulfil her duties. She should be sacked. She has proved that she can not be the Minister for Equality,as she is/supporting fully & on the side of gender critical clubs. The EHRC's claim is that the SC ruling is not law she hasn't said it isn't.

I agree. Ms. Phillipson is the problem, not fulfilling her duties. She knows that the SC ruling is not a law. She knows lawmakers are MPs. She did not allow MPs to debate the ruling. She ignored the WEC & the Joint HR committes' response to the appointment of Stephenson. She shouldn't be minister

The Supreme Court judgement/ ruling is not a law. We should say this, shout at powerfully. There is no law, but there is a judgement for the parliament to debate, not for Ms. Phillipson or PM to give the statements. Lawmakers are MPs & we should remind them loudly & powerfully. Not the EHRC

Teatowel reading “This towel is for cleaning up politics. And drying up dishes.”

T-shirt reading “I am a person not an agenda”

Notebook reading “Injustice is not inevitable”

Tote bag reading “Protect our right to swim”

👕☕📓 MERCH STORE NOW OPEN 📓☕👕

There’s a new way to support Good Law Project. We’ve (finally) launched our merch store! All proceeds will help us fight against hate and spread hope.

goodlaw.social/nryv

Just a reminder that this is still very much accurate and relevant. Even when the EHRC publish the Code of Practice, which does not change the actual law.

Interference to privacy, personal attack, sorry Sophie. Given all space & power to gender critical clubs, then this is the result, thanks to Ms Phillipson allowing this.. the humiliation of transgender women.

And this is Sir Keir Starmer and Shabana Mahmood’s dignity and respect.

I wonder what the law is. Which law is taken under consideration? Falkner is obviously supporting or part of gender critical clubs. A newcomer, Stephenson, is also a supporter of gender critical clubs. Ms. Phillipson should imply human rights for this guidance. Shouldn't she?

Subject: I No Longer Recognise the EHRC as a National Human Rights Institution Subject: I No Longer Recognise the EHRC as a National Human Rights Institution [Make your own amendments and additions to this email.] Dear [MP's Name], I am writing to express my deep concern regardi...

If you’re an individual, you can write to your MP to express your concerns, and state that you no longer recognise the EHRC as a NHRI. We’ve prepared a letter you can personalise and send. It helps show this issue matters to constituents.

If your organisation no longer recognises the EHRC as a national human rights institution, we’ve prepared an email template you can adapt.

It can be sent to public bodies like the WEC, the JCHR, and relevant ministers to raise formal concerns about the EHRC’s loss of independence and credibility.

Today, we’ve formally informed the EHRC that we no longer recognise it as a national human rights institution. This was not a decision taken lightly. But there can be no accountability without action. We urge other organisations to consider their stance and speak out.