The 2010 Equality Act Is Being Undermined by Official Guidance
by Ann Sinnott, Uncommon Ground:
One of the most contentious social conflicts today is that between women’s rights campaigners – who protest that women-only spaces, in both public and private organisations, are being eroded to the detriment of women and girls – and transgender rights campaigners, who dismiss such claims as bigoted nonsense and assert that transwomen are women and entitled to access women-only spaces. Scarcely a day goes by without media coverage of this issue and a ferocious war rages on social media.
You might wonder how the dispute came about. Isn’t the law clear?
The 2010 Equality Act is clear, though some terms could do with a bit more definition and there could be more real-life examples. But who reads the Act anyway? For a layperson, the language is dense and the structure complex (involves a fair bit of scooting back and forth to dig out all relevant info) so it’s not surprising that few – apart from lawyers and a few nerdy types [hands up!]– actually read it.
Most organisations bring in a training agency to interpret the act for them. I am sure that some of these agencies do read the act – but I am equally sure that many do not.
Most training agencies, organisations and the general public rely on the official guidance that the Equality and Human Rights Commission, a non-departmental public body, provides on its website.
EHRC guidance is, on the whole, accurate and reliable. But in relation to the single-sex exception – the part of the Act which protects women-only spaces – the EHRC’s guidance is, in many instances, incorrect.
Related Posts
Tags
Share This
