Your Shopping rights explained

    • 434 posts
    October 7, 2010 4:37 PM BST
    Rebecca,
    I was replying to what Julia said "Now my mind boggles as to why the rest of the bloody world wants to move here ." which did not refe to the past. The Statistics indicate that Julia was mistaken in her assumption.
    If you want to refer to the past, then why were the majority of settlers in North America from the UK? Why did the "Colonies" seek independence?
    Interestingly enough, it seems that the vast majority of the Barons, Bishops, and Abbots who were party to the Magna Carta were of French Origins.
    Further, I don't see too many native "Picts" running around in the UK either. Plus, you would think that having almost 800 years would be ample time to streamline the laws.
    • Moderator
    • 2358 posts
    October 6, 2010 11:51 AM BST
    Have you been refused service in a shop?

    Protection for transsexual people as customers and service users

    The Sex Discrimination Act (SDA) was amended in April 2008 to protect transsexual people undergoing supervised medical treatment, against discrimination and harassment in the provision of goods, facilities and services. This adds to the previous protection in employment and vocational training.

    The law applies to both public and commercially run services and enterprises.




    Amendments April 2010


    * It is unlawful for a publican or shopkeeper to refuse to serve a customer because they are **intending to undergo, are undergoing or have undergone gender reassignment.

    (1)A person (a “service-provider”) concerned with the provision of a service to the public or a section of the public (for payment or not) must not discriminate against a person requiring the service by not providing the person with the service.

    (2)A service-providermust not, in providing the service, discriminate against a person

    (a)as to the terms on which A provides the service to B;

    (b)by terminating the provision of the service to B;

    (c)by subjecting B to any other detriment.

    (3)A service-provider must not, in relation to the provision of the service, harass B-

    (a)a person requiring the service, or

    (b)a person to whom the service-provider provides the service.

    (4)A service-provider must not victimise a person requiring the service by not providing the person with the service.

    (5)A service-providermust not, in providing the service, victimise a person




    ** this is the important amendment as it no longer directly states a person must be under medical supervision, the emphasis is on intending

    Anyone with any questions please post in the law forum, I will try and answer them, if I cannot do it immediately I will seek clarification and advice.

    • 746 posts
    October 6, 2010 1:25 PM BST
    Holy crap! (smile)
    • Moderator
    • 2358 posts
    October 6, 2010 2:01 PM BST
    Holy crap? This is in response to someone that obviously was discriminated against.

    http://gendersociety.com/[...]544997&

    Quote ''The Nanny state'' laws do have some uses. One cannot say ''Piss off, I'm not serving you, you tranny pervert wierdo'' in this country.

    Note weirdo in this context is derogatory, as in with the intention to insult or belittle a person.

    • 746 posts
    October 6, 2010 2:29 PM BST
    Crissie, I read the "a's" and "b's" and part 1 and 3, etc. and had moment of laughter thinking about a policeman in a Monty Python like moment trying to spit out all the provisions of the law when accosting a perpetrator...one must be a Mensa candidate to get those statutes down...(smile) Did NOT mean to make light of discrimination, but my "weirdo" sense of humor got the best of me...must be from all those weeds I've been eating! (grinning, ducking, and running)

    Traci xxxx
    • 1652 posts
    October 6, 2010 3:19 PM BST
    What, I wonder, are the legal implications for someone who is not intending to undergo gender reassignment. Do shops in this country have the right to ask TV’s/CD’s to leave their store without any other reason than the clothes they are wearing or the way they are presenting?
    xx
    • Moderator
    • 2358 posts
    October 6, 2010 3:36 PM BST
    Lucy, at the time one can state, they are intending, The way I read the specifics one does not have to actually substantiate their claim, the basis is how the customer presents themselves, as in a court of law, one does not have to clarify their intentions, I am advised by Professor Sharp that respect for ones appearance or as they present themselves is deserving of being addressed in their perceived gender. Obviously as long as no one is offended by that person. Obviously its all relevant as would be a scenario involving a genetic female, if someone goes into Harvey Knics, in a skirt up to their arse, with their genitalia hanging out of a thong,if other patrons complain and their complaints are reasonable, then of course they can refuse to serve someone.

    Perhaps someone that is known to the staff in the shop as only going into try on clothes for sexual kicks. The list of why someone could be refused service is as probably as long as the ones of why not.

    • 434 posts
    October 6, 2010 5:05 PM BST
    Cristine,
    It boggles the mind why your laws should even get to the level of detailing the "transgender state" a shopper is at the time they are refused service. The more detail you put into a law, the more "loopholes" can be found in that law because of "omissions" in that law. It makes the law cumbersome and encourages legal challenges of that law.
    In Canada, the general Human Right of the shopper is would be protected ...without even having to consider the actual, perceived, or preferred gender of the person. Transgender would be irrelevant in the matter.
    If the shopper was obviously going to damage (or soil) the merchandise etc... then the shop owner would be within their rights to protect that merchandise. etc...
    When I see the law having to "specifically" include Transgender, it smacks of a powerful lobby group needing recognition - solely for the sake of ego gratification.
    We have the right to exist, but that does not give us the right to "ram our existence down everyone's throat" in a pro-active manner.
    My Grandmother had a great saying..."We are all equal ... whether we like it or not"
    • Moderator
    • 2358 posts
    October 6, 2010 6:48 PM BST
    Doanna

    Because UK laws are individual and deal with specific issues. and::-

    (1) date back years and are under constant revision and amendments to bring them into line to facilitate changing attitudes.

    (2) A crime/offence has to be reported/prosecuted with reference to a certain act of common law or statute..

    UK law is probably the oldest set of laws in the western world, all encompassing and comprehensive and many civilised countries laws are based on the idea and principles of UK law and justice. When you look at USA laws which vary from state to state and is dependent on the local electorial influence. Hardly gonna get a redneck state in the USA to pass a gender recognition act?.

    Discrimination laws, are for instance broken down into different sections, each one being a seperate identifiable crime. racial discrimination, discrimination based on religion., sexual discrimination and many more, then each one is relevant to employment law, goods and services and so on.
    To make a law work one must have a point of reference on what law was broken/infringed upon. You cant just charge someone with a discrimination offence without mentioning how and why the offence was deemed illegal.

    If someone goes into a shop and the shopkeeper says we don't serve niggers in this establishment, then thats derogatory and discriminatory, same goes if someone says we don't serve tranny perverts.

    A typical example of Judgemental precedents, altering laws is the case where A post-op TS was raped, the defence submitted a claim that as the vagina did not meet the clinical and technical description of a natal females vagina, the case should be dismissed. The judge ruled and the words ''surgically constructed vagina'' was added to the offences agains the persons section 1 rape. of the sexual offences act. This act is none gender specific and only refers to vaginal or anal rape.

    Thats why laws are updated with specifics.

    Have a look at your own rape laws for instance and is there a chance there. that someone could escape justice using the same defence plea???

    • 129 posts
    October 6, 2010 10:29 PM BST
    Hi Crissie .
    I personaly have never had a bad experience being served in a shop and i would have thought that unless the customer was causing any kind of distress to others then there should be no problem , by distress i mean in a manner that would put staff and other customers and children in an uncomfortable situation such as maybe,, someone "a man" trying on female clothes and showing off the fact that he is enjoying it in an unopropriate way, that sort of behavior should and would be a good reason to be asked to leave .
    If the person is clearly making it known that they are just acting as any other female customer would then that in 2010 "should" be accepted as normal .

    The key to this is everyone just having the confidence to be themselves . I love shopping and if anyone ever tried to take my right to do so away i would have them in court even if it cost me to do so .

    Slightly different subject ; i was in the shoe shop on saturday teaching 5 female teenagers how to walk heels , now thats what shopping is about "fun" and the staff rekon i made there day .

    Hugs Julia x x.

    .
    • 129 posts
    October 6, 2010 11:11 PM BST
    Donna.
    Firstly they are not Cristines laws " she is highlighting UK laws" .

    As your mind is so boggled about the laws over here just maybe you should understand why we are fighting to change them.

    The UK is a bit behind other countries where certain laws are concerned but then again if we have a problem we don,t just pull out a gun and shoot that problem as some countries do .

    Now my mind boggles as to why the rest of the bloody world wants to move here .

    Julia .
    • 434 posts
    October 7, 2010 4:17 AM BST
    Julia,
    I meant no "dissing" of Cristine (hugs! cristine) at all.
    One of the interesting difference between North America and the UK is that we have a written constitution and I do not believe the UK has such a thing.
    My point was, do you really need to specifically identify the gender of the person who was discriminated against?
    The right of that person to shop there was refused without a legal reason...and that would be more than enough for the court, over here, to decide in the plaintiffs favor. In North America, the section (1)A that cristine posted would have "done the job" quite well.

    (1)A person (a “service-provider”) concerned with the provision of a service to the public or a section of the public (for payment or not) must not discriminate against a person requiring the service by not providing the person with the service.

    Perhaps the reason the people in the UK keep having to change the laws is that the existing laws did not get it right in the first place and therefore, requires perpetual "fine-tuning" because of that. I believe the situation of laws in the UK would benefit if their laws were more streamlined...not more "complicated.

    Julia, A second point I would like to make.
    In Canada, we do not "just pull out a gun and shoot that problem as some countries do . " either.

    finally,
    Julia, you mentioned that "Now my mind boggles as to why the rest of the bloody world wants to move here . "

    If you are implying that nobody likes to move to North America because of our laws - or our attitudes, I will acquaint you with some statistics on immigration - According to the United Nations Population Report (2005)
    (I realize it's a few years old...but I don't believe these reports are issued on a yearly basis)

    Number of Immigrants
    USA 38,355,000
    Canada 6,200,000
    United Kingdom 5,408,000

    Percentage of total number of Immigrants in the world
    USA 20.56
    Canada 3.272
    United Kingdom 2.898

    Immigrants as a percentage of total population
    USA 12.81
    Canada 18.76
    United Kingdom 8.892

    -------------------------------------------------------

    "The vagabond who's rapping at your door ...Is standing in the clothes that you once wore." ...Bob Dylan


  • October 7, 2010 7:50 AM BST
    Donna,

    We may not have a "written"constitution as per America/Canada, WE do however have the Magna Carta, first passed into law in 1225, thats quite a few years before your country was even discovered.

    Immigration greater in north America? I thought apart from the Indians (Largely slaughtered by your predecessors) you are all either immigrants or the off spring of immigrants.

    I don't believe our laws and our system is perfect, it has however been around for a very long time and is largely responsible for the basic structure of yours, I doubt your interpretation of it is correct.

    Cristine,

    Thank you for your interesting and very relevant posts.

    Huggles

    Becca
    • Moderator
    • 2358 posts
    October 7, 2010 10:56 AM BST

    Thankyou,
    I'll try to make it easy, you have to give a reason why you were discriminated against. You can't just plead discrimination. This applies to hospital treatment employment, if someone refuses you a service because your black thats racial discrimnination if someone refuses you a service because your a transsexual thats discrimination based on gender. God knows what it would come under if you were refused emergency treatment in the A&E because you were wearing red shoes and your handbag did'nt match, but sure there must be something that would cover it.

    Same way you can't just prosecute somone for stealing something different types of theft, you have to give factual evidence of what they stole and how they stole it.
    burglary, robbery, fraud, taking pecuniary advantage, embezzlement. Armed robbery. larcency, blackmail is a form of stealing so is extortion. All different crimes with varying penalties. You can't just prosecute someone for killing someone, There is murder, an other degrees of murder right down to causing death by driving without due care and attention. When our laws were first written, They were secular and a disadvantage to the masses. gradually as society changed, laws were added and amendments made to make them fairer and all encompassing. Thats why we in the UK probably have the best laws anywhere in the world relating to Transsgender issues. To say it gets complicated and leaves too many loopholes is wrong, Many changes to statutes and common law, is to close the loopholes, as in the case of the artificial vagina a classic example of closing a get out.clause.

    Some of the aspects of USA law, I quite admire, wish we could adopt them here, especially when it comes to handing down sentences. Very often here
    if a person commits 5 robberies, the get say 3 years for each of the five robberies, they then get sentenced to do their sentences concurrent which means they serve their imprisionment with all sentences running together, ergo they only do 3 years less time off for good behaviour. Whereas in the USA, they tend to do 3 years for the first crime and then when thats finished they start doing the time for the next crime and so on. consecutive. The only real gripe I have with the human rights act in the UK is very often it favours the perp more than the victim.

    Someone once said the law is an ass, only if its being read and interpretated by donkeys.


    This post was edited by Cristine Jennifer Shye. BL at October 31, 2015 4:57 PM GMT
    • 871 posts
    October 7, 2010 2:32 PM BST
    A good and interesting thread Crissie and I can categorically say that I have never been subject to discrimination by a member of staff in a retail establishment. I have however had bouncers in nightclubs ask me to refrain using the ladies toilets and instead use the mens at which point I replied I will continue to use the ladies and if they wished to eject me from the club I would like a written letter stating the reasons why. The conclusion each time was that I continued to use the ladies toilets and although I unfortunately had to deal with the mental trauma and anguish of being discriminated it was never carried out in a physical manner.
    Love
    Penny
    x
    • 252 posts
    October 7, 2010 2:41 PM BST
    I hope your UK hate law actually gets some exercise. I recently read a story about how several Southern states, despite having hate crimes laws on the books, no one has been arrested on one of the new statutes. A law that exists but is never implemented. Sounds like the South to me. Reminds me of my baseball coach when we got a GG on our team when I was 10. The coach needed to play every player two innings and one at-bat. That jerk NEVER played her more than two innings in a game and never gace her more than one at-bat in a game. I don't know why I'm connecting the two, it just seems like they belong together.

    Z
    • 871 posts
    October 7, 2010 2:55 PM BST
    Hi Zoe, It is my experience that our police take crimes of hate very seriously. Last week I was a victim of a hate crime. I was called a paedophile and a weirdo by a group of youths and pursued for about 100 yards. Police came to my home within 30 minutes and patrolled the area in search of the youths. I subsequently had the police pay 2 additional visits over the next 48 hours to check and see how I was. I also had 3 telephone called from the police victim support and a letter providing me details on how to cope with the mental trauma of psychological abuse and persecution. I am also very proud of the free personal alarm which I received to be used if I ever find myself in a similar situation.

    Although it is a great shame that I was victim to such ignorant behaviour I felt on the whole my freedom was protected. Also, my thread at expressing my dislike for people who use the term weirdo to describe another was very therapeutic.

    Love
    penny
    x

    • Moderator
    • 2358 posts
    October 7, 2010 4:41 PM BST

    I might be wrong, I realy have no great knowledge of USA law. except from television, if your arrested on criminal charges you have the right to an attorney, if you cannot afford one, one will be appointed to represent you. When it comers to things like discrimination, being refused goods or a service one has to hire a lawyer. so under those circumstances, the poor people are disadvantaged. I have heard a couple of American girls and girls from Canada, declare in the chat room that when they came out they lost their jobs and some could not afford to pursue their claims under state law, because they could not afford to pay for the lawyers. Here the Ideology of common law is that, within the terms of the law everyone is equal regardless of their position in society or their ability to pay for legal representation, thats one reason that we have so many laws.. Somone refuses to to serve a TS in a shop because they are a TS or on the basis of race, etc etc , its a crime, punishable by law. One has recourse to the law, its not a case of if you can afford it you get it, you can't afford it tough luck. Not being in the position to know a great deal about US or Canadian law, I certainly don't want to get into a you versus us scenario, try not to form opinions lessening the value we place on our legal system. There is of course the requirement for a forum dealing with USA laws, so far nobody has volountered to head up such a forum.


    This post was edited by Cristine Jennifer Shye. BL at October 31, 2015 4:52 PM GMT
    • 129 posts
    October 7, 2010 7:40 PM BST
    Hi all .

    I have just been reading about the difficulties transgendered people in the USA have to put up with so i feel it a blessing to be British , living in the USA must be hard if you happen to be transgendered in anyway as every state seems to have a different law "strange place" i would never visit it .

    Julia xx.


    • 746 posts
    October 8, 2010 1:35 AM BST
    Grrrrr

    ...why do you BOYS keep getting in the last word! Geezus...."I'd never visit it"...fine! Who cares! Totally uncalled for, even in a response to another's post...just reminds me sooooo much of maleness always having to win, out fight, out argue, etc...give it up! This is getting ridiculous...and to those who initiate posts knowing full well that it will create flames (and you know who you are), you're just a bad...no wonder the site appears to be struggling...if I were a newbie in here, I'd be turned off by the smug and know-it-all attitudes displayed too often...gawd, it is supposed to be about SUPPORT, not UK vs. USA, etc...

    This has gotten just way too WEIRD and it is tiring and quite frankly, extremely boring...we're ALL in the same boat so to say regarding gender issues and there is enough hate out there directed our way...no need for the hate in our own family!
    Think about it....smarten up!

    From a disgruntled weedeater....

    Traci
    • 434 posts
    October 8, 2010 3:22 AM BST
    Cristine,
    I am not certain about the USA, but we have a thing called the "Human Rights Commission" that will persue the matter on their own...and cost nothing...and another thing called "Legal Aid". ...there is usually no cost to the applicant. Usually it never has to go that far because the Companies do not wish the "public backlash" and the bad publicity. Mostly, the matter is dealt with in an "out of court settlement"
    Employees that put their companies in that situation usually get fired and rarely file for wrongful dismissal because they would NOT win in court.
    Our Legal System in Canada differs a bit from the USA
    • 129 posts
    October 8, 2010 5:05 AM BST
    Traci.
    I presume your comments are aimed at me .
    Firstly "do not" call me a BOY! over here we have something called gender recognition and i am female .

    I was not having a go at the USA i was just stating that your having different laws in every state is confusing and i would never visit there , seems i would have to read the law books before crossing every border .

    The term United states is strange in its self! united means "together as one" that can,t be true if one state says one thing and another state says the opposite .


    A very happy hormone taker

    Julia .
    • Moderator
    • 2358 posts
    October 8, 2010 11:27 AM BST

    I have hidden two posts, I have not consulted Katie or any of the other mods. I am the last one to censor anyones opinion. But this forum is not going to be dragged into a us and them situation. I realy am interested in how laws work in other countries, sure we all have positive things to add, its basically a UK law forum, but I am grateful to get comments and explanations how the laws differ from country to country. But I will not let this forum descend into chaos by anyone, when people start being so base as to call somone else a boy then it makes me wonder why I am devoting my time to trying to help people.. I thought perhaps by highlighting some of our laws regarding transgendered issues it would keep people in the UK informed of their rights and perhaps give people from other countries a basis for repealing some of their own laws that did'nt quite come up to scratch.


    This post was edited by Cristine Jennifer Shye. BL at October 31, 2015 4:55 PM GMT
    • 746 posts
    October 8, 2010 1:51 PM BST
    Y'all are carrying on like a bunch of boys...that's why I mentioned it...

    Don't delete this...this is my LAST post and I will let my paid subscription run out...I am moving on!

    Thanks to many of you for helping me get to this point in my life...truly has been helpful and supportive...

    Best wishes always...love you!

    Buh-bye!!!! *poof*

    Traci
    [email protected]
    • Moderator
    • 2358 posts
    October 8, 2010 3:24 PM BST
    Thankyou Doanna

    for the way you have explained, Human rights commission if you check it out you will find listed all the relevant contraventions, it also details lengthy instances of different types of discrimination. it would appear its very akin to our own human rights charter upon which discrimination laws were revised and various sections added and amended in common law.
    • Moderator
    • 2358 posts
    October 8, 2010 3:45 PM BST
    Y'all are carrying on like a bunch of boys...that's why I mentioned it..

    Traci thats not very helpful please don't generalise, and because some people find it hard to be eloquent in their meanings, does not mean they are acting like boys. You have done very little to explain why and how your own laws work in relation to this particular thread, your contributions in the main have been perceived as a sneer on how ours work, Would love a sensible response as to how your state would handle the same scenario, if you were refused goods or a service because of your TS status.
    • 746 posts
    October 8, 2010 3:57 PM BST
    You're correct Crissie...perhaps I shouldn't have posted in this thread...in fact, I'll start another...and it will be my last post...

    Traci
    • 1017 posts
    October 8, 2010 4:23 PM BST
    Hi Traci,

    There are folks here who I respect, some I admire, others I tolerate (and truth be told, a couple I've come to dislike) and a very few who I really, really like. You are one of those in that last category. If you leave, I will miss you a lot.

    Best, and Good Luck,
    Melody

    PS, Sorry, Cristine, I posted this while Traci was creating the thread it should been posted in.

    • 434 posts
    October 8, 2010 5:28 PM BST
    Cristine,
    The very point I was making is that if you have it in the charter..then there is no need to further complicate things by adding these rights to other laws ...because they already apply. When you add detail, you also add complications and contradictions.
    • Moderator
    • 2358 posts
    October 8, 2010 5:51 PM BST
    Doanna

    The HRC is and edict from the EU,which requires the UK to amend our laws and incorporate any changes two different things, one realy has to understand the basis of UK law, lol for instance the UK Gender recognition act, is not all encompassing and caused changes to other aspects of common law. like the marriage laws, employment laws, discrimination laws, one has to change the basic laws that are long standing to include the new additions/ amendments.

    In theory if GOD was to include basket of bananas in the 10 commandments, thou shalt not covet they neighbours. ass, wife etc. basket of bananas would have to be included in that commandment if GOD was to add another commandment, it would have to be added to the existing 10. not as an also ran. If you bring out new laws, the old ones have to be revised to incorporate them, otherwise things would be very contradictory.
    • 2627 posts
    October 8, 2010 7:22 PM BST
    Julie when the US was formed the founders didn't want differences in opinions to cause the forming of seperate countrys. Thus they gave each state the right to govern themselves. In fact that allmost did happen. We do have national laws that include all states. I think those are the ones that need to be worked at.
    • Moderator
    • 2358 posts
    October 9, 2010 9:10 PM BST
    http://gendersociety.com/[...]962737&

    Great piece by Wendy Larsen, the sort of thing I was looking for and explains so much. I can understand the logic, reasoning and ideology.
  • January 26, 2012 1:34 PM GMT

    Dear Ms Martin,

    Thank you for your email.

    I can confirm that Evans as a company do not tolerate discrimination in any form, and any member of the transgender community is more than welcome to shop in our stores and use our fitting rooms.

    Kind regards,

    Jake Powell
    Evans Customer Care



    rebecca martin

    25/01/2012 14:55

    To
    CSManager
    cc

    Subject
    Re: Customer Reference: 625340








    Jake
    Is it possible for you to give me a statement then that say that there is no descrimination against Trans community by Evens or the Acadia group and that Trans women post and pre opp are welcome to use the changing rooms in evens stores?

    I and a couple of 1000 other people await your response.

    Regards
    Rebecca

    On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 1:46 PM, rebecca martin wrote:
    Thanks Jake
    for your reply i will now circulate iot with in the Trans community and im sure should they get similer issues they will be in touch with you

    Rebecca

    On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 1:44 PM, CSManager wrote:

    Dear Ms Martin,

    Thank you for your email which has been passed to me for my attention and response.

    Having noted your comments carefully, I would like to assure you that as a business, we do not tolerate discrimination in any form, and our staff receive specific training regarding potentially delicate such as this. Whilst we are confident that the staff member in question did not intend to discriminate against you in any way, I can confirm that she is undertaking direct training to ensure she is better equipped to deal with such matters in the future.

    As stated above, our staff are fully briefed on our expectations towards handling such matters. Because of this, I regret that we are unable to consider your request for a directive to be sent out from Head Office. Furthermore, any such correspondence between Head Office and our stores must remain confidential for business reasons. Please accept my assurances however that we are taking the necessary steps to ensure that something like this does not happen again.

    Thank you for offering your further comments. If you have any further queries please do not hesitate to contact me.

    Regards,

    Jake Powell
    Evans Customer Care


    rebecca martin

    23/01/2012 11:46

    To
    CSManager
    cc

    Subject
    Re: Customer Reference: 625340









    Joel
    thank you for your email , however i fully disagree with your conclusions about this not being descrimination.

    The sales person said if we have a shop full of people we couldent let you use the changing rooms
    The sales person then said that how it is unfiortunetly lifes not fair
    When i then stated to the sales person that under the GDA actually it would be unlawful to stop me using the changing rooms becuase my natural gender is miss matched to my presenting gender ie , i present as a women but am not post opp yet see attached letter -> she said it was head office policy

    That is clearly discrimination against pre op Trans people by Evans, so please readdress this issue and as a minimum send out a directive form your head office to all branches making clear how Trans community is to be treated and make it in line with current regulation and the GDA, i would also like to see a copy of this please.

    If you can not do this i will be involving the larger trans community and press for change a powerfull advocate group.

    Please find my documentation attached and photos of how i dress , all purchased from you

    I look forward to your rapid response.

    Rebecca Martin

    On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:18 AM, CSManager wrote:

    Dear Ms Martin,

    I am writing to you regarding a post that you made on our Evans Facebook wall, following your visit to our Bracknell store.

    I was disappointed to learn of the service that you have encountered. Please accept my sincerest apologies for the disappointment and inconvenience caused.

    I can understand how this has affected your view of us as a business as we would always allow our customers who present themselves as women to access our fitting rooms.

    I can confirm that we do not tolerate any form of discrimination and treat all such allegations extremely seriously. Having investigated this matter, we are confident that the situation you outlined relates to a lack of service rather than anything else. However, this is still unacceptable and we have therefore asked our Area Manager to follow it up with all staff concerned and take the necessary action to ensure that it does not happen again.

    Please however reply to this email if I can be of any further assistance and I will help all I can. I hope that this has gone some way towards restoring your faith in Evans.

    Regards,

    Joel Evans
    Evans Customer Services
    • 1652 posts
    January 26, 2012 4:05 PM GMT
    "I can confirm that Evans as a company do not tolerate discrimination in any form, and any member of the transgender community is more than welcome to shop in our stores and use our fitting rooms."
    All stores in the UK have the same policy, and if they don't they are breaking the law.
    Should any individual member of staff not completely understand this and act as the one at Evans did, it is very easy to get this rectified, as Rebecca has shown.
    The law is now in our favour, but there will still be the occasional individual who needs educating. They are after all at risk of losing their job.
    It sounds to me like this person was not acting maliciously, just foolishly. She probably won't do it again!
    xx
    • 434 posts
    January 26, 2012 6:30 PM GMT
    I think Lucy has it right. The Stores themselves appear to be compliant with, and in support of, the Law.
    We must always be aware that employees can sometimes be in error and if we raise the "Hue and cry" every time they make an honest mistake....we run the risk of being labelled as a fringe-group just looking to cause trouble.
  • January 29, 2012 11:48 PM GMT
    Doanna i do not agree with yu i am afraid -> if you dont challange somehting it is accepted as fact ....
    I chalanged this in the shop they didnt want to listen i then went through the line 1 customer services channel got no ware at that point i started dealing with Evans and owning group coporate.

    I do the rest of the community a dis service if we do not at first point of Encounter deal with situations like this and make them high visability items -> as these situation , attitudes adn beahviour becoe durable and set in place if not dealt with quickly. So i cannot disagree with your cmments strngly enough
    Thanks
    Rebecca
    • 434 posts
    January 30, 2012 2:24 AM GMT
    Elizabeth,
    I did not mean that we should IGNORE the actions of that store clerk... I just meant that we shouldn't automatically "jump" to the conclusion that there is some nasty conspiracy behind the actions of that clerk...or the store.
    If we are included in society, we should act reasonably ...within society. How can we expect society to respect us when we don't respect that fact that people can make mistakes... or have the occasional error in judgement?
    Are we to go around with a "chip on our shoulder" for the rest of our lives?

    Doanna
    • Moderator
    • 2358 posts
    June 24, 2014 4:28 PM BST

    Doanna said:-  ''Cristine,   
    The very point I was making is that if you have it in the charter..then there is no need to further complicate things by adding these rights to other laws ...because they already apply. When you add detail, you also add complications and contradictions.

     

    Doanna said:- ''Cristine,
    I am not certain about the USA, but we have a thing called the "Human Rights Commission" that will persue the matter on their own...and cost nothing...and another thing called "Legal Aid". ...there is usually no cost to the applicant. Usually it never has to go that far because the Companies do not wish the "public backlash" and the bad publicity. Mostly, the matter is dealt with in an "out of court settlement"
    Employees that put their companies in that situation usually get fired and rarely file for wrongful dismissal because they would NOT win in court.
    Our Legal System in Canada differs a bit from the USA

     

    The Senate should have passed this, and it’s disappointing that the transgender community is going to have to wait months again now unnecessarily for them to do this, but I still expect them to pass the bill,” said the bill’s sponsor, New Democrat MP Randall Garrison.

    Bill C-279 would protect transgender Canadians against discrimination in the Canadian Human Rights Act and prohibit the promotion of hatred or the incitement of genocide on the basis of gender identity in the Criminal Code.

    This has been the fourth time the measure has come up as private member’s business. In 2011, similar legislation got as far as third reading in the House of Commons but died on the order paper when the election was called.

     

    So when this thread was running in real time,   Doanna was not exactly correct, about automatic transgender human rights in Canada.

     

    http://blogs.montrealgazette.com/2014/03/01/transgender-rights-a-refresher-on-canadas-bill-c-279/

     

     

  • June 24, 2014 11:56 PM BST

    It has been a very long time since I made a post in this , I am the former member (Julia) .

    The laws here in the UK are very clear , the problem stems from the shop assistants not knowing the laws , but they should know what respect is.

    Since this thread I have been talking to many major retailers and also their public relations departments. I have personally handed information explaining the laws in simple terms to the store management to be explained to their staff. By doing that I have also been invited to staff training sessions and , explained to their faces the effects bad attitudes can have on a trans person .

    The laws sound complicated but in reallity they are very simple when put in simple terms , and more so to their faces who are basically ignorant to the harm they can cause. I have not done those things for myself , I get by ok .

    Only last week I was asked out of the blue by a store manager , Julia do you think it would help if i opened the store for a few hours just for Transgenders? . I had to respond , it is a nice gesture but it will not work and it is defeating the object , just treat everyone the same , you know me , you have taken the time to get to know me , you treat me with respect because I made you listen to me. If I miss not walking into that shop for just one week I get , have we done something wrong? I had to make it clear , I do have a life and if you had offended me believe me you would know about it , I would not avoid you I would tell you.


    Julia x

  • June 26, 2014 9:15 AM BST

    I would like to add something to this. The laws are there to protect us , they are under used. It is no good walking away and not saying anything if you are badly treated , it is as good saying just do it to the next one. We all have the power to put and end to mis-treatment of transgender people in retail or any public service industry.

     

    I know most of you will not agree but , I was told yesterday every town or city needs a Julia , they did not mean a female named Julia , they meant someone like me . Yes I will stand up for myself and others but , for myself I do it in a productive way.

    Here is a very good tip you may wish to use . If you are treated unfairly by anyone who is there to "Serve you" with a good service and with respect and you are not getting that service and respect then try this.

    A very small and cheap device or even your mobile phone can protect you.

    I carry a digital voice recorder with me everywhere I go. It is not in constant use but , last year a very ignorant Pharmacist had a problem with my gender identity , he was clearly transphobic as his actions were deliberate . He could see I was very clearly presenting myself as a female , this man had been to university so he was not thick in the head. He made a very big mistake in his actions , more so doing it to me.

     

    My prescriptions have my details on them just as anyone elses , they state my name and title , my title is "Miss" he called me sir on more than one occassion , he was dispensing female hormones to me and my blockers! There were 2 ways I could have handled that situation. I could have called him Miss (that does hurt a man , it dents his pride , more so if other people are around) . The second way is to complain to his management , now he would have just denied saying it. My voice recorder is one touch record , it gathers evidence. So I took my prescription in and pressed record , he called me sir 6 times , they were the last times.

     

    I asked to see the manager , a lady came to see me and I just outright asked her , would you stand there in front of me and call me sir to my face? No way would i ever do that was her response . We had a conversation about ignorance and she said that she would had not known I was born a male until I told her. I told her that your pharmacist does know though because he can see my medication , I played here the recording. She asked if I could burn it on to a CD? Yes that was no problem so I did and returned later that day and handed it to her. She took my telephone number and name and address.

    The next day I had a call from her . She told me he had been dismissed from his job and thanked me for bringing it to her attention. I did tell her there was no need to sack him but she said I am not having him treating you in that way because that means he will do it to others or has done.

    About a week later I received a letter with an apology , it also contained a £100 gift card , the voice recorder was £29.00.

    That same recorder had a man arrested and held in a police cell for 11 hours when he discovered I was Transexual and thought it may be fun to insult my gender , one police officer listened to the recording then 4 turned up to put him in the back of a police van shouting i never said anything what have i done?.

    The pressing of one little button can do wonders , mobile phones can record too. The device I purchased is small and can be virtually hidden in the palm of my hand , it picks up every word  , they cannot escape what they said.

    I very rarely use it but knowing it is there can also help if I ever hear another person being disrespected.

     

    There are many things we can do to change things , to me it makes life better for others and the next generation. Always please give credit where it is due , if you are treated very well then let them know you were . People who work in the public service do like to be recognised for good things not just bad , they are in low paid work and you could just make their day by giving some praise , yes it is their job but , mostly it is not a very nice job , go on just make their day and give them a reason to treat you well and make you feel special , it really can change many others lives .

     

    Take care .