LEGAL VIEW IS SICK BUILDING SYNDROME
HOW TO SUPPORT GENDER
IDENTITY IN YOUR
WORKPLACE
By Kate Palmer, Associate
Director of Advisory at Peninsula
The term gender identity describes an
individual’s personal sense of their gender,
which includes male, female or non-binary.
Non-binary is an umbrella term used to describe
any form of gender identity that isn’t specifi cally
fi xed as male or female. For example, gender fl uid
in which a person may fl uctuate between genders
or express multiple genders at the same time.
While the Equality Act 2010 off ers protection to
those who undergo gender reassignment, there
is no similar protection aff orded to non-binary
employees. Many commentators argue that this
failure exposes those with non-binary identities
to potential harm in the workplace. However, it
is still vital that employers protect non-binary
individuals from unfavourable treatment despite
the lack of legal provisions.
A common topic when discussing nonbinary
gender identities is the use of gendered
pronouns, such as ‘he or ‘she’, as many nonbinary
individuals may favour the use of genderneutral
terms such as ‘they’. With this in mind,
employers should consider how traditional job
application forms, that require individuals to
identify as ‘Mr’ or ‘Mrs’ could disadvantage
potential applicants without a fi xed gender
identity. Instead, employers should ensure there is
an opportunity to select a gender-neutral term, or
perhaps remove any requirement for individuals
to indicate their gender at all.
Naturally, employers should look to ensure
the workplace is a safe and positive working
environment for all employees, regardless of
their gender identity. Staff should be informed of
their duty to behave professionally at all times,
and designated training sessions should help
avoid incidents of workplace bullying. If nonbinary
individuals are subjected to unfavourable
treatment due to their gender identity, they
should be able to rely on transparent grievance
reporting.
Additionally, employers should consider issues
that could arise from non-binary employees’
access to gendered toilets and changing facilities.
Although employers may feel uncomfortable
discussing this topic, it is essential to liaise with
non-binary staff to understand which facilities
they would feel most comfortable using. After all,
the employee should be free to access whichever
facility they felt best suits their gender identity.
Several employers, such as Wagamama’s, have
decided to introduce gender-neutral facilities to
provide greater support to those with alternative
gender identities.
A similar notion should also be applied when
it comes to uniforms and dress codes, especially
where there are diff erent requirements for
those who identify as male and female. In
these cases, employers should consider how
this could disadvantage non-binary staff and
give individuals the fl exibility to choose the
requirement they feel applies to their gender
identity. Employers can alter their dress code
policy so that all staff are required to wear the
same items, further reducing the likelihood of any
potential unrest.
6 OCTOBER 2019
MAKING AN UNWELCOME COMEBACK?
Sick building
syndrome (SBS) is
largely believed to be
a phenomenon of the
nineties but shock new
findings in a survey carried
out by intelligent business
technology experts the
Remark Group show that
it may well be making an
unwelcome return.
Remark Group’s ‘Air
Quality and Wellbeing at
Work’ 2019 survey of over
1,000 UK o ice workers, has
revealed that 86 per cent get headaches at work, with 23 per cent saying they get them every
day. Worryingly, 91 per cent of o ice workers report that they su er from tiredness or lethargy
at work, with 41 per cent saying they su er daily.
Other symptoms are also rife, such as dry, itchy or watery eyes (78 per cent), dry throat (76 per
cent) and itchy or irritated skin (70 per cent) and only 11 per cent of people describe their sleep
quality as good during the working week, with a quarter reporting sleep quality was poor.
Shockingly, 80 per cent think that poor indoor air quality could be having a negative impact
on their health with the same amount reporting it could be having a similar e ect on their
productivity at work. Furthermore, 57 per cent think air quality is a ecting their mental/physical
health.
Environmental psychologist and workplace wellbeing expert Dr Nigel Oseland commented:
“O ice wellbeing is of paramount importance and it is clear that a person’s work environment
can impact significantly, not only on their health and wellbeing, but also on their performance.
“It is therefore crucial that today’s businesses focus on creating healthy buildings which
encourage wellness and productivity. They can do so, by monitoring air quality in the o ice
and embracing new technologies to ensure that the work environment promotes workplace
wellbeing.”
On its website, the NHS refers to SBS as the name for symptoms you only get while in a
particular building, usually an o ice. Symptoms of SBS get worse the longer you’re in a
particular building and get better a er you leave. It states that people can ease symptoms
themselves, by opening windows to improve ventilation, reducing workplace stress, taking
regular screen breaks and going outside for fresh air during lunchtime and breaks.
WORKPLACES FALL SHORT OF EMPLOYEE EXPECTATIONS
New research from Leesman has found that one in five new o ices fails to meet employee needs.
The data shows that new workplaces generally succeed in bringing people together and supporting
interaction but continue to fall considerably short of employee expectation when it comes to
supporting individual and concentrative tasks. Inextricably linked to this in some locations, the data
showed ‘noise levels’ remain a widespread and highly problematic issue, with an appalling average
satisfaction score of just 33.4 percentage points across all new workplaces. One in four respondents
scored below 25 percentage points satisfaction.
The company’s latest study, the details of which can be found in ‘The Workplace Experience
Evolution Part 2: Do new workplaces work’, sought to investigate whether a widely cited statistic
from McKinsey & Company that 70 per cent of all change management project fail applies to
workplace projects.
The data revealed that while an encouraging number of workplace change projects are successful,
significant numbers still finish with nothing more than mediocre results. Furthermore, one in five
new workplace projects deliver poor results.
Two thirds (66.5 per cent) of the respondents agree that their workplace enables them to work
productively. Viewed in reverse, however, this means that a third of new workplaces do not
support employees’ productivity. The report rea irms that successful workplace change projects
resides with how well a workplace and the way that it is used is aligned with the activity profile it
accommodates.
‘The Workplace Experience Evolution Part 2: Do new workplaces work’, is available online:
https://www.leesmanindex.com/research/
NEWS & ANALYSIS FMJ.CO.UK
/
/
