Period Dignity Officer post scrapped!

VioletSky

You could try asking me Lathyrus

Which part are you struggling with?

The whole thing really.

It just seemed a string of disjointed sentences.

Maybe they referred back to previous posts but if so it wasn’t clear.

It’s why I use the quote function a lot. It can be irritating but at least people know what the posters comment refers to.

But Glorianny I was agreeing with you. Why would I need to explain anything?

I wasn't addressing anything you said Lathyrus so maybe you don't need to worry about it

hope this helps

eazybee

More importantly, concerns were raised about the process of the appointment of this particular man for the role. He was appointed by the person who had appointed him to his two previous positions following a brief time of advertisement and application for the post, plus his lack of appropriate qualifications and experience, both medical and managerial.

I would value Martina Navratilova's opinion highly as she has far more experience of dealing with period problems during a very physical and stressful career, and presumably also the menopause.

I think the bigger problem is the way he was appointed, as described in the first paragraph of easybee quote above. He was given the appointment by the person who had given him his previous jobs. The post was advertised for a very short time and not very widely.
It doesn't look good when there are suggestions of nepotism in these sorts of appointments. Whoever did appoint him though, should have stuck with him if he thought he really was the best person for the job, not jettisoned him at the first sign of trouble.

Mollygo

But Glorianny I was agreeing with you. Why would I need to explain anything?

Great to know that you agree that a job cannot be assigned based only on sex MollyGo and that doing so can only be a harmful step for women.

There are obviously many jobs which can be allocated to a particular sex. I think the term is objective justification.

So the business needs to prove that a protected chatacteristic is required. I am not saying it applies to this job but it is certainly something that can happen.

not jettisoned him at the first sign of trouble.

He resigned. Man of principle.

Oh, should have mentioned...the appointment panel was all female. Shocker, innit.

That was mentioned in the previous thread in this topic.

Whoever did appoint him though, should have stuck with him if he thought he really was the best person for the job, not jettisoned him at the first sign of trouble.

Ilovecheese, today, 20:11.

Taken out of context:

I think the bigger problem is the way he was appointed, as described in the first paragraph of easybee quote above. He was given the appointment by the person who had given him his previous jobs. The post was advertised for a very short time and not very widely
It doesn't look good when there are suggestions of nepotism in these sorts of appointments. Whoever did appoint him though, should have stuck with him if he thought he really was the best person for the job, not jettisoned him at the first sign of trouble

Ilovecheese, today, 20:11.

Strange that he was jettisoned at the first sign of trouble then if he was the best person for the job.
However, has the role been jettisoned too?
Perhaps more investigations would have found queries with the selection process.

Mr Grant is now taking legal action.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-62826983

Galaxy

There are obviously many jobs which can be allocated to a particular sex. I think the term is objective justification.

There needs to be a legitimate reason for such appointments and this obviously had no such restrictions. Apparently some people think the law shouldn't apply and media pressure and personal outrage are the way these things should be regulated. Everyone should be worried by how this was done.

Posted with no comment.

ilovecheese implicitly assumed that the person who appointed Jason was a man. The pronoun "he" was used.

I pointed out that it was an all female panel who appointed him.

Not out of context at all.

Interesting that in a discussion about whether a man is right for a job, someone assumes that a man did the job of four women.

SueDonim

Mr Grant is now taking legal action.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-62826983

So he didn't resign then. ?

It's all going swimmingly, isn't it?

SueDonim

Mr Grant is now taking legal action.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-62826983

to call discrimination we must accept that by being gender inclusive on a female issue it would exclude certain female groups that would be excluded, including those who were absolutely more vulnerable than Mr Grant - females with disabilities, females from certain religious groups, abused females, etc

why does nobody get it

Absolutely Glorianny. It would never do to appoint the most appropriate, knowledgeable and well qualified person for a role just because she is female. Far better to appoint someone who has no experience of some if the issues but has a friend on the appointment panel.

Yes I know Glorianny that's why I said in my second post that it wouldnt apply to this job. But people had broadened it out to wider issues.

Mollygo

Absolutely Glorianny. It would never do to appoint the most appropriate, knowledgeable and well qualified person for a role just because she is female. Far better to appoint someone who has no experience of some if the issues but has a friend on the appointment panel.

Casting aspersions on the honesty of women you've never met.

Nice.

What aspersions? I’m just agreeing with Glorianny.
Now you’re casting aspersions on me and don’t think we’ve met. Nice.

I am still failing to understand how he was qualified for this post, gender notwithstanding.

Academic now as the post no longer exists, but it was puzzling.

If we evolve our ways of thinking and being in the world to such a degree that biological sex has no meaning then none of these issues would matter a jot. If we transcend beyond biological sex in our emotions our feelings our psyche, then how would our lives be, just visualise, imagine, I think we are being primed to accept loosing our humanity to what constitutes humanness itself, to be so dulled in our senses we become robotic. Thank goodness for passion and powerful emotions debate and disagreements, thank goodness we all think and act differently we’re alive not machines. I Love that I bleed that I’m a woman.

The original post says it all: Personally, I think that common-sense should have been applied in the first place, and a woman appointed to the position.

Common sense has now prevailed, but this misjudged appointment has caused damage to the aim of preventing period poverty.

If the reports are accurate they will face a case for sex discrimination. Did they not have legal advice.