This Isn’t Working

• Inside The Stonewall Conference: What Didn't Work?

  Was this a business event - or a spiritual gathering? What did Stonewall say about the Supreme Court ruling? And what valuable content did employers gain from their £400 tickets? Our host Tanya de Grunwald shares exclusive insights from her day at Stonewall's 2025 Workplace Conference - and invites Levi Pay, director of Plinth House (and former Stonewall intern!) to provide further analysis about this highly unusual event.  They cover: * What was it like arriving at the event with Maya Forstater, co-founder of Sex Matters? Who else had paid to attend - and who were the noisy protesters outside the venue? * Why were there no photos, no questions - and no analysis of the Supreme Court ruling? * Who were the speakers - and what did they cover? Why was Tanya puzzled by some of the presentations, and alarmed by those from the National Trust and Trans in the City? * Are 'LGBT' partners with an activist agenda starting to turn on employers who they feel have let them down by respecting the Supreme Court ruling (defining 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010) - especially around the provision of single-sex spaces at work? Should big brands be worried about Pride? * Did Stonewall's slogan 'No debate' end up creating a cohort of fragile (and sometimes volatile) young people who will struggle to integrate with their colleagues? * Would Levi and Tanya's plans to redesign this event have improved its chances of engaging with the law, reality, disagreement, and the employers who are crying out for advice they can trust in this area? Enjoy the episode!   Thanks to Blackbird Documentaries for permission to use the protest footage https://youtu.be/lLEoBKf1SLs?si=9DFWlKUsj6bXzukI

  --------  

  1:11:15
• What Is A Woman (At Work)? HR Director Faces Maya Forstater (Ft. Neil Morrison)

  It’s official: self-ID was never lawful, and too many UK employers have dangerous policies in place. Why did we need the Supreme Court to tell us this – and what should employers do now? Since the landmark ruling on 16 April, emotions have been running high, and HR teams face the daunting task of assessing and correcting their policies, while managing employee reactions from across their workforce, and hot takes from activist pressure groups and keen to overturn or circumvent the ruling.  The CIPD has dropped the ball, so we’re picking it up, presenting HR professionals with this calm, dispassionate analysis to help you find clarity and a way forward. If you identify as sensible, this is the conversation for you. This week’s episode features two guests: Maya Forstater (women’s rights campaigner and founder of Sex Matters) and Neil Morrison (HR director at Severn Trent). We ask: * What does the Supreme Court ruling mean for employers?  * If the judgement was clear, who has been creating confusion – and why? * How have big employers reacted to the news? What mistakes does Neil think they have made? * Which employers will find it hardest to unpick the problems they’ve woven into their organisation’s policies and culture? * What are the legal risks for employers who don’t sort this out immediately? * What role have Stonewall, the CIPD, confused lawyers, and poor-quality #DEI training played in leading employers down the wrong path?  * Have employers who have got this wrong underestimated the scale of the mess they have made? Do they understand how angry some of their employees are - and is it time to apologise? Looking back, this sort of conversation should have happened a long time ago. Whatever your personal view on this topic, it’s become clear that ‘No debate’ belongs in the bin. It's time to start talking... Enjoy the episode!

  --------  

  1:06:25
• Can Men Be Lesbians At Work? (Ft. Kellie-Jay Keen)

  As employers grapple with the Supreme Court ruling, we ask: how did ‘trans inclusion’ go so wrong at work? Have HR teams been silencing women with reasonable objections to policies which prioritise gender identity over biological sex? How much of this mess is the fault of the Chartered Institute of Personnel Development (CIPD) - and can men be lesbians at work? In this explosive, powerful and moving new episode of This Isn’t Working, women’s rights campaigner Kellie-Jay Keen delivers some truth bombs for UK employers to consider. As they examine the implications of the judge's clarification that ‘sex’ and ‘woman’ in the Equality Act 2010 refers to biological sex (not gender identity, or the sex stated on a person’s Gender Recognition Certificate), we ask: Why do so many women at Kellie-Jay’s Let Women Speak events say they have been shamed and silenced by their employers after questioning ‘trans inclusion’ policies which they say distort sex-based language, and disadvantage women?  Is it ‘transphobic’ for female employees to voice concerns about the unintended consequences of workplace policies created without their input or consent? Do employers understand that for some trans women (biological males) there is a sexual motivation for dressing as they do, and for requesting accommodations from their colleagues?    Who are ‘trans widows’ – and is it time for employers to recognise that the impact of later-life transition is not always positive for the ex-partner and children of that person? Should more thought be given to the notion that everyone’s identity should be ‘celebrated’ at work? Is it appropriate to expect employees to welcome gender diversity trainers who are still campaigning for puberty blockers for gender-distressed children, and who champion medical transition as the best solution for gender-confused adults? Have Barclays, Google, EY, BP, JP Morgan, Amazon, Clifford Chance, Whitbread, Metro Bank, Sky, Bloomberg, Sage and Gallagher done enough due diligence on the ‘trans awareness’ partners they have been working with? In the cold light of day, will they have regrets about the messages they have been promoting to staff over the last few years? Has the CIPD failed in its duty to provide HR professionals with accurate and balanced information to help to create workable, legally sound policy? Has some of its advice actually *created* legal risk for employers? If employers have made big mistakes in this area, how can they be fixed? Enjoy the episode...   NB. This conversation was recorded just before the Supreme Court ruling - but it was never intended to be about the law! More great guests coming soon, to dig into the detail of what the Supreme Court ruling means for employers and employees...   Kellie-Jay Keen: YouTube  @KellieJayKeen  X https://x.com/ThePosieParker Let Women Speak: X https://x.com/StandingforXX Website https://www.letwomenspeak.org/

  --------  

  1:13:03
• Are Activist CEOs Out Of Control? (Ft. Paul Sweeney)

  Why are so many big brands insulting and confusing their customers and employees with divisive political statements – and will anyone grab the wheel before the decision-makers drive the company off a cliff? If senior leaders have a clear political agenda (eg. Israel/Gaza, or environmentalism) or personal interest (eg. racial justice, or a trans-identifying child) should they be removed from discussions where their strong emotions create a conflict of interest? Bud Light’s decision to work with the trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney (creating a 25% sales dive) wasn’t an isolated incident. Aviva, Ben & Jerry’s, Wickes, Starbucks, Coca Cola, Wickes, John Lewis, NatWest, Unilever, Proctor and Gamble and Virgin Active have all been burned after wandered into red-hot debates. Is this recklessness coming from the top – or have the senior leaders lost control of activist groups at more junior levels? Are boards broken – or just looking the other way? And why aren’t risk teams flagging the obvious legal, reputational and financial dangers here?  This episode is packed with insights about the shadowy world of senior leadership – and analysis of what is going badly wrong in so many companies. According to Paul Sweeney, seasoned corporate strategic advisor, and author of Magnetic Nonsense, we are watching the shattering of the ‘illusion of corporate governance’ – and it’s quite a spectacle! We discuss: * WHAT RISK ARE COMPANIES RUNNING BY FOLLOWING ACTIVIST AGENDAS? Who is pushing these, why is it so hard to stop them – and should CEOs who damage the organisation’s reputation and/or finances be fired? (Paul says yes…) * WHY DID BOARDS PANIC IN 2020? Were they too quick to make political statements and approve DEI targets, after the death of George Floyd? Paul remembers that period vividly… * WHAT ROLE DID MANAGEMENT CONSULTANCIES PLAY IN STEERING COMPANIES IN THE WRONG DIRECTION ON DEI? Paul admits no-one read the small print of the McKinsey reports which claimed demographic diversity leads to better business outcomes  * HAVE BIG FIRMS BEEN DOING POSITIVE DISCRIMINATION ‘BY STEALTH’ AT SENIOR LEVELS, even though it is unlawful in the UK? Have specialist diversity headhunters like Green Park and Involve solved any problems – or just made a fortune creating new ones for us all, including the suspicion that some senior leaders are ‘DEI hires’ when in fact they were appointed on merit? * HOW WILL COMPANIES BACKTRACK FROM HERE? And has Donald Trump changed everything?  Enjoy the episode!

  --------  

  1:07:11
• Does DEI Have A Misogyny Problem? (Ft. Gareth Roberts)

  Have you noticed that many of the loudest voices in DEI are men’s – and some get really angry when they’re challenged by women? Same here! So let’s get into it. Which men are drawn to DEI, how much damage are they doing – and is it just a weird coincidence that many of them are gay?  The writer Gareth Roberts – himself a (lovely!) gay man; and the author of Gay Shame – agrees that something dark is happening, and women need to wise up.  In this episode Gareth and Tanya explore the outsized influence of the high-profile men in DEI, and scrutinise the tactics they use to push their own supposedly ‘inclusive’ agenda – whether the rest of us like it or not. We also highlight examples of some of their most shocking behaviour.  And, yes, we name names.  They’ve posted their thoughts publicly, so why not? Game on. Tanya and Gareth discuss: WHICH MEN ARE ATTRACTED TO DEI – AND WHY? Gareth says the allure of soft power, glitzy events and the chance to talk about themselves(!) can be an intoxicating mix… WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WOMEN CHALLENGE THEM? Gareth reacts to some of their most aggressive responses to reasonable questions from women on Linkedin. Why does one of DEI’s biggest blokes feel so confident calling gender critical women ‘TERFs’ on public platforms? And is it time he apologised for accusing mild-mannered employment lawyer Audrey Ludwig of ‘sealioning’ for daring to disagree with him? WHAT RISKS ARE THESE MEN CREATING FOR THE ORGANISATIONS THEY WORK FOR? Would an employment tribunal share the view that everyone is welcome in the ‘inclusive’ culture they claim to have created? Can you declare yourself an Elon Musk fan in a workplace policed by their team? And why haven’t they recalibrated since Donald Trump’s victory, and the Cass Review? WHICH GROUPS ARE AN AFTERTHOUGHT IN THEIR ‘INCLUSIVE’ CULTURE? Do the in-house DEI guys allocate enough resource to disability, social mobility, pregnancy and motherhood? Or are they using their power to prioritise their own pet causes, and bring in iffy trainers they are too cosy with? WHO ARE THE ‘MALE ALLIES’ – AND WHAT MOTIVATES THEM? Does painting their nails really challenge gender stereotypes – and why are some of them so keen to talk about menstruation? And – while they claim to be helping women – are they actually dividing us?  Buckle up, boys... Enjoy the episode! Gay Shame by Gareth Roberts is available on Amazon

  --------  

  1:10:29

More Business podcasts

Trending Business podcasts

About This Isn’t Working