In reply to Robey:

I'm glad you shared this as I thought perhaps it was just me and I was way behind where I thought I was in my understanding of EDI! (/DEIB/EDIB/IBED...) I think a risk of EDI policies is to become too specific - meaning you get a lot of "what about"ism. If you include specifics, you'd better be certain you've included all the specifics... For me, an EDI policy should be based on your general actions to be inclusive and a zero tolerance towards discrimination. The individual actions you take on individual issues are more of a strategy/action plan rather than a policy itself.

In response to the original question, I would refer to "employees" or "colleagues" or even "people" if you policy is also relevant to customers/clients/stakeholders. I would just ensure that all other policies use the same terminology to avoid the feeling that you are erasing the word "women" - if all policies refer to "employees", it shouldn't be noticeable that the menopause one does and makes it a deliberate effort to be inclusive across the board, rather than remove reference to women.

In reply to Robey:

Whatever you do you'll either get it wrong or upset someone.

In reply to Sophie:

Different approach: don't define who the policy applies to? I'm pretty sure that most people can work out if they think it applies to them, without it being specified.

I think a fundamental of the menopause is that there isn't one approach that helps everyone - but the understanding and adaptability that should underpin a good approach to supporting people who might have different needs during this time could help everyone. I don't have a Menopause Policy that is separate from any other, because it is only one health issue that affects staff at work. Instead we have a Supporting Our Employees policy, that tries to set out some fundamental principles for how we can adapt work around the individual needs of our staff.

Don't get me wrong - I'm delighted that this is now something we're debating rather than pretending that menopause doesn't exist, but I'm generally not keen on a suite of policies to cover every eventuality, but instead to deal with people as individuals and make sure they get what they actually need.

Hi Ryan, some further info to support you on this one. The CIPD guidance says, "Consider when to use additive language and when to use gender-inclusive language. An example of additive might be including a reference to 'women and people experiencing the menopause' rather than saying only women or only people in a wellbeing policy." www.cipd.org/.../

In reply to Steve Bridger:

yep DEIB is the new one coming

In reply to Steve Bridger:

Belonging, I imagine, comes over from the employee engagement survey world into the EDI/ DEI space. Often the question in the survey around belonging was used as a soft way to infer inclusion although it's probably not enough to test whether the culture of your organisation is inclusive and actively anti-racist.

In reply to Robey:

I disagree as I think virtually all companies have not thought to effectively link menopause and women to their inclusive part of their DEIB strategy. I think the focus too much on other well known DEI categories whereas menopausal women in the workplace is a huge demographic to not even consider in an DEIB strategy which is what I am raising and therefore I feel there is huge risk unless these individuals are recognised and supported further - I know coming from a man is strange but I have seen the effects around me and seen really talented and experienced people leave companies as a direct result and I feel w need to do more ! a lot more. 

We know that if labour get in menopause will be formally considered as a recognised disability and the 9th protected characteristic as they have already said so, we need to get ahead of this before the claim floodgates open as every menopause related tribunal case since 2018 has WON - no other people area has a 100% ratio and solicitors will be all over this like a rash shortly. Biggest case award so far in London £125K Nov 2022 !Recent Case Law – Menopause Awareness (menopause-awareness.com) 

In reply to Sharon:

In the context of a DEIB (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging) policy, the "belonging" aspect refers to creating an environment where every individual feels accepted, valued, and included, regardless of their background, identity, or experiences.

The "belonging" component of the policy emphasises fostering a sense of community and connection within an organisation, where employees feel empowered to bring their authentic selves to work without fear of discrimination or exclusion. It recognises that diversity and inclusion efforts alone may not be sufficient if individuals do not feel a genuine sense of belonging within the workplace.

In practical terms, promoting belonging may involve initiatives such as:
-Creating a culture of respect and empathy where diverse perspectives are encouraged and celebrated.
-Providing opportunities for all employees to contribute to decision-making processes and organisational goals.
-Offering support networks and affinity groups where employees with shared identities or experiences can connect and support one another.
-Implementing inclusive practices in recruitment, promotion, and career development to ensure equal opportunities for advancement.
-Providing education and training on unconscious bias and cultural competence to foster understanding and empathy among employees.
-Regularly soliciting feedback from employees to assess the inclusiveness of the workplace culture and identify areas for improvement.
-By prioritising belonging as part of the DEIB policy, organisations can create a more inclusive and supportive environment where all employees feel valued, respected, and empowered to thrive.

In reply to Lee Richard Williams:

Not entirely frivolous but I recall reading in one of the serious papers some weeks ago that a teenager wanted to identify as a cat at college. Perhaps the wording needs to all inclusive and include people who wish to be identified as cats - or indeed any other animal or creature.

Slightly less frivolous, if we want to be more inclusive shouldn't we include those who identify as Pagans, Witches, Warlocks or Extra terrestrials or something similar from Star Trek. Yes - there is such a group and declared so on the last census.

In reply to David Perry:

Whatever you do you'll either get it wrong or upset someone.

Hi! Welcome to HR! :D

In reply to Lee Richard Williams:

I think virtually all companies have not thought to effectively link menopause and women to their inclusive part of their DEIB strategy

Well, I'm pretty sure most of those companies have, in fact, included women. But what you said was that their strategy would be ineffective without including the menopause. And that's simply not true. But this is semantics.

if labour get in menopause will be formally considered as a recognised disability and the 9th protected characteristic as they have already said so

This, meanwhile, is certainly *not* true. Labour has proposed a number of changes to current legislation in this area, including extending equal pay reporting to race and disability. They have made some proposals regarding providing more support to smaller businesses to help them address the issues of menopause. But they have in no way suggested that being perimenopausal should be a uniquely protected characteristic along side race, age, sex etc.

every menopause related tribunal case since 2018 has WON

I don't know if that's true, but I'm prepared to take it on faith because if it's true, it will demonstrate that the change to primary legislation you suggest would be completely unnecessary as perimenopausal women are already more than adequately protected by the existing legislation regarding protections for sex, age and disability.

there is huge risk unless these individuals are recognised and supported further

I might quibble over the word "huge", but I'm broadly with you, philosophically. But this thread isn't about whether or not those dealing with the perimenopause need to be better supported in order to retain important talent and skills and to sustain the positive features of workplace diversity. It's about, primarily, how to address these people in a way that is sensitive to their gender identity *and* whether the right way to do this is through a dedicated policy or through other means.

I notice that you carefully talk about strategy rather than policy and I'd be interested in knowing more about how you are distinguishing these two things.

In reply to Steve Bridger:

Is "belonging" a new buzzword?

Yes. As with so many things in this area, it has emerged from the academic study of society and integration, including workplace integration.

It arises from the idea that the concepts of Equality, Diversity and Inclusion all still imply an "othering" of those who do not conform with the perceived cultural "norms" of white, male, straight and cisgender (one might also add "English-speaking" and "between the ages of 27 and 65" to that list) and from the increasing awareness of the phenomenon of microaggressions that arise from the aforementioned othering.

The principle is that strategies for Belonging should break down perceptions of cultural norms such that, if someone truly "belongs" then the other functions of EDI cease to be necessary.

It is a useful tool in academic study, where it helps as a measure of social integration in large populations. Whether it actually has any meaningful answers to the social challenges of the workplace, or whether it's just another dialectical stick with which to flagellate ourselves remains to be seen. I am yet to see the "B" in EDIB gaining traction in mainstream business dialogue, but it can surely only be a matter of time.

In reply to Lee Richard Williams:

Hi Lee, I appreciate the fulsome reply although my post was a build rather than a question on what it was. I know you wouldn't know that and it looks like you are a specialist in this area and wanting to help outline the importance of belonging and how it shows up, which I know will be helpful.