Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 5

1005 replies

ickky · 12/05/2022 15:53

The Tribunal started on 25th April at 10am. If you would like to view online you need to send a request for access as early as possible.

Send an email to

[email protected]

The subject heading of the email request should read

“MEDIA OR PUBLIC ACCESS REQUEST – Case number 2202172/2020 - Ms A Bailey – 25th April 2022.

Then ask for the pin for the online access.

You will be contacted with instructions on how to observe the hearing.

When joining the live tribunal please choose a non inflammatory/offensive name, everyone can see it in the chat - This is a court room, please behave accordingly.

The court chat function is there for official court purposes, not for observers, please don't use it unless you have a technical issue.

On the first page underneath where you put your screen name, select the video and mic that are not crossed out (top option), this is the courts vid and mic.
On the next page select NONE on the drop down windows for vid and mic, these are your own video and mic.

You must be muted so as to not disturb the hearing.

There is also live tweeting from

twitter.com/tribunaltweets

Abbreviations:
AB: Allison Bailey, claimant
BC: Ben Cooper QC, barrister for AB
SW = Stonewall Equality Limited (respondent 1)
IO = Ijeoma Omambala QC, senior counsel - barrister for SW
RW = Robin White junior counsel to SW - assisting IO
GC = Garden Court Chambers Limited (respondent 2) (GCC would be a better abbreviation)
AH = Andrew Hochhauser QC, senior counsel - barrister for GC
JR = Jane Russell junior counsel to GC - assisting AH
RM= Rajiv Menon QC & SH = Stephanie Harrison QC (jointly respondent 3 along with all members of GC except AB)
EJ = Employment Judge Goodman hearing the case
Panel = any one of the three panel members (EJ and two lay members)

Thread 1 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4529887-Allison-Bailey-v-Stonewall-Employment-Tribunal-hearing?

Thread 2 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4542466-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-2

Thread 3 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4545725-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-3

Thread 4 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4546945-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-4

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
JulesRimetStillGleaming · 13/05/2022 16:47

I'm not black but am aware that lots of black people complain that they are perceived as aggressive because of the way they naturally express themselves. He's also being sued. I think I might be angry under those circumstances.

Personally I prefer people expressing their emotions. I'm not a fan of middle class, stiff upper lip suppression.

Chrysanthemum5 · 13/05/2022 16:46

JR looks very hot and bothered - I wish someone would open a window for her

Mollyollydolly · 13/05/2022 16:45

I dont find his arguments that the Chambers was full of activists of all different persuasions and therefore he wouldn't get involved. Surely, if true, that proves Allison was treated differently?

oviraptor21 · 13/05/2022 16:43

Yes. I'm interested in how edgy he seems, given his profession.

AlisonDonut · 13/05/2022 16:43

How many company diversity champions programmes have the management agreed to pay good money for? Is he saying he has no idea what they did but still the management agreed to sign up for it?

SelfPortraitWithFoxInSmokingJacket · 13/05/2022 16:41

Leslie is trying very very hard to personally distance himself from the mess

And coming across as defensive, petulant, and aggressive in the process. I find it surprising given his legal background - it's as though his outraged self-importance has eclipsed any professional instinct to manage how he presents himself.

Original poster
ickky · 13/05/2022 16:41

The difference is with regard to his last statement is that GCC never took a public position before about any groups in chambers.

OP posts:
oviraptor21 · 13/05/2022 16:40

Ooh - very defensive tone there.

I

JulesRimetStillGleaming · 13/05/2022 16:40

That was an Eastenders moment. Needed the drum beats after the "Allison knows it's nonsense".

nauticant · 13/05/2022 16:39

Tipped off by Chrysanthemum5 I see my "Maya" should have been "Mia" (Haki-Law).

tabbycatstripy · 13/05/2022 16:36

What if organisations ARE behaving like fascists, though, Mr Thomas? What if they are creating an environment in which a form of fascism is able to thrive? Truth is a complete defence.

nauticant · 13/05/2022 16:36

BC's cross-examination is done. IO going to do brief re-examination.

Eelicks · 13/05/2022 16:35

Leslie is trying very very hard to personally distance himself from the mess

Chrysanthemum5 · 13/05/2022 16:35

I do hope Mia will be giving evidence

98765abc · 13/05/2022 16:35

GCRich · 13/05/2022 16:27

Xenia

I agree that companies should stick to uncontroversial issues. Such as that you cannot discriminate against black people and gay people and women.

Getting into the debate of if and when trans rights should trump sex based rights is undoubtedly controversial and should be avoided.

Trouble is with my point of view that whilst I would generally agree with you Tory vs Labour point, and putting aside sex vs gender for one second, the Tories are objectively corrupt, undemocratic, and cruel and those things are objectively bad.

'the Tories are objectively corrupt, undemocratic, and cruel and those things are objectively bad.'
2GCRich The fact that you can state this with such self-assurance proves Xenia's point that it would be better for business to return to political neutrality.

nauticant · 13/05/2022 16:35

LT is saying that he was misled by Maya who did not accuately describe AB's tweets.

Chrysanthemum5 · 13/05/2022 16:35

LT coming across as quite whiny and also as someone who is happy to make decisions without bothering to get the background

JulesRimetStillGleaming · 13/05/2022 16:33

Mollyollydolly · 13/05/2022 16:27

I think Ben has had some bundle troubles of his own this afternoon which he's covered up well. Just an impression.

It's all the same bundle.

GCRich · 13/05/2022 16:30

Back on topic... GCC entire problem is that no-one senior found the time to take a step back and think things through and ensure that the law and GCC policies were being followed... but had instead imbedded a deliberately deceptive misogynistic and homophobic hate group into it's structure.

twistingmylemon · 13/05/2022 16:30

Tone policing again.

GCRich · 13/05/2022 16:29

tabbycat

sorry, I disagree. If a company cannot come out and say "we oppose homophobia and racism and sexism" then it is a very poor show.

Chrysanthemum5 · 13/05/2022 16:27

So LT's main excuse is 'I was travelling'

GCRich · 13/05/2022 16:27

Xenia

I agree that companies should stick to uncontroversial issues. Such as that you cannot discriminate against black people and gay people and women.

Getting into the debate of if and when trans rights should trump sex based rights is undoubtedly controversial and should be avoided.

Trouble is with my point of view that whilst I would generally agree with you Tory vs Labour point, and putting aside sex vs gender for one second, the Tories are objectively corrupt, undemocratic, and cruel and those things are objectively bad.

Mollyollydolly · 13/05/2022 16:27

I think Ben has had some bundle troubles of his own this afternoon which he's covered up well. Just an impression.

ifIwerenotanandroid · 13/05/2022 16:24

Jules, I'm taking the Fifth. And the star.⭐

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In
This thread is not accepting new messages.