Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 18

Hi trans activists, you can scuttle around pretending this is super great for Stonewall, but it's not you we are trying to convince.
This is a warning to all the organisations out there, listen to Stonewall crap and you'll need more than an emotional support pet.

This. The message is clear. Two significant judgments in a month that show that gender critical feminist beliefs are protected under the Equality Act 2010.

Look up ‘aggravated damages’.

I don't know about anyone else, but before I decide to contribute to any fundraiser, I read more than just the headline. I was well aware that GCC and stonewall were being sued, I was also aware that the case against stonewall would be harder.

I chose to contribute and would do so again, because these cases ultimately provide protection for us all.

Do you think a smaller organisation would want to fork out 27k plus their own legal costs?

As has been said on twitter'
STONEWALL: We won.
EVERYONE: What about the employer?
STONEWALL: They were found guilty.
EVERYONE: What were they guilty of?
STONEWALL: Following our advice.

This is a disaster for stonewall. Organisations aligned with them have been told they can be sued if they follow stonewall's advice. Organisations are leaving stonewall in droves.

This is a big win for Allison and for womens human rights.

She set out and fundraised to sue Stonewall

Yes, and Garden Court Chambers, her employer. Who were found to have discriminated against her for her gender critical beliefs, which as we all know from Maya's recent win and her appeal tribunal last year, are protected under the Equality Act like any other philosophical belief worthy of respect in a democratic society. She also brought an awful lot of negative attention to the Diversity Champions scheme racket. Do keep up.

Ben Cohen - why are all the newspapers except Pink News getting it wrong?

twitter.com/benjamincohen/status/1552325305532137474?s=20&t=kf9bfuE5crnZ2OJl69DwnA

There are so many good things about this case and Allison's success.

Well done to her and many thanks from here for her great courage in going ahead with it.

I am glad that in future employers will not be able to use Stonewall or other organisations to 'stamp' their policies as good ones. Accepting slogans (like those by Orwell's pigs: 'four legs good two legs bad') isn't enough.

Organisations will need to think for themselves and to listen to those the policies concern.

I am also glad that organisations (even ones with 'wrong' ideas) can still protest and put their point of view to employers (and other people). Yes -even Stonewall should have freedom to air its thoughts... It is just that they should not have the freedom to prevent anyone from questioning these thoughts. 'No debate' is a dangerous thing for free speech and free thought.

@CatherinaJTV Do you not understand media / public relations?

The sole point of saying "I am suing Stonewall" was about directing attention to this case. Stonewall UK is a global brand name. (If Ms Bailey had said "I am suing my Chambers" or "I am suing Garden Court" do you think there would have been such widespread interest?)

The purpose of this case was to demonstrate the precarious position for any organisation that has a relationship with Stonewall UK simply because the position that Stonewall UK takes in relation to the Equality Act 2010 is largely unlawful.

The Tribunal agreed with Ms Bailey which is why it awarded damages to her, within the boundaries set for how much damages can be awarded.

All organisations that have a relationship with Stonewall UK today have learned that liability rests solely with them and not Stonewall UK. These organisations will, from today, need to be reviewing that relationship to ensure they can avoid a similar fate.

Ms Bailey's case achieved its purpose. Stonewall UK is now standing on very unstable ground.

'The ruling effectively says that HR departments need to be cautious before adopting Stonewall advice. '

And doesn't this quite echo the sentiment in the Bell case? She may have lost in theory, but in actuality the ruling handed back responsibility to individual doctors and agencies, which seems to be leading to quite a comprehensive overhaul of exactly what these individual doctors are willing to do, because that was the limit of the law and the judicial review.

Employers in the future will not be able to say that they only did what they did because Stonewall told them it was correct, they will have to take the responsibility and liability themselves.

In future cases no-one will be forced to take on Stonewall as well as their employers, the blame will all be on the people who implemented Stonewall law to begin with. Especially now, knowing as everyone does that it was wrong.

How's that for value for money!?

Guardian report is up:
www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jul/27/law-chambers-discriminated-against-gender-critical-barrister-tribunal-rules

But won against her employer, who got utterly shafted.

She won a tiny amount of money for some tweets that caused "injury to her feelings", but lost on her extensive claims of "lost work and income".

That is very much not "utterly shafted."

I seem to remember before the tribunal there was talk along the lines of 'when it gets going, you'll be astonished' - & we were. Time & again the reaction was WHAAAAAT? or 'I can't believe what I just heard!'

That's good value for money.

Well - think we should all be celebrating that everyone is genuinely happy with this outcome! TRAs AND people who believe sex is real and immutable.

This happens very rarely, so let's all agree it's a great outcome and stop finding things to make up or be "concerned" about.

Chocolate-covered ginger biscuits for all! And miniature flags for some.

I’m not aware that Stonewall got its costs reimbursed! I would say it didn’t win. But it’s reputation is sxxt. Who in their right mind would ask them for advice?

From GCC statement:

"We are reviewing the judgment carefully with our legal team with a view to appeal." ENDS

Clearly their "legal team" isn't that great, they couldn't put an adequate bundle together and they've just been found guilty of discrimination. Against a black, lesbian woman, for holding a perfectly reasonable view, which is legally Worthy Of Respect In a Democratic Society.

Or Catherina, put it another way.

Do you believed that Stonewall's reputation was strengthened as a result of the court case?

Why?

I can’t image stonewall and GCC are friends anymore!!

Catherina, Stonewall will have lost a lot of credibility. Did you follow Kirrin Medcalfe's testimony. This is the person responsibly for trans equality guidance that organisations across the country pay for.

The ruling effectively says that HR departments need to be cautious before adopting Stonewall advice. Common sense suggests that Kirrin may not be the right person for the very powerful position they occupy.

She won against her employer who discriminated against her. That is plenty for me. More than plenty.

I gave money. I'm glad I did. If you want to claim this hasn't damaged Stonewall, then knock yourself out. I think it was absolutely fatal, but time will tell...

Can we play who's going to be next to leave the diversity champions scheme please?

KPMG needing some positive publicity right now

All the NHS organisations, police services and fire & rescue services need to get on with their day jobs and I bet a few of those LLP firms are looking at GC thinking thank fuck it wasn't us.

I just looked back to what I wrote this morning. I should have put a bet on it

And the cost of those expensive lawyers giving evidence at the tribunal also must have been £’000s in lost fee time.

AB fully lost in regards to all Stonewall related claims.

But won against her employer, who got utterly shafted.

Now if I were an employer, how would that impact my relationship with Stonewall? 🤔

Just wanted to point out some points you seem to have misinterpreted. But I'll leave you to it... Allison Bailey lost in all her claims against Stonewall. She set out and fundraised to sue Stonewall. She did. She lost.

Have a good evening trying to spin that into "we got value for money"