Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 18

And the wrens and the snakes from the mumsnet choir still singing female-ly
And the bells are ringing out for Miss Bailey.

Can the support wren sing the tune ?

This brings back hearing all those people including Cathryn McGahey sickeningly defending the cotton ceiling stuff

Owen Jones' behaviour has become pretty erratic, and on some occasions extreme over the last couple of years.

He has become part of the problem rather than part of the solution on various issues.

I believe it was Kids Company, not Kidscape
(antibullying support charity).

Will Allison gets her costs paid? Will she get her lost income back?

With inspiration from @NancyDrawed and @IDidntKnowItWasAParty , and with apologies to The Pogues and Kirsty MacColl, I give you…

The Fairytale of Garden Court (abridged)

It was nearly Christmas
In the think tanks
An old lawyer said to me, gonna be a busy one
And then he tried to tweet
But couldn’t work out how
He turned his face away
And read his next big case

They’ve got cars at the Bar
But they still hit a bin
Blame the kids in the back
Is this excuse wearing thin?
When you first sent that email
It was past 1.00 a.m
Better take some advice
From the likes of KM

They’ve a dog
They’ve a mum
They’ve a new support chum
They’ll lean on you gently and squeeze you for more
You can talk about soccer
But you’ll never block her
Because Allison Bailey is the one we adore.

Wombats I'm on my phone so can't fit more than two in at a time so context/threads are lost, sorry!

My organisation is on the SW Diversity Champions list of shame and recently redid some of their HR policies to be more inclusive. I did note that the maternity policy retained the word mother but added the extra inclusive bits about other birthing parents, so didn't exclude anyone.
I recall at one point they were completing a 30+ page for SW so wonder if our TRA HR manager that's just left was the main one driving it all and might be a good time to contact HR to advise them that Stonewall advice is illegal. I'll ask Sex Matters if they have a template but they might be a bit busy at the moment

Are you able to share screenshots, please?

I'm reading some of the 1,200+ comments on the Times threads and there's a helpful TRA (Earl's Court) posting, allowing the informed posters to be able to argue back for the benefit of lurkers. Feels very MN

I never see Belgariad references!!!!

It certainly reads to me as though the greater adjustments were for Knan, with Medcalf requesting only help to find text in documents.

I can’t see any mention of it in the Grauniad 🤨

The BBC have managed to report it, but it’s buried at the botttom of UK news.

They’re still not getting it.

Any organisation that takes its LGBT advice solely from Stonewall is now at risk of inadvertently discriminating against particularly its female and lesbian staff, but also its gay and bisexual staff. Stonewall have themselves indicated that they know this, and will not stand over the advice that they give should the company run into trouble.

I think that’s newsworthy!

But maybe that’s why the Graun don’t want to report it.

It reminds me of when Polgara the Sorceress pronounces on somebody, what she says is one of the worst curses of all: that nobody will ever believe a word they say again. (Niche David Eddings reference).

Now I want to reread the Belgariad, and it takes ages, I've already done it twice.

OK hands up, how many of you raised a glass or two yesterday?

Or was that just me?

It's there now, but a bit hidden

www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-62328298

It is a bit confusing.

But paragraph 16.:

"Adjustments for disability had been made by E J Stout at an earlier case
management hearing for the witness Kirrin Medcalf . The adjustments were to
help him find text in documents. The tribunal was a little surprised when, as
Shaan Knan was called, a request was made for extra time to make
adjustments. On questioning what these adjustments were, the tribunal was
told that when giving evidence he was to be accompanied by his mother, by a
support worker and by a support dog. Further questioning elicited that the
support worker was an employee of the first respondent’s solicitor, to help with
any IT technical difficulty. Mother and dog were there for moral support. There
was no time to adjourn for a case management hearing, and in any case medical evidence was not available. On the basis that some Garden Court
witnesses had needed help from a technician, that his mother could have sat
near him in a hearing room, and that a dog was unlikely to interfere with
evidence, the adjustments were allowed, on condition the camera position was
moved back so that all three people were visible on screen throughout his
evidence. This was done."

So yes, it is a bit clumsy as to whether referring to Shaan Knan or Kirrin Medcalf.

I think it means, as Shaan Knan was called to testify, a "request was made for extra time to make adjustments" on behalf of Kirrin Mecalf, not Shaan Knan. Not totally clear in that paragraph, though.

Possibly distracted by the support worker + support mum + support dog?

Was it on BBC TV news at all. I don't think I've seen it. Glad Ch4 covered it. Very disappointed if the BBC didn't.

Not sure if this has been posted but I can't believe Channel 4 News actually covered Allison's win. C4 News are normally stone, cold silent on GC issues while giving long form interviews to the likes of Shon Faye.

Jackie Long looked a bit uncomfortable previewing the story.....but the interview with employment barrister Chris Milsom was really clear.

www.channel4.com/news/allison-bailey-law-chambers-discriminated-against-barrister-with-gender-critical-views-tribunal-rules

Yup, the para misattributes the supporting cast to SK and not KM unfortunately.

It is such a good result for women.

Allison Bailey, I bow to you!

I remember, it was so encouraging, to watch Allison Bailey's crowdfunder grow, and grow, and grow, with so many contributions of £10, £15, £20. Not huge tax-deductible corporate finance, but £££££ collectively from ordinary women putting what they could into the crowdfunder.Thousands of us,

I agree with other posters' analysis that Stonewall got off, in strict law, on the charges; but any other organisation following Stonewall advice is now similarly vulnerable to being sued on similar grounds. And Stonewall just get to walk away from the damages, and any responsibility.

So glad for Allison Bailey!

Raising a glass to all of us!

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/de6fed9e-0da6-11ed-a4af-79eb4b98fc31?shareToken=8f30f089dfd8ac8641a5ecb5c043a11e

This is The Times article. It may be the same as the one linked earlier upthread.
I like the way it immediately states the influence of Stonewall on GCC.

A slight aside but LOJ described it as a win for Stonewall earlier and that everything else was just 'noise.'
He then decided to tweet (since deleted) that he wanted Labour supporters to harass Keir Starmer in the street for being a fraud and a hypocrite..
Condemnation rained down from all quarters.
Fingers crossed it's the week he gets the sack from The Guardian.
Would be the perfect end to this week.

p5 para 16 (but KM, not SK?)

paras 19 & 20 = bundle

Is it a coincidence that I can't find newspaper coverage on the BBC news site? 🤔