Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Prof Jo Phoenix vs The OU - Employment Tribunal Thread 3

993 replies

ickky · 11/10/2023 10:41

Started on 2nd October at Watford Employment Tribunal (Radius House, 51 Clarendon Rd, Watford WD17 1HP 01923 281750)

You may attend in person or remote viewing has been quite limited but you can request log in details from

Email [email protected]

Header should read

URGENT CURRENT CASE - Public Access Request - J Phoenix - The Open University - 3322700/2021

Ask for access link and pin and please give your name and address in the email as they check when you connect to the tribunal.

Abbreviations

JP - Jo Phoenix, Claimant (C)
OU - The Open University, Respondent (R)
J - Regional Employment Judge Young
P - Panel or panel member
BC - Ben Cooper KC, Counsel for C
JM - Jane Mulcahy KC, Counsel for R

OU Departments & Networks:

HWSRA - Health & Wellbeing Strategic Research Area
FASS - Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
SPC - Dept of Social Policy & Criminology
KMi - Knowledge Media Institute
GCRN - Gender Critical Research Network

OU witnesses

PB - Dr Paraskevi Boukli, Former Senior Lecturer Criminology, Deputy Head SPC 2021-22
IF - Prof Ian Fribbance Dean of FASS
DD - Dr Deborah Drake, Senior Lecturer Criminology, Head of SPC 2018-21
LD - Dr Leigh Downes, Senior Lecturer in Criminology (in SPC), Academic Lead for EDI FASS 2019-21
CT - Catherine Tomlinson, Senior Student Advisor
LW - Louise Westmarland, Prof of Criminology, Co-Deputy Head SPC, 2018-21, Current Head SPC
MW - Prof Marcia Wilson, Dean EDI, 2020-23
CM - Caragh Molloy, Group People Director 2019-23
JD - John Domingue, Prof of Computing Science, Director KMi, 2015-22
PK - Peter Keogh, Professor Health & Society, Member RSSH
CW - Dr Christopher Williams, Senior Lecturer History
SD - Shaun Daley, Head OU’s Resourcing Hub. Head Strategic Resources, Co-Chair OU’s LGBT+ Staff Network
HBC - Helen Bowes-Catton, Lecturer Social Research Methods
NS - Nicola Snarey, Assoc Lecturer Eng Language
NatS - Natalie Starkey, Outreach & Public Engagement Officer Sch Physical Sciences, 2019-22
CT - Cath Tomlinson, Senior Student Advisor
SJ - Samantha Jacobson, Employee Relations Case Manager
RH - Richard Holliman, Prof Engaged Research, Head School Environment, Earth & Ecosystem Sciences, 2019-22. Member of Investigation Panel investigating the C’s grievance

Witness for JP:

SE - Sarah Earle, Professor Modern History Uni of Oxford, Founding member GCRN

Tribunal Tweets - https://twitter.com/tribunaltweets

TT coverage so far https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/professor-jo-phoenix-v-the-open-university

Thread 1 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4905118-jo-phoenix-vs-the-ou-employment-tribunal-2nd-october-whispers-ben-cooper?page=1

Thread 2
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4913946-prof-jo-phoenix-vs-the-ou-employment-tribunal-thread-2?page=1

Prof Jo Phoenix vs The OU - Employment Tribunal Thread 2 | Mumsnet

Abbreviations JP - Jo Phoenix, Claimant (C) OU - The Open University, Respondent (R) J - Regional Employment Judge Young P - Panel or panel memb...

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4913946-prof-jo-phoenix-vs-the-ou-employment-tribunal-thread-2?page=1

OP posts:
Thread gallery
21
Original poster
ickky · 12/10/2023 12:26

Mmmnotsure · 12/10/2023 12:25

BC: Would this case be appropriate for a first-time grievance manager?

CM: I don't agree. Support would have been provided.

[That would be the OU definition of support, obvs.]

Snort

OP posts:
Chrysanthemum5 · 12/10/2023 12:26

This witness is really trying to push the blame on to her junior staff. I wouldn't want to work for her after this display

Mmmnotsure · 12/10/2023 12:25

BC: Would this case be appropriate for a first-time grievance manager?

CM: I don't agree. Support would have been provided.

[That would be the OU definition of support, obvs.]

OP posts:
maltravers · 12/10/2023 12:25

I think the OUs strategy is blame it on unprovided legal advice and better to take a loss at the tribunal if they can’t price JP out of it, than to settle and unleash chaos internally with the students. They’re afraid of their own students (as we all knew anyway).

Chrysanthemum5 · 12/10/2023 12:25

So it was hugely complex and important but the person actually managing the grievance had no experience in running the process

Sisterpita · 12/10/2023 12:24

OMG she is worse in person than in TT.

CriticalCondition · 12/10/2023 12:23

Re the legal advice, in her witness statement she refers to an internal employment lawyer and to two (named) firms of external lawyers. She claims privilege over the nature of the advice, unsurprisingly.

Chrysanthemum5 · 12/10/2023 12:22

No @chilling19 she was busy and important and other people were running the process so it wasn't her fault and she didn't need to know the policy because someone else did.

Sisterpita · 12/10/2023 12:22

FFS you can always bring in an independent investigator.

chilling19 · 12/10/2023 12:21

HR wonk - External investigator was not an option.
Ben - it is in the policy
HR wonk - waffle, waffle

Err, I think the policy would be the first place I would look as DIRECTOR OF HR.

Mmmnotsure · 12/10/2023 12:20

OU panel was two internal people no external investigator.

CM: The advice we were given was that wasn't an option within in the process.

BC: I'm sorry but we have just looked at the process and it was an option within the process. You're in charge at HR. Why do you need advice re what allowed? You should be on top of this.

CM: I was not in detail of the policies. Advice given to me was couldn't have ext investigator under policies.

Melissamelisante · 12/10/2023 12:20

Doesn't sound like she was actually head of anything in reality but only in name. What a waste of space.

maltravers · 12/10/2023 12:17

pronounsbundlebundle · 12/10/2023 12:15

Given she doesn't work at the OU anymore I wonder if the OU knew in advance that she had never read the grievance and would say that in court?!! Nasty surprise for their side if not....

I would expect that to become clear when witness statements were taken and when decisions were made between the lawyers and OU as to who they would put up in the hearing.

Sisterpita · 12/10/2023 12:17

I’m in too

Melissamelisante · 12/10/2023 12:16

I'm in! Hope the others who were hindered this morning are also let in.

Ameanstreakamilewide · 12/10/2023 12:16

Unless those people causing the grievance are TRAs. The OU were simply too chicken to stand up to them, and hoped Jo would bugger off/resign.

TrumpetOfTheMatriarchy · 12/10/2023 12:16

BinturongsSmellOfPopcorn · 12/10/2023 11:55

And there may be 10000 staff but presumably she's not the only HR person in the OU?

And presumably all 10,000 don't all have a grievance in at the sane time.

Although in a place that badly run, maybe they do.

I think your use of 'sane' time I
s a bit optimistic in this context

JoIsBraverThanIAm · 12/10/2023 12:15

Researchers are not (usually) self-employed, they are employees, and the employer has all the usual duties towards them.

pronounsbundlebundle · 12/10/2023 12:15

Given she doesn't work at the OU anymore I wonder if the OU knew in advance that she had never read the grievance and would say that in court?!! Nasty surprise for their side if not....

GCITC · 12/10/2023 12:15

JoIsBraverThanIAm · 12/10/2023 12:12

What documents do witnesses get given, and when, pertaining to the case? After she left the OU, she wouldn't (or shouldn't!) have had access to the grievance any more, unless or until she was given a copy in connection with the tribunal.

Generally they each get given an individual bundle with documents that relate to them/their job/what they were involved in.

I would think the grievance was in her bundle, given that everyone probably thought she'd read it before.

Sisterpita · 12/10/2023 12:14

I still can’t believe the legal advice was to leave the open letter up.

We suspend employees but are clear this is to allow time to investigate and in no way does it indicate any judgement. Taking down the open letter whilst investigating the grievance is perfectly reasonable.

pantsforteaagain · 12/10/2023 12:14

Apologies for the basic question - what responsibility do universities have towards researchers? From what I have seen of universities, a researcher is almost like a self-employed unit (with respect to their research) - they choose their research topic, build their own networks, get their own grants, etc. Why would the university have any responsibility for the consequences? I can see that the university would do so wrt teaching, as that is something commissioned by the university, but why for research?

pronounsbundlebundle · 12/10/2023 12:13

I suspect also there's arrogance there - she thought it was reasonable that she (as a v important person) didn't ever read it and therefore based all her input to the working group and advice on hearsay and gossip and personal opinion rather than facts or Jo's 'lived experience'. She didn't realise that the REST OF THE WORLD doesn't agree that it's reasonable for her to not read a contentious grievance and essentially - by not doing that - entirely dismiss Jo's point of view.

That alone is probably illegal, isn't it? If an employee raises a grievance surely it's illegal for senior managers to make decisions about that grievance without reading it / knowing the facts?

Melissamelisante · 12/10/2023 12:13

Just reading the Tribunal Tweets to catch up and there is an exchange tweeted:

"CM: I can say we sought legal advice and on balancing different rights the statements could not be taken down.
BC: Advisors advise, you as a working group decide. Im interested in your thinking as a working group. Anything else you can help with as to how you balance harms?"

So, again, we have reference to having sought legal advice. I would LOVE to know what form this advice took and from whom it was sought.