Rachel Meade - it's a win!

Fair point. The difference is the lack of positives in the first scenario!

Ooh, unfair. It might be the kiss of death, but at least you'd get to meet lovely Angela Lansbury.

I hope the civil service are taking note.

I can't find it either, maybe it has not been published yet.

Anyone employing RMW for a case linked to trans ideology should be aware that their barrister as a huge conflict of interest. They see the law through their very specific perspective and are likely to push to fight cases that would be in their interest.

Being presented by RMW must be like Jessica Fletcher turning up in your vicinity.

Just realised this is the wrong determination. I can't find the remedy judgment.

I hope Rachel spends some of the money on a lovely holiday.

Have any of the opposing counsel twiXed anything?

I won't hold my breath.

Huge congratulations to Rachel. Hope she does something relaxing with her compensation.

I have tried to find the remedies judgement, does anyone have a link? The link above is for the judgement.

😁 joyous!!

I'm glad Rachel was awarded the money.

I hope the message it gives to other organisations along with the judges words give them pause for thought and that other organisations and HR departments everywhere start to give their head a bloody good wobble.

Worth every penny of the funding.

The implications of this ruling and the ET's recommendation for retraining needs to spread.

It will be interesting to see which organisations are employed to deliver the training.

Now that ‘message’ would be much more likely to sink in with HR and EDI staff. Otherwise I just can’t see this having any impact on HR in other sectors. Maybe if it was the front page of a professional journal but even then, I’m not convinced.

Edited to add this ruling is nevertheless welcome and a vindication for Racheal. Can’t believe how many supposedly intelligent people are ready to engage in this witch hunt of silencing those who deign to believe in sex over gender.

I suspect it will be the same as the Jo Phoenix judgement - silence.

@Signalbox Thank you

The infiltration of ideology into our institutions is real cause for worry. They are so entrenched that accepting the judgment which runs counter to their ideology is difficult.

It seems all institutions and trade unions have just done a hook, line and sinker with no debate. A sign of things to come, if you think Labour will have rolled over and accepted GC views, think again ( I have always voted left, like many of you). This is left ideology with people leaving Universities and running institutions without knowing what is happening out here. They haven't got a clue. I am angry. When will it become obvious that we are protected, are they just hoping we'll run out of funds and they can then call it a win because no more court cases. In whose world is that justice.

Monday morning rant

Here you are…

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/607d6cba0ef43a2dbb27df45/t/65a00a0f1492d57d53820bba/1704987151937/2200179+2022+-+Judgment+11+1+24.pdf

Does anyone have a link to the remedy judgement?

Just checked their Twitter feed to see if they've made any pronouncements on this judgement. Nothing so far, but looking forward to see how they will spin it...!

From Rachel's lawyer:

'This should serve as a resounding warning to all regulators that they must not let their processes be weaponised by activists who seek to punish and silence legitimate debate.'

100%. Let's hope this resounds throughout the land! Add it to Forstater and Jo Phoenix.

What a fantastic result. Rachel deserves every penny.

The fact that both WCC and SWE have been directed to re-train their staff is priceless. Rachel has won an enormous victory that all HR departments and EDI leads need to take notice of.

RMW’s second edition will be out of date before it is published.

I had forgotten social work England were defended by RMW 😁😁 ah it’s a good day!

Wow. This isn't just a victory, it's a victory with icing on top, isn't it?

"It also recommended that Social Work England should within six months 'ensure that all its triage staff, investigation staff and case examiners shall receive training on freedom of expression and protected belief.'"

This should send a message out to the dunderheads running HR departments everywhere that you can't go round disciplining your staff because they've expressed an opinion you don't like.

chilling19 · Yesterday 21:51

In what lawyers described as an unprecedented move by a court to award exemplary damages against a regulator, an employment tribunal called for both the council and the watchdog to train their staff in the principles of freedom of speech.'

This is indeed very good news, but I wonder what will happen, regarding her legal fees?

Also, it's all well and good saying that they'll retrain people, but as in similar cases, why aren't the people involved sacked? Surely an orchestrated campaign bullying and harassment is gross misconduct, at the very least?

Still no apology from SWE though?

“Colum Conway, chief executive of Social Work England, said the regulator was considering the judgement.
^^
He added: “We recognise that this has been a particularly difficult case for those involved, conducted against a backdrop of debate on many issues within society in relation to freedom of expression. Our professional standards reflect the diversity of social work practice and the positive impact it has on people’s lives, families and communities.
^^
“We will continue our work in this area and clearly articulate the reasons when there are reasonable grounds to investigate a social worker’s fitness to practise.”

But WCC apologised. Still relying on it’s all so very complex.

“A Westminster city council spokesman said: “We have received the findings of the remedy hearing and will need to take a little time to digest before responding more fully. We have apologised to Rachel Meade and the points which emerged during the tribunal and remedy hearing are an important and helpful guide in clarifying what is acknowledged to be a rapidly evolving area of employment law.”

edited to add: sorry just reached the end of the thread and seen I’m repeating what others have said about SWE.

And suggests that, despite the case and despite Cass, they are totally captured.

And this is the body that regulates social workers who in turn are responsible for crucial decisions around the future and care of vulnerable children.

Terrifying.