Another GC employment tribunal. Roz Adams vs Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre #2

What other defence does DH have - ERCC have fucked up.

that's a really good point. do you think ERCC are providing any kind of support to AB (I mean this sincerely, they are obviously mentally fragile and easily upset, this whole thing can't be doing them any good at all)

I really can't see how anyone so easily upset about reading an email, as AB is, can be at all useful in a Rape Crisis Centre.

Bloody Norah.

AB, like other NB & trans people, had no idea this is where their complaint would end up. They become the subject under cross examination with personal information being put into the public domain.

The process is brutal not just on the claimant but also some of the respondents witnesses. Not for the first time I wonder about their mental health & wellbeing. Yes they have initiated this, but they have actually being failed by management & the organisation just as much as the claimant.

As Kemi said the EA2010 is a shield against discrimination and organisations adopting Stonewall law are doing employees like AB no favours by not taking a rational approach and kindly explaining it’s not discrimination.

I bet Employment Tribunal judges really love them tho

Wouldn't an interview with AB have been fairly important in assessing just how "upset" she would have been about getting cc'd into an email?
It seems fairly fundamental to the disciplinary process to me (but I guess I'm not a fundraiser)

Noting boils my piss more than a (willful?) misinterpretation and misuse of data protection legislation. Professional hazard.

MR: Never met AB so don't know.

But earlier MR couldn't understand how an AMAB NB could get a job at ERCC so she must've known AB was AFAB

She has never met AB - what??

Back to the table.

NC: This includes gender. Do you take that to mean gi or sex

MR: I guess for me it's both.

NC: So both gi and sex are special category

MR looking at table.

MR: I would read it as same, but there's health records category later on which could come into play.

NC: Everyone email copied to knew AB was physically female, everyone who met AB would know they were female - you can't disclose what everyone knows. Would people know AB was female.

MR: Never met AB so don't know.

how can it be so triggering to AB (and tolerated by the workplace) to be asked "how should i describe you to a rape survivor who has requested women-only support"

Surely to fuck the answer then should be "pls refer them to the female support staff, i'd prefer not to handle this case"

the talk section of that is currently a complete bin-fire

What if AB had been AMAB (urgh)? how would the reply go then?

From the articles and evidence shared, and MW's own stated beliefs and purpose in role, they would have been told they are NB and not male. The sin is mostly admitting that a NB person actually has a sex that remains static however they choose to identify.

It's becoming increasingly obvious that this service and its staff are largely very dedicated to serving the TQ+ political agenda and the interests of their staff, particularly the male ones. The women are just kind of resources for doing this with, along with the paperclips and furniture.

Jesus, the contortions.

@GCITC dear me, there's a lot going on in the history of that Wikipedia page (which is currently using 'she/her').

Again, just a reminder that in 2016 Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre published this account by a survivor:

CID Officers explained that there^ would need to be a forensic^ examination when the on-call forensic^ examiner (FE) arrived. I was not given^ any idea of how long that would be.I felt that I had to wait a long time for this.

I was asked to get on to the^ examination table. I was wearing a^ medical gown and no other clothing.^ I do not recall being asked if I would prefer a female FE. When the FEs^ arrived, they were two men. The nature of the testing was explained to me. I was never asked if I felt ok with a second person attending. I did not feel in the frame of mind to object.

I was asked to get on to the examination table. I was wearing a medical gown and no other clothing.
I was feeling very apprehensive and vulnerable. I felt like a piece of meat, not a live human being who has just been through extreme trauma. I did not want any man anywhere near me and certainly not touching me. Because I wanted all this to be over, I didn’t feel able to voice this. I just wanted to scream at them. Clinical information was given to me but I felt no compassion, care or consideration for my feelings.

www.ercc.scot/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Edinburgh-Rape-Crisis-Centre-A-Womans-Story-230516.pdf

Probably a good time for the judge to remind people that stating AB's real name would be contempt of court.

AB sounds tedious. I wouldn't work with them and require there to always be a 3rd person present if i had to.

She cld have said Ab was NB and not a man. ANd the user cld req a different worker if uncomfortabel

(from the tweets). This is utterly batshit. So a SU asks "it will be a woman?" and the answer could have been "it will be someone who was born a woman but is now non-binary. So yes, a woman but you have to pretend they aren't. Heads up - this non-man/non-woman uses a male name. practice using they/them so you don't cause them to have a meltdown"

What if AB had been AMAB (urgh)? how would the reply go then?

The table you were shown earlier today and that you said you had never seen before.

Witness says the data is in the Trans Inclusion Policy. (But not GDDR)

NC: reads from policy what sensitive personal data is - list.

NC: It doesn't mention sex under that heading.

MR: Not explicitly, but this was part of physical health.

Ooh we’re coming onto the GDPR angle now.