Darlington nurses win their employment tribunal

the TRA’s are going batshit over this. Willoughby screaming into the void again…

Can I ask: is there any chance of an appeal? The judgement doesn't make case law, does it, because it's a tribunal rather than an appeal? So how much authority/effect does it have in the eyes of HR departments etc? Lots, I hope, obviously, but might some organisations still (🙄) think they can insist on women budging up in their single sex spaces?

Has the government responded to the judgement? Kemi Badenoch has posted on X about it & reminded people about Jennifer Melle.

https://x.com/KemiBadenoch/status/2012169620313006386

I'm pretty sure that ITV news didn't cover this story. I was watching it and don't think I missed the coverage.

Edit: it's appalling that they don't care about a court case where the country's biggest employer was forcing women to undress in front of any male employee who said magic words.

OMG, I'm off now, I can't be doing with people who clearly don't understand simple English.

Can I ask: is there any chance of an appeal? The judgement doesn't make case law, does it, because it's a tribunal rather than an appeal? So how much authority/effect does it have in the eyes of HR departments etc? Lots, I hope, obviously, but might some organisations still (🙄) think they can insist on women budging up in their single sex spaces?

Has the government responded to the judgement? Kemi Badenoch has posted on X about it & reminded people about Jennifer Melle.

https://x.com/KemiBadenoch/status/2012169620313006386

OMG, I'm off now, I can't be doing with people who clearly don't understand simple English.

OMG, I'm off now, I can't be doing with people who clearly don't understand simple English.

On Rose's behaviour in the changing rooms: The tribunal essentially said that the nurses were understandably on high alert and fearful knowing that there was a man in the changing room and this led them to interpret what might otherwise be neutral acts (looking at someone in the eyes etc.) as being threatening (or pervy). There wasn't enough clear evidence that Rose's behaviour was threatening to make a finding of fact about this. So while the tribunal seemed to have sympathy and understanding for the nurses' interpretation of his behaviour there just wasn't enough evidence to justify a finding of sexual harassment. They basically found that he just didn't think about the nurses feelings at all.

While this might seem disappointing I think it is a legally sound decision on the facts.

For posters concerned 'Rose' wasnt found by the tribunal to have harassed the female nurses as he'd been given permission to be there, strongly recommend you read pages 36-37 of the other Darlington nurses thread 8.

Because the judgement found rose had done nothing 'wrong' posters on the other thread have explained the judge is recognising just a man's presence there is abusive to women- it makes protections for women stronger not weaker.

it means all men who say they are women should always be excluded from the womens changing room- even if they are 'nice' men , even if they are sad at being excl uded. It makes no difference to the impact on womens privacy and dignity as they are all men.

Hope that helps....

Woman of the Year 2023 ???

In what context? (Other than in his own head).

OMG, I'm off now, I can't be doing with people who clearly don't understand simple English.

He's an akshual woman, didn't you realise? His bio on Twitter/X:

Broadcaster. Biological Female. Don’t identify - am. Terfs - racists for trans people. BBC News - state propaganda. Woman Of Year 2023. Green

What point are you trying to make, here?

On Rose's behaviour in the changing rooms: The tribunal essentially said that the nurses were understandably on high alert and fearful knowing that there was a man in the changing room and this led them to interpret what might otherwise be neutral acts (looking at someone in the eyes etc.) as being threatening (or pervy). There wasn't enough clear evidence that Rose's behaviour was threatening to make a finding of fact about this. So while the tribunal seemed to have sympathy and understanding for the nurses' interpretation of his behaviour there just wasn't enough evidence to justify a finding of sexual harassment. They basically found that he just didn't think about the nurses feelings at all.

While this might seem disappointing I think it is a legally sound decision on the facts.