Sandie Peggie: Employment Tribunal, associated legal claims, and related matters - thread #63

NP I don't know if it is shocking. I find it diff to say I find it shocking. RCN trying to inform members

Just making poached egg on toast and coffee while listening to NC wrap him up like a kipper. 😂

Come on man, surely you can agree it is shocking.

Talk about fence sitting. (which ironically may lead to being a eunuch)

NC if you put this together RCN seems to tell nurses that it's not just ok but necessary to affirm eunuch ID expressed by children
NP accept it could be taken that way yes
NC it's shocking isn't it

[me - YES IT IS!!!!!!]

It's all 'be kind' until you apply logic and see what the end point can be. Go NC!

I sincerely hope not!

This is not how he imagined his working life to go is it.....

NC - the term gender ID is given def: 'the intrinsic feeling of being a man or woman, boy/girl...gender queer' (missed some of quote)
NP don't agree with this, it's to ensure nurses understand terminology for example some of those I wouldn't have knowledge of. Nurses understand the language.
NC so is your evidence that the Id eunuch should be respected by staff?
NP don't think this is RCN endorsement
NC but it contains alarming implication that they should be inclusive of eunuch ID of a child patient? Nc quotes

I imagine NP is currently feeling very very very uncomfortable.

I can only see TT and its making me laugh

How many times will Naomi get to say 'eunuch'? Has she had to explain it yet?

But guidance isn't going to contradict policy, is it.

.

NC turn in same document to internal page 11 deals with children. 'gender varient of children should be treated.. the same as adults are...where seg needed...stated gender ID or child' So that's affirmation of children, as treated as opposite ses
NP yes
NC clearly an expression of adherence of gender ID belief
NP this is guidance to treat with dignity. Not policy

RCN's Schroedinger's policy. TWIW ideology rules re patients but not staff. Yeah, right. Does he honestly expect us to believe this?

Left the S behind….

Yes, but the guidance doesn’t say sex based wards only, does it? Hmmm.

NC this is advice and policy from RCN aligned with gender ideology NP can't answer with a simple yes or no. Piece of advice prior to SC judgement
NC even before SC judgement came about because of this clash between GC and trans ideology So even before that that guidance was manifesting a commitment to trans ideology
NP yes
NC that was a position the RCN had before SC ruling
NP yes predates that

Hooting fish in a barrel

Well, in his cross examination of LM as the Claimant’s witness.

Edit to add: and questioning about LM taking up quite a bit of his examination of NP.

NC No sorry turn to second main volume bundle, 'care for trans patients'.
NC - A doc published by RCN. turn please to internal page 6 please, heading 'accom and environment' 'trans patients...care should be taken...on their preference' The implication, if a man says he's a woman and dressed as a woman, he's to be placed in a female ward
NP yes

[!!!!]

You just missed

Waffle

Waffle

Waffle

Waffle
....

Hours later...

Waffle.

been busier this morning than I expect so didn't manage to watch before NC took over but that's always the best bit anyway lol

NC - is it fair as a simplification to boil it down that the GC TW are men and Trans ideology TWAW NC RCN not adopted trans ideology, but their treatment of Lisa assumes she understood that this was their position
NP don't agree
NC - LM said that her mgr when pressed on what she'd said that was unacceptable she said that she should reflect on her values v the RCNs DEI. Do you think she should reflect on her values?
NP no
NC you said that there are strong views on both side 'corporate view...support to everyone under EA' Would you turn to page 202.

Said in a petulant tone.