Choreographer Rosie Kay forced to resign from her own company

[peonyred]

This is a share token so you can read the story. Another Janice Turner article. Simone suggested Crowdfunding for her new company.

Rosie Kay: I resigned from my own dance company after I was accused of transphobia

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3935bc4a-5858-11ec-a3f7-65d2d47c7fea?shareToken=d4efe0ddb11ede84d52835a0a02d70e3

it is

Is loud and lairy not code for we all got pissed? The open letter claims she blacked out as well I think. Look I wasn't there, I don't know which version is right, but I can see that it is possible that holding a work event at home blurred the line between an acceptable and unacceptable tone of debate. I don't think that line of argument is completely without merit is all, it's worth looking into. And I am generally GC.

We do need to work out whether her house, complete with her child's deeply offensive bedroom, is their work environment or not

In employment law, a Christmas party off the premises still counts as work. The dancers may or may not be massive snowflakes, I'm not hugely well disposed towards them on the face of it, but they do have employment rights. I don't know if she infringed them or not, I wasn't there, but I don't think asking the question is itself totally off-bounds.

I'm sure I read somewhere that she said she couldn't remember everything that had happened and that a lot of alcohol had been consumed.

I'm not sure that the fact bosses getting drunk at office parties is a good comparison- that's generally a bad thing- and it's usually quite easy to get away from a drunk at an office party. It's not quite the same in a small group in someone's house.

We do need to work out whether her house, complete with her child's deeply offensive bedroom, is their work environment or not. I would say not:

Well you'd be wrong. There is absolutely no doubt that office parties outwith work premises are "work places" from point of view of employees" and employers' conduct.

I'm sure I read somewhere that she said she couldn't remember everything that had happened and that a lot of alcohol had been consumed. Yes @KimikosNightmare

But only in a later missive by the dancers. They say she said this and that, but she hasn't said the same. So far, if you only go by what both parties say happened, you come the the conclusion that the dancers are being weird. It is only if you take their uncorroborated word as gospel that she comes out of this in any way other than bemused and hard done by!

Given their interpretation of other things they all agree she did say it is entirely possible that they think 'loud and lairy' means 'blacked out'. That's how oddly, extremely they have interpreted her words. And again that is only going by what they all say actually happened and was said.

Interesting how Ms Kay is being put on the defensive. DARVO in action.

@KeflavikAirport

We do need to work out whether her house, complete with her child's deeply offensive bedroom, is their work environment or not

In employment law, a Christmas party off the premises still counts as work. The dancers may or may not be massive snowflakes, I'm not hugely well disposed towards them on the face of it, but they do have employment rights. I don't know if she infringed them or not, I wasn't there, but I don't think asking the question is itself totally off-bounds.

It was not a Christmas party.

The moral of this story becomes clearer and clearer. If you have a group of people whom you have employed for a particular project, and the behaviour of some of them means that project is at risk of becoming impossible, the proper course of action is to cancel the project. If this means they are then not employed, because they are redundant, well, perhaps you can later employ on some other project the ones among them who were not finding it impossible to work cooperatively or to work to instruction.

It was not a Christmas party

What on earth is that supposed to mean? Keflavik Airport referred to "Christmas parties" as an earlier poster had referred to "work Christmas parties"

There isn't a shred of doubt that work related social gatherings offsite are "work places" for the purposes of employees' and employers' conduct.

@KeflavikAirport

We do need to work out whether her house, complete with her child's deeply offensive bedroom, is their work environment or not

In employment law, a Christmas party off the premises still counts as work. The dancers may or may not be massive snowflakes, I'm not hugely well disposed towards them on the face of it, but they do have employment rights. I don't know if she infringed them or not, I wasn't there, but I don't think asking the question is itself totally off-bounds.

It wasn't a Christmas party. She was trying to help them overcome the disadvantages they were experiencing because of covid. Actually trying to avoid the shit that then got dumped on her!

She seems to have had a perfectly ordinary view of who they were and what her jobs was - to nurture them into the competitive world of dance.

They, on the other hand, seem to live in a totally different universe. A universe that includes not being able to treat peopel according to their experience, when expereince makes a huge difference in their understanding of what is required of them and of their performance.

As I said upthread. Covid seems to have meant they had little external critique. So, like many students in all sorts of classrooms, they rank themselves within their cohort and don't really consider the wider world, the yardstick by which they will be measured once they have left their schooling.

They are as green, untested, unrealistic and opinionated as she said. They are also acting as Borg... and for some inexplicable reason actual adults, ones with a lot of life experience, don't seem to know how to set them straight!

It wasn't a Christmas party

It's completely irrelevant whether or not it was a Christmas party. It was socialising related to their employment.

It is only if you take their uncorroborated word as gospel that she comes out of this in any way other than bemused and hard done by!

There was one letter but six dancers. So presumably they provide corroboration between them.

@KimikosNightmare

It wasn't a Christmas party

It's completely irrelevant whether or not it was a Christmas party. It was socialising related to their employment.

OK. So ignore the first line and read the rest! If you do you will see that I said it was work related, just not a Christmas party.

Or carry on nitpicking. Your choice!

@Lovelyricepudding

It is only if you take their uncorroborated word as gospel that she comes out of this in any way other than bemused and hard done by!

There was one letter but six dancers. So presumably they provide corroboration between them.

Yeah! As I said, they are acting in unison,. Think about it. How did that letter get written? They got together, discussed it, quite clearly added a general sprinkling of hyerbole - again if you only take what they ALL say was said and done - and have chosen to act as one entity, putting together all of their perspectives as one.

Let me say that again

I am ONLY considering the things that they ALL agree were actually said and actually done

To go back to that... unless of course you are saying that any cohort that collaborates will automatically be believed over a single individual @Lovelyricepudding?

Because that way lies madness - as we are seeing!

I made a small donation. However having heard from the other side , I'm now not as persuaded that some of their points don't have merit. As Keflavik said

The dancers may or may not be massive snowflakes, I'm not hugely well disposed towards them on the face of it, but they do have employment rights

If an employer invites employees to their home they need to be aware the employer/ employee relationship doesn't fall away.

In some cases it will be purely social- particularly if only 1 or 2 employees are present. Here the whole team was and the point of this gathering was to encourage team building.

Hang on: six signatories, nine people involved. What are they going to to do to the three "disloyal" people who didn't join in the witch-hunt and work each other up into precipitate action which quite certainly took away all their immediate employment -- that show ain't going on without the person running it, so they are all out of a job?

I feel rather sorry for those three: they are being victimised for something they have not done, whichever way I look at it.

OK. So ignore the first line and read the rest! If you do you will see that I said itwaswork related, just not aChristmasparty

Or carry on nitpicking. Your choice!

If any one is nit picking it is you. Your comment about it not being a Christmas party is completely irrelevant and redundant if you accept it was work related; which was not actually clear from the rest of your post.

@AskingQuestionsAllTheTime

Hang on: six signatories, nine people involved. What are they going to to do to the three "disloyal" people who didn't join in the witch-hunt and work each other up into precipitate action which quite certainly took away all their immediate employment -- that show ain't going on without the person running it, so they are all out of a job?

I feel rather sorry for those three: they are being victimised for something they have not done, whichever way I look at it.

I bet that the 40yo person is one of the three abstainers, in the frequently mentioned we were ranging in age up to 40yo.

I will also guess that all three abstainers are male dancers and hence no criticism directed towards them.

Oh do give up. Address the central points.

She did what many tutors, lecturers and employers do. Especially when mentoring is part and parcel of the job.

Here the whole team was and the point of this gathering was to encourage team building. Yes! That! And rather than look outside themselves and re-orient themselves to the wider world they chose, well most of the, chose to retreat to their perma-astonished inner worlds.

How the hell else could anyone find the style of decor in a little boy's bedroom 'dangerous'?

What else would anyone read a written apology and say it was not enough because summink summink ?

Read it again... www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-59584638

"I was not going out of my way to have Rosie Kay removed from the company, I wanted there to be proper acknowledgement of what had happened." came after "I am devastated by how the night went and how much it has affected you. It was never my intention to upset you, but I see now that I did so profoundly. I am truly sorry for this."

What more is required? Sack cloth? Ashes? Crawling through the streets of Old London Town?

It doesn't matter - whatever one says or does in apology, it's never enough.

@KimikosNightmare

I made a small donation. However having heard from the other side , I'm now not as persuaded that some of their points don't have merit. As Keflavik said

The dancers may or may not be massive snowflakes, I'm not hugely well disposed towards them on the face of it, but they do have employment rights

If an employer invites employees to their home they need to be aware the employer/ employee relationship doesn't fall away.

In some cases it will be purely social- particularly if only 1 or 2 employees are present. Here the whole team was and the point of this gathering was to encourage team building.

May I ask which of their points you feel have merit? I ask as I've read the whole blog and am now really confused. My gut still says they have decided to be offended and have twisted her words/the events' but I'm very aware that this is based on nothing concrete. I do wonder if Rosie Kay really did 'black out', as she apparently admitted to this in a 'verbal' apology only ie no one can disprove it.

@Whatsnewpussyhat

Funny how the non binaries new exactly which parts to audition for based on their sex...

Kay asked them to define non-binary. At that she says several male dancers shouted that she was a bigot and a terf

Funny how it was the male dancers who shouted her down and called her a bigot and a terf in her own home because that's what they have to do when a woman disagrees and when they have absolutely no reasonable, coherent and logical answer to her question. Deflect, acuse and silence.

What happened to the days when those who were young and inexperienced would grab an opportunity to work with someone like this and get their face known and make the most of it.

Their own cognitive dissonance makes them want to destroy those in their way. They simply cannot cope with anyone who won't agree with them.

It's like that group at Hatchette that thought people would give a shit if they decided to down tools on the Ickabog. I mean the publisher is hardly going to drop JK Rowling because a couple of people are offended

Just musing: I have booked a long-haul flight in first class for later this month. If I tell them that I am non-binary, will they give me two amenties bags?