Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 2

[ickky]

The Tribunal started on 25th April at 10am. If you would like to view online you need to send a request for access as early as possible.

Send an email to

[email protected]

The subject heading of the email request should read

“MEDIA OR PUBLIC ACCESS REQUEST – Case number 2202172/2020 - Ms A Bailey – 25th April 2022.

Then ask for the pin for the online access.

You will be contacted with instructions on how to observe the hearing.

When joining the live tribunal
select the video and mic that are not crossed out, this is the courts vid and mic.
On the next page select NONE on the drop down windows for vid and mic, these are your own video and mic.

You must be muted so as to not disturb the hearing.

There is also live tweeting from twitter.com/tribunaltweets

Abbreviations:
AB: Allison Bailey, claimant
BC: Ben Cooper QC, barrister for AB
SW = Stonewall Equality Limited (respondent 1)
IO = Ijeoma Omambala QC, barrister for SW
RW = Robin White assisting IO
GC = Garden Court Chambers Limited (respondent 2) (GCC would be a better abbreviation)
AH = Andrew Hochhauser QC, barrister for GC
JR = Jane Russell assisting AH
RM= Rajiv Menon QC & SH = Stephanie Harrison QC (jointly respondent 3 along with all members of GC except AB)
EJ = Employment Judge Goodman hearing the case
Panel = any one of the three panel members (EJ and two lay members)

Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 1 👇

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4529887-Allison-Bailey-v-Stonewall-Employment-Tribunal-hearing?

I don't consider MTF trans people honorary anything in relation to my own sex. For me their identity is just a specific way to be a male person.

I was very willing to live and let live, have mutual tolerance and respect -

until I realised that this was an entirely one way thing, and no 'letting live' or reciprocation would be involved.

So driven to the discourtesy, I have to be quite clear now. TW are fine, nothing wrong with being TW, but they are male, and a subset of the male sex class. TW and female people being forced teamed is a strategy to benefit males at female people's expense.

Tangential, but can anyone tell me who Martin Reuby is please?
(And is he really a London cabbie?)

'So driven to the discourtesy, I have to be quite clear now. TW are fine, nothing wrong with being TW, but they are male, and a subset of the male sex class.'

This is how I feel. Manners are important but they're not more important than the truth.

Member of the employment tribunal panel and will be a contributor to the judgment.

No idea.

Martin Reuby will be the trade union member of the tribunal.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3417686/Whistleblower-sues-union-Unite-zero-hours-contract.html

Still with the bundle, the message from Shaan Knan (which I think was posted on the Wall?) states that, via Knan, members of the trans community were encouraged by Michelle Brewer to write messages to the Heads of Chambers at GC specifically supporting action against AB. It's in the same message that Knan displays knowledge of the meeting at GCC to discuss any formal action against AB.

So it will be very interesting to see Michelle Brewer give evidence, assuming she will be doing so.

Also from the bundle, 2 whole minutes after emailing AB on 24th October 2019, following up on an email sent to AB from the three Heads of Chambers asking her to stop tweeting on the issue, to delete any reference to being a member of GCC on her twitter, and not to speak to the media, Judy Khan emailed Stephanie Harrison, another senior member of the chambers, and what she wrote was, 'What I really wanted to say was FFS...'

It's going to be nearly impossible for them to claim they treated her with any form of genuine impartiality. They made a show of it to her, but behind her back that's how the Head of Chambers was talking to colleagues about her.

I read that too. Thinking: surely this goes against procedural fairness

I wondered about that but the DM story is about Martyn Reuby. They're probably the same person but I haven't seen an image of the ET's Reuby so didn't want to presume it's the same person despite the (to me) uncommon name.

Just to lend weight to the 2 spellings, one person, there is a Martin R associated with UNITE.

www.iansunitesite.org.uk/2010/04/

Tangential, but can anyone tell me who Martin Reuby is please?
(And is he really a London cabbie?)

That was me being flippant so that's my fault. I was simply contrasting his vocal delivery with everyone else involved in the proceedings.

Thanks all

That photo looks like the man in the tribunal a good few years ago.

The panel has to have lay members and can be an employer and an employee side expert.

He's working class and has a proper working class accent. Nothing wrong with that. It doesn't make him thick. He asked a very important question yesterday and illicited some important context from the FiLiA witness.

I think the key message, for employers and activists alike, as someone said upthread:

"Workplace activism is a disaster for everyone."

And I might've been projecting. I sound more like everyone else in the tribunal than MR myself but most of my family have SE London accents and it annoys me that people assume London/Essex accents indicate stupidity.

I can't tell you how low my heart sinks hearing women talk about male-sexed people who are desperate and focussed on getting into women-only space 'Honorary Women'.

Allison's reached her target. I hope she sleeps well tonight.

I am so very glad that she has reached her target. I hope she sees just how much support she has.

Pluvia - totally understand and despite the honoury position in my mind (because we all know a bloke is a bloke), I firmly believe in single sex spaces.

If nothing else, the sight of the judge today furiously making notes about the cotton ceiling was a joy to behold. Let as much sunlight in on that as possible, whatever the ultimate outcome is.

I didn't take the comments about Martin Reuby's way of speaking to be derogatory. When I heard him I thought 'good, here's a straightforward everyday person, not one from the Stonewall/judiciary bubble.' I'd trust him to see through the machinations & shenanigans that have been evident so far.

Reported in today's Times:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/c7d32c72-cca1-11ec-bb1d-4e283d8ec187?shareToken=84d910f8d836b99b2cbb9c3e4012ab21

I read her long statement yesterday. What a strong and fascinating woman she is! I wish her health and happiness and her case success. If she wins, we all win. Even if she loses, the sunlight her case has shed will help us.

‘I can't tell you how low my heart sinks hearing women talk about male-sexed people who are desperate and focussed on getting into women-only space 'Honorary Women'.’

It’s how I have treated transitioning people in the past, but not if they are trying to enter female-only spaces. I don’t believe feelings of identity should give them that access, because honorary or not (however I might behave towards them out of kindness), those spaces are not for them.