Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 3

[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

On the first page underneath where you put your screen name, select the video and mic that are not crossed out (top option), 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)

Thread 1
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4529887-Allison-Bailey-v-Stonewall-Employment-Tribunal-hearing?

Thread 2

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4542466-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-2

This feels like desperate stuff by AH. He's got very little of substance in the documents so he takes every opportunity to undermine AB's character and motivation. Suggesting she is greedy, untruthful, unkind. When everything she says and the way she says it demonstrates the complete opposite.

He seems to be pushing the idea that AB is a conspiracy theorist grifter - not sure that's going to fly...

AH is acting like he's got a big smoking gun!

Maybe just trying to psych her out.

If we're charitable, AH QC is trying to demonstrate that AB was mistaken about being inadequately clerked. He's trying to make out her treatment was the norm and she just has a chip on her shoulder and expects more than her due. And that's his job, but it's not pleasant to listen to, because his implication is that expecting work that correlates to your level of experience and your sensible career aspirations is greedy and entitled. But it doesn't seem to be greedy and entitled for any other barrister so far.

I'm nt watching live, but from your descriptions this is sounding racist.

I am watching live and I wouldn't say that at all. At least one of the clerks is also of Jamaican heritage. AH is trying to undermine her as he would any witness for the other side/ the claimant.

I wouldn't say that at all. AH doesn't really have anything so needs to do something. It is not nice to watch, but doesn't seem racist.

Well done Allison. Your answers are excellent and despite the line of questioning this morning, it is very clear that you did not begin this painful and stressful case out of greed!

AH is a patronising git, but I don't think he's a racist.

This AH is just awful. So rude, patronising, condescending and insulting.
I get that this is what he is paid to do - but personally I find it extremely distasteful, no matter what side it comes from.

I was thinking about what Tabby said and the implication about her being greedy and entitled. Her comparator is not a clerk but an equally well qualified white, male barrister - well, would he be implied to be greedy and entitled? Is AH himself being greedy and entitled expecting lucrative work?

Isn't a lot of this back and forth, about specific cases being clerked to AB, beside the point?

Ultimately the numbers prove definitively that AB wasn't getting the same kind of work as before. They can't claim that didn't happen.

Or is the goal here to paint AB as unreasonable and demanding so they can claim that it wasn't discrimination, it was the result of personality clashes?

I don't think that race is playing any part in this, either in GCC's treatment of Allison or in this hearing.

AH has that little barb in his tone of voice that i don't care for.

My admiration for Allison grows stronger every hour. I'm sitting here clenching my teeth with apprehension and i'm not even the one being cross examined.

Personally I don't see any racism - AH is just trying (unsuccessfully IMO) to undermine AB any way he can. He's grasping at straws, throwing out all sorts of unfounded accusations.

Placemarking

Will these clerks be called as witnesses? So BC can cross examine them?

That might be enlightening.

There's no racism. This is just how they cross-examine. They're trying to get an admission of a mistake or error.

I thought this one would be much tougher.

Presumably the ones who have made witness statements will be called for cross-examination.

Or will be available to give evidence so that cross-examination is possible.

'Her comparator is not a clerk but an equally well qualified white, male barrister - well, would he be implied to be greedy and entitled? Is AH himself being greedy and entitled expecting lucrative work?'

Well quite.

And although I certainly am not saying anyone is 'racist', I am not sure race plays no part in this. There's a document in the evidence bundle that demonstrates (or appears to demonstrate) how much harder it appears to have been for a person of colour to be made a QC at GCC.

But AB isn't proceeding on those grounds so I'll say no more about that.

Yeah, that part makes sense. It was always going to have to be GCC's case, since they can't very well argue about the numbers.

Hochhauser's argument seems to be that the sort of low quality work she was getting was just what people should expect to get, and thems the breaks, but I think it will be demonstrable if that wasn't true of colleagues of a similar level of experience.

Struggling to follow along. Is there a thread unroll from this morning by Tribunal tweets?

You are doing an amazing job AB!

Just logged on, what time are they back from lunch ?