Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 4

[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)

Witness Statement of Allison Bailey: allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Witness-Statement-of-Allison-Bailey.pdf

Kirrin Medcalf's complaint to GCC: allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/PH-Bundle-pp-331-2-Stonewall-Complaint.pdf

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

Thread 3 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4545725-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-3?

Yes

Clearly he was expecting the sign off to be Fuck You Very Much.

Off topic but I’m another agility person (non competitive at the moment, just can’t make it work with two young kids). Perhaps the ring is a secret GC hotbed, and we need a signal. Mumsnet scarf anyone?

Or seemingly have no filter like MG.

Patronising or what?

Yes so do I, basic politeness goes without saying, even when there is a problem.

Always thought it was not a great idea as a barrister to start to get on the judge's nerves.

EJ yet again having trouble with all the different bundles. Not able to find a page (along with everyone else).

I think it was IO and RW that did them, forgive me if that is incorrect, but next time I hope they have a competent person to check their work. It really has been appalling and there have been many many complaints about it.

Patronising or what?

Presumably it's just his barrister cross-examination style.
He'd be utterly intolerable if he speaks to people like that in every day life.

The "emotional support dog" v "Assistance Dog" is a thread worthy topic in its own right, to me. Unfortunately the Equality Act is somewhat woolly (see example below), and there are no proper registration schemes/licensing etc.

The Equality Act 2010, (EA2012 section 1733_) lays out that in relation to protecting the rights of disabled people accessing private hire transport, an Assistance dog means
(a) a dog which has been trained to guide a blind person;
(b) a dog which has been trained to assist a deaf person;
(c) a dog which has been trained by a prescribed charity to assist a disabled person who has a disability that consists of epilepsy or otherwise affects the person’s mobility, manual dexterity, physical coordination or ability to lift, carry or otherwise move everyday objects;
(d) a dog of a prescribed category which has been trained to assist a disabled person who has a disability (other than one falling within paragraph (c)) of a prescribed kind.

This allows for people to claim their own dog has been trained to give emotional support etc for a disability. No proof/certificates etc required. I believe this is exploited (not always deliberately, sometimes naively in that "my dog is such a support to me, he makes a difference to my life etc). I think this "dilutes" the whole concept of Assistance dogs. (I'll do another post as MN keeps losing mine!)

I would say especially when there is a problem.

I don't know why they don't all just mute unless they are speaking. You can't think properly when all you can hear is your own voice coming back at you.

Ear Muffs for everyone would surely correct the problem.

Yes, this tribunal has been plagued by technical issues with the set up and with the preparation of the bundles. Very annoying, distracting and time-consuming for the participants and observers.

I’m only following tweets sporadically (though I do try to read back) but not convinced she is coming across all that well, which is disappointing. Are you all sure she’s not being successfully painted as unreasonable?

I wouldn't say it's successful. But that is what they are attempting to do.

I don't think so. I also think if she were a Man, her forthright manner would be applauded.

They suspect someone is live feeding the hearing.

Just checked the law in Ireland re self training
"For an animal to be recognised as a Service Dog it must be fully trained and registered with one of the following or an international equivalent: Irish Guide Dogs For The Blind. Dogs For The Disabled (Cork)"

So it's harder to get a accreditation to show you dog is fully trained than it is to get a GRC over here. Gotta laugh or else you would cry.

... 'If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you ...'

Allison kept her head and was civil in the face of deeply unpleasant and dishonest behaviour

In the UK, over 1000 people a year die from epilepsy.

The criteria from the Support Dogs company to be able to have a trained epilepsy dog who can detect seizures etc is this:

1. You should have a confirmed diagnosis of epilepsy. You should keep accurate seizure diaries.
2. You should have at least 10 major seizures per month. Major seizures are defined as tonic clonic/atonic or complex partials, but not including nocturnal seizures.
3. Applicants must not have any changes to their medication six months prior to the information day and throughout the assessment and training period of a dog.
4. You must be over the age of 16.

5. You should have someone who is able to act as your carer available through the 6 month training process. This could be a friend or a family member and is to provide additional support to you and the dog during the training process. For example checking to ensure the dog is responding and acting in the way it will have been trained to immediately before and after your seizures. 6. home to ensure the dog’s needs can be met at all times. You should be capable of providing or have adequate support at

1. It is not always possible to place a seizure alert dog in a home where there is another household member who also has epilepsy.
2. It is not possible to place a seizure alert dog in a home where there is already a pet dog.
3. All applicants will be considered regardless of race, sex, religion, creed, age or any other categories protected by law.

10. You cannot have your own pet dog trained.

Compare and contrast!

It's not an easy process, there are very strict criteria for people whose lives are at risk. These dogs are intensively trained and literally can be life saving.

I believe lots of pets genuinely give emotional support, I loved my rabbit a lot and he helped my mental health immeasurably, but I didn't carry him round everywhere on those grounds!

Diluting the concept of assistance dogs by claiming "emotional support" just fucks over disabled people whose assistance dogs can be life saving etc.

They are going to kick everyone out at this rate.

I’ve done some work with assistance dogs in the past. As a rule of thumb if a dog is an assistance dog you’ll be able to describe the task the dog has been trained to perform.

eg - my assistance dog has been trained to recognise the signs of, signal a warning and interrupt a panic attack.

vs

my emotional support dog is a real comfort when I’m having a panic attack.

Sorry I don't want to derail the thread, I might start another elsewhere!

About Allison's income falling dramatically and no explanation given as to why. I think the figures are very persuasive - her income fell off a cliff from one calendar year to the next. And no comparator barrister experienced anywhere near the decrease Allison did.
I find that very persuasive and would think the opponents would have to prove some other compelling reasons why. I think that the figures presented if true are enough to persuade, in the absence of any other evidence.
There are many planks to this case as other have pointed out, but I think Allison's case looks strong so far on this point.

They're going to chuck us out.