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?

Placemarking.
Still reading the last thread with ever-dropping jaw.

Until fairly recently I thought all that "TWAW, No debate" shtick was to avoid scrutiny and to stop the obvious contradictions coming to light.

Then came men in women's sport and the nodding heads just delegated the issue - "its up to individual associations, safety and fairness" bla bla bla.

But after today I realise that both of these aren't actual tactics. They are the natural result of the architects of your cult having sponge moppets for brains.

They really aren't very bright are they?

Do we think the dog was under the table thinking 'I'm not a vet but I know what a dog is!'

I bet the dog is GC. Mammals are generally excellent at determining which sex other mammals of the same species are. It wouldn't be a winning evolutionary strategy otherwise .

Do you recall the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics and how utterly deranged it sounded when you tried to describe it because it was genuinely something that you needed to see? (I recall some US friends trying to describe it and people wondering if the time difference had made them delirious.)

I was unable to attend the hearings at all today but KM's appearance seems to have been like that. It defies merely reading a text because the whole thing would seem every PoMo, political stereotype going if it had not genuinely happened.

I'm hoping for support Meerkats.

Like Terf Cat.

I note that KM uses they/him pronouns and is addressed as 'Mr'.

Is KM a transwoman or a transman?

You're welcome. I was going to put a sub heading of The one after all the support, but I thought I better not. 😄

I believe KM identifies as non binary

I am really really shocked that Alison lost her job because of this idiot. I'm baffled that he had that much sway in the minds of highly intelligent, highly educated adults.

His mum, support worker and support dog.🙃

Baffled

Thank you.

I also see (from Twitter, unfortunately can't find the thread now) that the position to which KM was appointed was advertised in 2019 with a salary of around £44k.

Found this
www.charityjob.co.uk/jobs/stonewall/head-of-trans-inclusion/644368

"Your role will be to deliver our strategy for trans equality, Vision for Change. Written by our Trans Advisory Group, it’s based on our shared mission: that trans people have the right to live full and authentic lives at work, home and in public."

Jesus wept. When women are struggling to decide whether to feed their kids or heat their homes. How could someone this divorced from reality get this kind of high-paying job? Oh yes, maybe it has something to do with sex-based pay gap, which only benefits one of the two sexes.

I'm fairly sure it's on record that AB, as a barrister, earned significantly less than 44k during a year working for GCC. I will have to go and look it up.

Anyone who requests 3 support beings to give evidence presumably has additional needs

Presumably they were behaving according to their strongly-held beliefs.

Stonewall and Garden Court are accused here, not this individual.

If it's arrant nonsense, then all the more embarrassing that GC chambers were captured.

From that job description...

You’ll be a strong public speaker, with experience of being a spokesperson for your organisation.

Ha ha ha ha!

Does anyone know the rules on support animals and support people in a court room? I know friends may come to the public gallery as a friendly face, but I’d assume there’d need to be a verifiable reason to have them sat next to you?

I’m very pro support people/animals as a reasonable adjustment, but it doesn’t seem as though there was any sort of process before KM was given a blanket “yes” to whatever he requested.

To be fair, I don't know of any other job where you need to divorce reality and spout this idiocy so they have probably earned their wage.

Sorry that should have been ideology not idiocy. 🙄

Emotional support animals do not have the same legal recognition as assistance dogs.

Freudian slip? 😀

I'm going to disagree that 44k is a high salary for someone who is 'Head of' (Trans Inclusion). I appreciate that the charity sector may pay less than other sectors but in the public sector for example, 44k would be middle management at most.

In the public sector you wouldn't have a huge amount of responsibility for that salary. Anyone who is Head of a section or area of delivery would be on 60/70k+

Strikes me that the role is either very underpaid or the job title is very trumped up compared with the actual duties of the role.

Typically biased piece from the BBC

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-61382650

I note they have not reported on this afternoon's proceedings - I wonder why

Potato potahto!