Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 5

[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 please choose a non inflammatory/offensive name, everyone can see it in the chat - This is a court room, please behave accordingly.

The court chat function is there for official court purposes, not for observers, please don't use it unless you have a technical issue.

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, senior counsel - barrister for SW
RW = Robin White junior counsel to SW - assisting IO
GC = Garden Court Chambers Limited (respondent 2) (GCC would be a better abbreviation)
AH = Andrew Hochhauser QC, senior counsel - barrister for GC
JR = Jane Russell junior counsel to GC - 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

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

Thread 4 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4546945-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-4

Have paragraphs disappeared along with comments on quotes?

I keep thinking of Saul Goodman...

'support olive' PandorasMailbox 😂

Only on the iOS app. MNHQ are aware of it and trying to fix it. It's ok on the browser.

Best comment of the thread goes to @PandorasMailbox 😂

The ‘Stonewall Sling’ definitely has one part bitters.

Or is that the ‘Long Slow Uncomfortable Screw-You Courtesy Of Stonewall’?

So Knan and someone else, a Mr ...., for Stonewall on Monday, I didn't quite catch the name, did anyone else?

Yeah. Just found him too. Sanjay Sood-Smith.

Sorry, missed this, thank you!

I appreciate that it's Friday and UK women are tucking in to a nice Gender-on-the-Beach or similar, but quick question from an American:

What is the logic behind the rule that only the respondent(s) in an ET get to call witnesses?

I don't really understand why, having passed the threshold that Allison's case is good enough to be heard in court, BC can't call whichever witnesses he deems necessary.

TT - Tribunal Tweets I think is what was said

The Bundle with a support Olive, therapy stir stick and a little Stonewall umbrella.

Sorted. One sip of this kool aid and you won't know if you're a man woman or moon rock.

Oh? Is he Oliver Postgatey. Thank you. That's lovely!

Now when I read the tweets I'll be able give him OPs gentle reassuring voice.

Yes. I missed the start of his evidence and had no idea who he was - I was shocked to then gather as he spoke that he had been one of the HoCs during the whole sorry saga. He seems to have paid little attention to details or shown the proper level of curiosity before making crucially important decisions, and his excuse of travelling/being busy doesn't cut it for me.

Bring it on! BC will have him for breakfast.

Then you add different proportions of different spirits and liqueurs to different glasses, and snap at people if they can't taste the flavour which is predominant in yours.

Stonewall umbrella - perfection

And coming across as defensive, petulant, and aggressive in the process. I find it surprising given his legal background - it's as though his outraged self-importance has eclipsed any professional instinct to manage how he presents himself
Yes - you have articulated exactly the feeling I got whilst watching him testify

Good question, I would like to know too. In maya's and this tribunal the claimant called expert witnesses from outside, but they obviously couldn't call anyone from the defendent organisation. The fact that maya's employer did not call someone who was quite key (a woman in the American office) was interesting, and maybe looked bad, but maya didn't have the option of calling her instead.

I think the issue is that you can't cross-examine your own witnesses. So it may not be that helpful to call Stonewall employees for AB's side, as BC wouldn't be able to cross examine them.

LT's autobiography "Do Right and Fear No-one" was published less than a month ago. He has dedicated his career to fighting injustice and representing people with cases against the police and the state.
It's a real shame for whatever reason, he was unable to see the injustice Allison was enduring at GCC at the time.

Ultimately you can only call witnesses who are willing to turn up. The respondent sort of has to, and the defendent has to if they want to defend their case. Anyone else? Basically voluntary.

If you're suing Stonewall, why would a Stonewall employee agree to give evidence on your behalf? An ex-employee, disgruntled, with bridges burned, maybe. But I'm betting, in most cases, most of your former coworkers are either firmly keeping their heads down or actively defending your claim.

Sorry, that should read 'the claimant sort of has to...' It's been a long day.

All of this. He didn't pay attention to detail (astonishing in a barrister, really) and thought Allison would just accept their stitch up like a good little girl. And even now, knowing a bit more about the case, lacks the self awareness to truly acknowledge that he, and all his fellow HoC's, erred Allison massively.

Zero grace, and a shame for someone who obviously likes to think of himself as a do gooder.

Brilliant 🤣🤣🍷🍷🍸🍷🍸🍷

Re witnesses:

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1032803/consolidated-rules-october-2021.pdf

here are the employment tribunal rules (neatly proving my point above that I try to find these things out!)

The Tribunal can compel a witness to give evidence. In practice I think that is rarely used because they could, if they wanted to, just stand there and say ‘I don’t remember’.