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

You win the internet today, or yesterday. Whichever day you posted. I'm still catching up.
Was hoping for support mums and dogs, but been disappointed up to now.
Thanks all for posting, I'm working extra and missing the live action.

I've seen this picture getting liked a lot by TRA's on twatter, surely it's in support of Allison?

Am I missing something?

I read it as sarcastic

No. If you use Google Lens to search, you'll see it's a meme and they've replaced a man's head with hers.

Read about the man in the picture here.

BuzzFeed Video tracked down “Harold”—a retired electrical engineer from Hungary named András Arató—to get the full story behind those stock photos of a man drinking coffee and checking the computer with a forced smile on his face. As it turns out, Arató was drawn into the world of stock modeling about 10 years ago after a photographer who “was seeking a character like me” noticed his selfies. Arató was such a great subject that he was requested again and again, slipping into roles as diverse as doctor and professor to painter and “husband.”

www.avclub.com/meet-the-charming-man-behind-the-hide-the-pain-harold-1844051062

England/Wales/Scotland/Northern Ireland
United Kingdom
Britain
Great Britain
United Kingdom of Great Britain
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
United Kingdom of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

No, not at all complicated!

Easiest way to tidy that up is to fix GB in kids heads as geography. It's an island, Little Britain is actually Brittany (Bretagne and Grande Bretagne)

Isle of Man, the Island of Ireland and Jersey, Guernsey are not Great Britain (GB as a sporting team in eg the Olympics is a bit rubbish therefore.)

So that's how you get to GB and NI.

Then you break down the big island into England, Scotland, Wales. Quick look at the Union Jack and the national flags. Why is there no dragon miss?

Act of Union 1801, whistle-stop through Irish land-owners, potato famine, refugees to the US, sectarian violence and bloody Sunday, Good Friday Agreement, Brexit and oh is that the bell?

No, not at all complicated!

I do bang on about it a bit, because if you don’t know the proper actual name of the country you live in, it’s unlikely that you’ll understand how it’s governed, its legal system and so on.
I’ve been teaching adults for the last 8 years and found very many people who are perfectly intelligent and capable of going around their daily business successfully don’t, for example, properly understand our electoral system, what Parliament and Government do and the difference between them, how laws are made, the roles of the Commons and Lords etc etc. They feel and are disempowered and disengaged. If I were a cynical person I’d say this was deliberate and suits the powers that be very well.

Yes they do. And they will have had to pay collectively for their legal fees too.

TRAs never have any idea whether a court case is going well because they have zero self awareness and frequently rely on people for their information who don't really know what they are talking about but like the sound of their own voices (like many male people). If Allison loses altogether they will crow about it, if she is conceded anything at all the Twitter meltdown will be epic.

Yes they do. And they will have had to pay collectively for their legal fees

I think this was part of GCC's argument for strikeout, that it was vexatious and would affect all of GCC. The judge disagreed.

Disagreed that it was vexatious, and that it had no prospect of success, and allowed it to proceed.

Do start a new thread on it to educate us but yes it is complicated. But don't make out that intelligent people are not intelligent because they don't understand the complicated and obviously confusing and contorted legal structure of the country and/or countries that British people have to live with. Because it isn't a sign of 'unintelligence' to not understand the complexities of a complex convoluted system.

Because it isn't a sign of 'unintelligence' to not understand the complexities of a complex convoluted system.

Thats not what I was saying. But never mind.

Returning to the tribunal - has GCC made any attempt to settle at any point, does anyone know?

Only Allison would be able to tell you that. Offers to settle tend to be without prejudice. However, I doubt Allison would accept anything that’s not an admission of liability and I doubt GCC would admit liability. Even if she was successful, I don’t think she’ll be looking at a large amount of money in compensation. Nothing like the legal fees for this case. I guess she’s not doing it for the money, it’s more about the principle but her career at the Bar will be more or less finished by the end of this, unless she decides to work for herself rather than in a set of chambers.

Reading about his evidence reminds me of another courtroom scene:

”We follow Stonewall, Ben. We follow Stonewall or people die. It’s that simple. Are we clear?”
”Yessir.”
”Are we CLEAR?”
”Crystal.”

@Actoncurrerellis I missed the joke - where is that from?

I have a question: say Allison wins her case and is awarded compensation/damages for her loss of earnings. Who pays on behalf of GCC? Like all Chambers, it’s a collective of self-employed barristers. Do they all have to dig into their own pockets?
Yes they do. And they will have had to pay collectively for their legal fees too.

I had no idea. Surely a few of them at least must be pretty fed up with what has happened and the implications for them? I'd have been inclined to jump ship and find new chambers long before this came to court.

It's a reference to something Jack Nicholson says in "a few good men". He's a comic book colonel snottily, patronsingly beating up on a youthful Tom Cruise.

Thanks, I recognise the coffee drinking guy now i've seen the original, I always thought it was a joke about older people using computers.

Yes, I remember them claiming the Maya win wasn't really a win, as she still had to keep her belief to herself, since expressing it would amount to harassment. Such binary thinking. Ironically.

When actually the Maya win is incalculably valuable. And has led to Allison being able to sue Stonewall and her chambers.

Every single time the lid is lifted on this ideology and papers report it, it's a win.

No matter what the decision of the tribunal, it's already a win.

Transactivist facts are facts.

Presumably they have insurance for things like this?

Transactivist facts are facts

There's a podcast floating about the internet in which KM talks about trans rights in the workplace - 'a matter of life or death'. Let’s just say a bingo card would be filled up very quickly, should you have one to hand. Complete with gratuitous dissing of JKR.

(I have no idea which, if any, support humans or animals might have been present while said podcast was being recorded)

TRAs attempts to 'steal' the word woman to mean women and any man who wants access to their spaces is an assault on women as it prevents a proper discussion of their needs and thoughts and of misogyny.

Similarly, calling everyone transphobes when they don't comply with the above demands is an assault on transpeople as it prevents a proper discussion about genuine transphobia - i.e. when you make it a term to insult anyone who does not think TWAW you have no term left for people who refuse to employ someone because their trans or rent a house to them because they're trans.

These TRAs are the transphobes as well as the femphobes.

I suppose they must have insurance @JulesRimetStillGleaming though my experience of these types of insurance is the insurers keep a close eye on proceedings and don't simply open the cheque book.