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

They are accepting (and LT is guilty of this too) that she is ‘strong’ and ‘invulnerable’, and that has overtones that are inappropriate.

Slightly off-topic, but I sometimes wonder what would happen if some of us who are deemed ‘strong’ and ‘invulnerable’ in the workplace were to start to articulate how we actually feel, when under threat. Or required to support others, or see others supported when we are not (eg the multiple supports for KM).

Ms Bailey is telling us what it's like, and the horrible circumstances in which her colleagues deemed her "strong and invulnerable." I think this is something really important to reflect on.

Nice one!

😂

<thumbs up>

I agree @ExMachinaDeus. It's especially galling for those of us who have been trying to pretend that all is ok and falling apart at home only to know that you only had to whisper support dog to get everyone falling all over themselves to help (which I actually know is a load of rubbish as when I have declared my disability, I've been expected to just suck it up and get on with it like everyone else).

If you would like to use it, please do - I'm starting to get used to "Properlypaginatedbundle" and will probably keep it now - I just got a bit wistful . . .

(Why is there no snake emoji?)

It only works for men/ transmen

If women show an ounce of weakness, one of two things happens:

a) they are pounced upon and abused because of their emotional softness

b) they are pounced upon and vilified because they are emotionally manipulative

(which I actually know is a load of rubbish as when I have declared my disability, I've been expected to just suck it up and get on with it like everyone else).

That is such a common experience. There is no valorisation for making accommodations for boring, everyday disabilities. Almost no large employer is willing to consider the flexibility that would allow people to stay in post and deliver a full working week.

There are no attractive decals for meeting the needs of people with disabilities. No lanyards, badges, awards for allyship, bling to put on the CV that can be parlayed into attractive job opportunities. Just the relentless grind of meeting our needs and integrating that into team management while embedding it into the organisation.

(Why is there no snake emoji?)

🐍 🐍 🐍 It is a striking MN omission (I got mine from Chrome).

If you are strong it is a price we have to pay really. It is the same on line. Some weak people who get upset easily complain to websites all the itme about posts and those posts are taken down. Those who never complain, put up with things or simply support freedom of speech are not really known about by the websites pulling posts because they don't complain. Hard issue to resolve in lots of contexts.

Because if we do:

a) we're demonstrating that we don't have the right 'qualities' to be promoted to the board (not bitter about this at all)

b) we're demonstrating, palpably, that we're weak and can't cope

... and then when the inevitable happens and we fall apart more publicly:

c) we're patronised for not being emotionally intelligent enough to recognise that we should have asked for help, and that asking for help demonstrates our own internal strengths.

d) we're demonstrating that we're not functioning properly as a member of the team, and that team members are always there to help others

Amongst other things.

🐍

There is one in safari too!

🍸... along with a support olive

Buggerit!

I'm being a viper!

🐍 🐍 🐍

they are pounced upon and vilified because they are emotionally manipulative

Yes @Properlypaginatedbundle I've seen men get quite angry in committee meetings: slight thumping of tables, going red, tone of voice etc. Not overtly angry ranting, but enough to see there is emotion there.

But if a woman were to start to cry ... you know, the slight wobble in the voice, extreme blinking back of tears, a bit shay. Well, THAT is manipulation. Men being angry isn't emotion, it's reason & reasonable.

There's some interesting feminist scholarly work done by Alison Jaggar [sp?] on the sexual politics of emotion.

I think it is easy to forget how far we have moved back from the brink. Each case, win or lose, makes people question the imposed orthodoxy. We have the Cass review, RRS has it on record that she was bullied and let down, everyone knows Sonia Appleby’s concerns. No debate doesn’t work for a cross examination under oath. Government’s have been held to account, the role of lobby groups exposed. Stealth attempts to change the meaning of women in the census, by the FCA, in sport have all been exposed and challenged.
Women have said no, Lesbians have said no, Gay men have said no. Hard won rights will not be spirited away in the fog of #Be Kind.

Government’s decision makers

Make mine a double

Support olive - brilliant 🤩

Ever heard a man described as “strident” no matter how forceful he is being?

Thank you

😬

If you don't fancy anything that would be served with a support olive, a Stonewall umbrella or a twizzly shit-stirrer, I suggest a Claimant: a shot of Baileys, neat, cool and perfectly measured.

In case anybody cares (I doubt it), that's not me being esv.

I find a Venn Diagram helps - like this one

Must admit, I thought of Allison yesterday when I used one of my Baileys glasses (they have the logo on). Sadly it only had water in it, but I'll use one tonight for a Claimant or two while watching Eurovision. Cheers!

Thanks - I'll look that author up. (I've changed me name again 😁)

Tonight I'll be drinking margaritas- made with the salty tears of TRA support dogs.