Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 6

[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

Thread 5 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4548160-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-5

The reasonable adjustments made were shorter breaks, coloured paper for the bundles and ensuring that questions were put succinctly. Did they say it was related to vulnerability? I probably nodded off at that point. I can't understand why those adjustments would mean that a barrister can't treat them in the same way as any other witness.

SK is a football in these proceedings. BC wants to get evidence of the cooperation between SW and GCC, AH wants to get evidence that Michelle Brewer did SK's bidding rather than taking the initiative herself, and for IO, SK isn't an employee of Stonewall, or representing them, so won't be much exercised on SK's behalf.

I wonder how SK was persuaded to climb into the bearpit when it's only for others' benefit?

Yes, that's how I see it.

but yes it is a pain and also not being able to select a page to go direct to in a long thread.

Yes, that's a pain in the arse!

On laptop, you can edit the url. So at the end it says page=11, and you can just change 11 to whatever page number you want to go to.

But I can't do that on mobile, so I hope they'll bring the box back! 😭

Doesn't remember having those emotions? What?

I have, with no problem at all, just by clicking in the link in the email... don't know whether or opened in chrome, but it worked straightaway, including video.

Thanks for the new thread @ickky and thank you to everyone keeping it updated.

Even my support olive is completely agog.

Do you know what to do if your bookmarks aren't working?

Mine never work. I usually end up a page or two before my bookmark, and have to scroll.

Just thinking about my DD who would need those adjustments. She also has poor instant memory recall and would get easily flustered in fast paced questioning. Would need time to process question, formulate answer, and give it. May well forget relevant information until prompted.

That said, she isn't in a job that enables her to screw over other people because of their differing beliefs.

Where would SK get the info that there was a meeting on the Monday, other than from MB?

She must have told SK, unless it is an entirely accurate prediction of future events.

SK now saying he is in no position to contradict MB's witness statement.

When I've been out and about I've used the last link in the access email from the Court:

Guest page: click here

to obtain a webpage giving an option to call in by phone rather than having to enter the video conference.

Quite.

These people are robust enough to do hold influential positions in important organisation.

They should be able to be cross examined in the same way as everybody else (allowing any reasonable adjustments) when it ends up in court.

AH doesn't even need to get out of first gear with SK...

Did AH just misgender Drummond?

Thanks everyone for updating. I can dip in and out and am grateful for the commentary here.

I believe so. Alex is bravely expanding the bandwidth of womanhood

Shock horror - AH broke IO's rules!

He asked SK to read something....a heinous crime. 🤨

Can't get my phone to work. Thanks for updates.

Is Alex Drummond going to be attending? Do we think AD will stick to her principles and keep her beard?

Good question EJ

So SK wouldn't use Terf because we aren't actual feminists like his friends are

EJ asked a good question but may have misunderstood SK. He doesn’t think terf is offensive. He thinks it’s the right thing to call gender critical feminists (except that he doesn’t think we’re feminists).

Yay, EJ is asking the question I hoped BC would ask of SK: how do you use the word TERF now?

Apparently SK realised over the past year, year and a half that TERF is now not good. SK says TERF could be used in an offensive way but he doesn't personally find it offensive. SK simply finds it descriptive.