Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 7

[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

Thread 6 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4550451-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-6

They all have phones. And google. It's just absolute rubbish that they aren't aware. I can believe that before AB brought it to their attention that they didn't know, but there's just no excuse for not looking in to what she was actually trying to say. It's easy enough.

And GCC members justify their seemingly discriminatory behaviour against AB by saying they trusted SW, and also they were too busy to look into AB's case properly. Shocking and unforgivable. For a chambers that claims to specialise in human rights - from their website: "Garden Court Chambers is a number one ranked barristers' chambers committed to fighting injustice, defending human rights and upholding the rule of law." Yet they claim not to have had time to deal with AB's case properly to ensure that she was not treated unjustly, with respect for her human rights!

Exactly. I looked up 'MAAB' yesterday. Found out immediately that it was 'Male Assigned At Birth'. It's really easy.

JK admitting that action was taken in proportion to the fuss being made - surely that is an important concession re possible discrimination?

Yes, I'm guessing the 'oh we were all so busy and didn't get around to properly looking into it' doesn't fly if it's a workplace injury. It shouldn't in this case either.

I smell smoke...maybe someone's pants are on fire??

It suggests Chambers was run on the basis of ‘who shouts the loudest’, doesn’t it?

She just said the twitter storm was a direct cause of their reaction. "We only investigated people who were accused of witchcraft!"

How can anyone be expected to deal with anything when they have other things on, and emails are sent on Friday afternoon and what not...

Also for clever people more than capable of critical thought, did they suddenly think it more likely that a highly educated black lesbian had turned into an insufferable bigot, or that just maybe, she might have a point? (I know this has been said before about JKR.)

I think as other PPs have said, it's their only defence. Otherwise they have to say, we knew she had a point, but we bowed to the mob.

So - have I got this straight - they had a white, male employee who is vulnerable and they're using their desire to protect him as a reason why they discriminated against a black, lesbian woman who had health problems and was a child sexual abuse survivor?

How progressive that the white man's vulnerabilities are more important than the black woman's .

Yes, you're right about the time line, it certainly ramped up in the last few years. But i'm pretty sure the times and the mail were reporting on it before then.

Janice Turner, for one, has been on board since speakers corner.

We will respond to a bunch of people kicking off on twitter, but not to the very real concerns of one of our own members because she didn't want to use the words 'this is a complaint'. Even though she din't want to make a complaint because she quite rightly knew that such a complaint would have been weaponised against her. She trusted the heads of chambers to act fairly and even handedly with this issue, which she strongly highlighted to them. 'She didn't make a complaint' is a cop out.

I Honestly don't get the pandering on Twitter. That person who got a free dress out of monsoon, for instance. Why? What happens if you just say no?

Yes, you're right about the time line, it certainly ramped up in the last few years. But i'm pretty sure the times and the mail were reporting on it before then.

Janice Turner, for one, has been on board since speakers corner.

Absolutely, but my wokest friends, clever people, who are TWAW, wrinkle their noses at the mere thought of reading the times. It was definitely avoidable pre 2020 -probably JKR "coming out".

But a chambers having to investigate a colleague don't have that excuse! They should have investigated!

I find that if you just say NO, no apology, it usually goes away. If you start pandering, they will be relentless in their pursuit and will not stop until you are utterly defeated.

Just have the courage of your convictions.

As MHL said yesterday. She was of the mind to ignore the daft complaints and they probably would have just gone away.

That was very telling - so emails about opposition to Stonewall membership are 'annoying and irritating' are they? Not reflective of legitimate concern then?

Alison's tweet on, for example, the 'overcoming the cotton ceiling' workshop, was in Sept 2019, and the complaint to GCC from SW was Oct 2019 - so GCC members can claim that they weren't initially aware of the issues back then, though really by then they should have been - HOWEVER, AB explained it to them extensively, and they refused to listen.

I haven’t had much chance to see Ben Cooper’s questioning but today I caught a snippet and wow.

His gentle style brings to mind the quote, “floats like a butterfly; stings like a bee”.

Yes quite, @IDidntKnowItWasAParty . Unforgiveable not to listen to a trusted colleague. It must be that it's their only defence.

Not like BC to get flustered. When he says 'instructions' will that be from AB?

I wonder what the hoc’s response would have been had they been told that a member of chambers was tweeting using another kind of slur, derogatory to another group - a racial slur, for example, or indeed the most obvious pejorative term for a person who identifies as trans.

Would they have just ignored that, as long as there wasn’t a Twitter storm about it?

I very much doubt it.

Of course, the fact is that there would have been a Twitter storm about any other group being labelled with a pejorative slur, and that in itself shows what a vulnerable, unprotected minority openly GC women are - the kind of group that as a “progressive” set, GCC should have been doing its utmost to safeguard. If they had the kind of integrity and courage that Allison has.

DH caught a snippet and said, "There's someone who knows how to place a stiletto blade so you don't know you're bleeding until later."

JK is gender critical, isn’t she? Nearly everyone is.