Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 8

[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

Thread 7 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4551757-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-7

How could anyone state that women wouldn't be scared to speak out when THIS is the result of what happens when you do?

What bigger example do you need to play out for women, particularly younger or junior members of your workplace, to know that the must not ever even express their discomfort with GI?

Exactly, Necessary.
Someone scared to voice their opinions would keep that to themselves, wouldn't they??

I'm 'scared' to say anything about the Stonewall shite at work, so i keep my powder dry.

Similarly if all the clerks knew AB was out of favour then they wouldn't need to be told not to give her work, they would just 'know' that it wasn't considered desirable to encourage good briefs to be sent her way.

Indeed, and so I think teasing out the attitudes of senior people is key.

BC: u were angry about allegations?
JK: of course I was upset

Allison was angry, not upset, but Judy Kahn was upset, not angry.....

Her statement that is it patronising to women to say that they would be scared of speaking out is so revealing. She does not understand how structural discrimination works.
(Its exactly the same as when critics of CRT say that it is patronising to black Americans to say that their chances of academic and professional success are lower than white Americans)

But how do these things tally, JK? Either the barristers of GCC are fearless and able to say whatever they think without concern for the vicious response of trans activists, OR it’s obvious that AB’s comments (which were statements of facts and her considered opinion) were too provocative to be made on Twitter.

Which is it?

Was SH down to be next?

The contrast in the way she is responding to AH's questions compared to her waffly evasive approach to BCs questions is really stark. And, I'm sure is not going unnoticed by the panel.

She seems to find it easier to grasp what the question is and find pages, too.

The utter irony of JK saying that GCC women would not be afraid to speak their miinds, when this very trial is what happens when AB spoke her mind, is absolutely mind-boggling and shameful

Watching the body language of these witnesses is fascinating. I have made a mental note to literally sit on my hands should I ever find myself in the witness box.
Even if you have a good poker face, hands and particularly feet are the most difficult to control (something to do with being extremities of the body) and likely to give the most obvious 'tells' about an individual's thoughts or feelings.

It’s possible (and I think probable) but we’ll hear from the clerks today.

Oh I (incorrectly) assumed court wouldn't run becasue of AH not being available. I was HOPING to get some work done this afternoon.

Whatever, nevermind - bring on the clerks!

JR taking over as I thought.

I agree, it is almost like it's a different person.

Charlie Tennant, Luke Harvard, Louise Hooper - next witnesses.

That's the end of JK's evidence.

AH departing.

Resuming at 11.40 with Jane Russell. Charlie Tennant, someone else, and then Louise Hooper.

Order of witnesses

Charlie Tennent
Luke Harvey
Louise Hooper

Charlie Tennant, Luke Harvey and Louise Hooper are up next in that order. I think they are all GCC clerks.

BC did make the point earlier that AH has a junior who could have re-examined JK. He was very reluctant to cut short his questioning.

The cross-examination of the clerks is going to be interesting. Were they, at a key nexus of gossip, being clerks who tend to love a discreet gossip, who always have their eyes and ears open to facilitate the smooth operation of chambers, aware there was a massive row and that AB was at the centre of it?

Do we know when Michelle Brewer will be?

Yes and when women do speak out she labels what they're saying as deliberately provocative. That they would have known they'd get a bad reaction. Doesn't add up at all to me.

AH questioning JK about "tweets replying to GCC" - I hope to goodness that someone tells BC (who doesn't use Twitter) that at least some of them were not replies to GCC but were replies to replies to GCC.

Next witness:
Charlie Tennent Clerk at GCC
www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk/clerks-and-staff/charlie-tennent
"Charlie joined chambers in May 2014 as Crime Practice Manager, having spent 7 years at another leading criminal set.
He is responsible for heading up the Crime Clerking Team. His day to day responsibilities involve developing the practices of the Crime members, fee negotiation, allocation of work and has pride in ensuring solicitors get a high quality service.
Outside of Chambers, Charlie enjoys travelling, socialising with friends and is a Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder."

First time I’ll have managed to see JR in action. She seems very far away….