Jo Phoenix: case management meeting today

[Pluvia]

Jo Phoenix is a criminologist who was bullied and harassed out of her job at the OU for her views on sex and gender. She has an Employment Tribunal (with Ben Cooper representing her) in the pipeline.

I'm wishing Jo well today because she has her case management preliminary hearing, at which the date will be set for the tribunal. Today's the day when everything becomes concrete and financial commitments are made.

I notice Jo's garden's been looking a little untended. If anyone wants to help with the landscaping they just have to google Jo's name to find the location.

@Thamesis No it always has a zero balance when asking for banking confirmation.

Just confirm at zero and your donation will go through.

Thanks @ickky , you're right. And there's a big coloured note telling me so 😁

Thamesis it wouldn't let me donate, I tried twice (and the amount the second time had changed somehow) - message was to contact my bank. Bit odd.

Dug, good luck to her

Good Luck Jo. Have donated and will be following your case with interest.

Thanks for the reminder, a good day to do a bit of digging.

Best of luck, Jo

Cheering you on Jo - and wishing you a lovely garden to win from.

Too hot to dig .. but lovely weather for gardening.

Time to water those tomatoes before it gets too hot!

Anyone know what happened at the case management meeting? (I see the gardening link has been ?automatically extended btw.)

I’ve name changed for obvious reasons but I work at Reading and I’m immensely proud of how the VC has made clear a commitment to freedom of speech and academic freedom.

I hope other middle-ranking universities are listening and use this as a means of strengthening their reputation. I know two families where universities such as Bristol, Brighton and Cardiff, hotbeds of trans activism, have been ruled out. Their children have encountered bullying at school for not cheering loudly enough for the trans cause. I'll make a point of mentioning Reading to them.

What's the atmosphere like at Reading, Readingtonian? Is there much trans activism or does it fade away once it's not given full focus?

Namechanger here too for obvious reasons.

My son is just about to graduate from Reading. He is very compassionate about people caught up in unhappiness about their minds and bodies. At the same time he loathes the whole 'gender ideology crap', and says he was given the intellectual space at Reading to able to think and express this without being vilified.

He says it probably helped that he was studying a science subject with a stong biology component. He ran an unrelated student society affiliated with the Student Union and said they seemed 'ok' too, not particularly captured.

In other words, Reading University apparently allows its students to believe that humans are a sexually dimorphic species, that sex and gender are not the same thing, and that freedom of expression is vital.

It's not a Russell Group university (overrated hype anyway) but it is very highly regarded and many of its departments are top class. And the Whiteknights campus is really lovely.

And the Whiteknights campus is really lovely.

It really is

What's the atmosphere like at Reading, Readingtonian? Is there much trans activism or does it fade away once it's not given full focus?

Well, there was a protest recently about a guest lecturer and it seemed largely peaceful (mostly people sitting on the grass having a picnic with their banners, from what I heard) but I think there were complaints about the lecture having taken place and various accusations that the University had broken its own rules, broken the law, made a hostile environment etc. There was a full investigation and statement about it here: www.reading.ac.uk/news/2022/University-News/VC-comment-strengthen-freedom-and-support

And there was an issue a few years ago where Rosa Freedman was targeted by students.

But other than that I can't say it's an issue I hear or see a lot about.

Done

ProJo posted on twitter that the hearing will be on 2nd October 2023, not sure if that a typo or not, seems a long time to wait.

The OU are calling 18 witnesses, this will bump up costs and has lengthened the hearing by 5 days, so it's going to be 15 days now.

twitter.com/JoPhoenix1/status/1537344376963219456

Disappointed by the OU (I'm a graduate).

Planted a little.

Thanks for the update ickky. I bet the Oct 23 date is right. Well, more time for gardening and at that rate a lot of gardening will probably be required. We could do with some good news from the MF and/or AB hearings in the meantime... Here's hoping.

Update from Jo Phoenix about the state of the allotment

On June 13th, I virtually attended my ‘case management preliminary hearing’. These are administrative hearings overseen by an Employment Judge where all parties deal with the issues that need clarifying, agree a schedule for all the various processes that happen prior to the actual hearing and agree a date for the hearing. In cases involving discrimination, it is not atypical for employers to ask for a preliminary hearing to establish whether the protected status that the claimant is claiming (in my case protected belief) falls within the Equality Act 2010. Fortunately, The Open University have agreed that my beliefs are covered so there is no need for such a preliminary hearing.
My case will be a face to face hearing that starts on 2nd October 2023 in Watford Employment Tribunal. The Judge reminded everyone present that Employment Tribunals are public hearings which means members of the public can attend. Once I find out a little more about this and we get closer to the date, I will provide an update that includes instructions on how to attend if you are interested in watching the proceedings.

The less good news. What I thought (and budgeted for) would be a total of 10 days of hearing is now scheduled for 15 days, largely because The Open University are calling 18 witnesses.
18 witnesses.
The present schedule is that I am likely to be on the stand for 2 days. The Open University will be presenting their 18 witnesses across 7 days of hearing.
We are a long way out, the schedule can change and the final ‘cast list’ can change too.
The last few weeks has had me thinking about access to justice. As far as I understand it, employment tribunals were designed to be a way of providing employees access to justice for unfair treatment by being a low cost court. Yet, for me, all I see is that The Open University has a total income of £561.5M and an adjusted operating surplus of £52.1 million. Deep pockets. It got me thinking about whether and to what extent huge organisations like these – perhaps even The Open University – consciously deploy a strategy of economic intimidation against claimants. As I see it, the cost of this legal battle is small fry in the grand scheme of The Open University’s budget but for me the prospects that the tribunal is going to cost even more because it is now 15 days is worrying.
Without your donations, I would not have been able to bring this case. Without your donations, we wouldn’t be able to establish in law where the line between harassment and discrimination and academic freedom is. There is still time, but I am asking once again for donations. It makes sense to me that The Open University and their lawyers might be watching this crowdjustice fund. It would make sense to me that their lawyers may well be making calculations based on their assessment of how much this case will cost me and what stomach they think I will have to take the risk that the support is not there. Please help me show them (just in case they were thinking about it) that economic intimidation is not a strategy that is going to work in this case.

If you can send her some veg it would be a good thing....

It got me thinking about whether and to what extent huge organisations like these – perhaps even The Open University – consciously deploy a strategy of economic intimidation against claimants.

That's been plain for some time: Allison Bailey and Rachel Meade are examples of this and I know there are others. It feels intentional and it's notable that there are some common personnel involved for cases where the costs escalate.

Thank you for the update. Will dig a little further.

thank you ! I'll try and bump this at the end of next week when more people will have been paid and might feel a bit more flush

Thank you for the update.

You are quite right. It has become a quite bare faced strategy for well funded large organisations to try and prevent individuals from having access to justice to resist their actions, and it is going to have to be addressed as it is now being so vigorously and purposefully exploited. I wonder if this is something to raise with MPs and with women's groups such as FPFW as women are being particularly targeted to prevent them defending their rights.

Something about large organisations, particularly those in receipt of public funding, being required when extending proceedings to fund their opponent to be able to respond perhaps.

Interesting point about access to justice - I wonder if it needs to be looked at from a legislative point of view, how are the current tactics, which must be allowable under the legislation,in effect denying access to justice.

I wonder who, if anyone, is doing this work, and should there be JR on this, I'd also be willing to throw any leftover carrots that way