Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 18

[ickky]

The Tribunal started on 25th April, witness testimony concluded on the 26th May. Closing arguments for council was on the 20th June.

There was 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 )
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 = Judge Goodman, Mr M. Reuby and Ms Darmas

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

Thread 8 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4552521-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-8

Thread 9 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4553181-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-9

Thread 10 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4553754-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-10

Thread 11 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4555145-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-11

Thread 12 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4555687-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-12

Thread 13 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4556235-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-13

Thread 14 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4556407-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-14

Thread 15 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4556803-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-15

Thread 16 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4557036-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-16

Thread 17 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4561850-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-17

Allison Bailey - claimant (4-9, 11-13 May)

Witnesses for the claimant:

Dr Nicola Williams - Fair Play for Women (29 April)
Dr Judith Green - A Woman's Place (29 April)
Kate Barker - LGB Alliance (3 May)
Lisa-Marie Taylor - FiLiA (4 May)

Witnesses for the respondents:

Stephen Lue - barrister for GCC (3-4 May)
Zainab Al-Farabi - ex Stonewall (10 May)
Kirrin Medcalf - head of trans inclusion Stonewall (10 May)
Leslie Thomas - barrister at GCC (13 May)
Sanjay Sood Smith - Stonewall (16 May)
Shaan Knan - LGBT consortium - on STAG (16 May)
Rajiv Menon - joint head of chambers (16-17 May)
Maya Sikand - barrister at GCC (17-18 May)
Mia Hakl-Law - HR senior for GCC (18 May)
Judy Khan - barrister at GCC (19-20 May)
Charlie Tennent - clerk at GCC (20 May)
Luke Harvey - clerk at GCC (20 May)
Louise Hooper - Barrister at GCC (20 May)
David Renton - barrister at GCC (20 May, 25 May)
Marc Willers - Barrister at GCC (23 May)
Stephen Clark - Barrister at GCC (23 May)
Liz Davies - Barrister at GCC (23 May)
Cathryn McGahey - Bar Council Ethics Committee's VC (24 May)
Tom Wainwright - Barrister at GCC (24 May)
Colin Cook - Head clerk at GCC (24 May)
David de Menezes - GCC, Head of Marketing (25 May)
Kathryn Cronin - barrister at GCC (25 May)
Michelle Brewer - barrister at GCC at time, now left and a judge (26 May)
Stephanie Harrison - joint head of chambers (26 May)
Closing arguments for AB, GCC, and SW (20 June)

Allison Bailey's

Witness Statement

allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Witness-Statement-of-Allison-Bailey.pdf

Supplementary Statement

allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/C-Supplementary-Witness-Statement.pdf

Closing Statement

allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/CLOSING-SUBMISSIONS-FINAL.pdf

Yup, the para misattributes the supporting cast to SK and not KM unfortunately.

Not sure if this has been posted but I can't believe Channel 4 News actually covered Allison's win. C4 News are normally stone, cold silent on GC issues while giving long form interviews to the likes of Shon Faye.

Jackie Long looked a bit uncomfortable previewing the story.....but the interview with employment barrister Chris Milsom was really clear.

www.channel4.com/news/allison-bailey-law-chambers-discriminated-against-barrister-with-gender-critical-views-tribunal-rules

Was it on BBC TV news at all. I don't think I've seen it. Glad Ch4 covered it. Very disappointed if the BBC didn't.

It is a bit confusing.

But paragraph 16.:

"Adjustments for disability had been made by E J Stout at an earlier case
management hearing for the witness Kirrin Medcalf . The adjustments were to
help him find text in documents. The tribunal was a little surprised when, as
Shaan Knan was called, a request was made for extra time to make
adjustments. On questioning what these adjustments were, the tribunal was
told that when giving evidence he was to be accompanied by his mother, by a
support worker and by a support dog. Further questioning elicited that the
support worker was an employee of the first respondent’s solicitor, to help with
any IT technical difficulty. Mother and dog were there for moral support. There
was no time to adjourn for a case management hearing, and in any case medical evidence was not available. On the basis that some Garden Court
witnesses had needed help from a technician, that his mother could have sat
near him in a hearing room, and that a dog was unlikely to interfere with
evidence, the adjustments were allowed, on condition the camera position was
moved back so that all three people were visible on screen throughout his
evidence. This was done."

So yes, it is a bit clumsy as to whether referring to Shaan Knan or Kirrin Medcalf.

I think it means, as Shaan Knan was called to testify, a "request was made for extra time to make adjustments" on behalf of Kirrin Mecalf, not Shaan Knan. Not totally clear in that paragraph, though.

Possibly distracted by the support worker + support mum + support dog?

It's there now, but a bit hidden

www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-62328298

It reminds me of when Polgara the Sorceress pronounces on somebody, what she says is one of the worst curses of all: that nobody will ever believe a word they say again. (Niche David Eddings reference).

Now I want to reread the Belgariad, and it takes ages, I've already done it twice.

OK hands up, how many of you raised a glass or two yesterday?

Or was that just me?

I can’t see any mention of it in the Grauniad 🤨

The BBC have managed to report it, but it’s buried at the botttom of UK news.

They’re still not getting it.

Any organisation that takes its LGBT advice solely from Stonewall is now at risk of inadvertently discriminating against particularly its female and lesbian staff, but also its gay and bisexual staff. Stonewall have themselves indicated that they know this, and will not stand over the advice that they give should the company run into trouble.

I think that’s newsworthy!

But maybe that’s why the Graun don’t want to report it.

It certainly reads to me as though the greater adjustments were for Knan, with Medcalf requesting only help to find text in documents.

I never see Belgariad references!!!!

I'm reading some of the 1,200+ comments on the Times threads and there's a helpful TRA (Earl's Court) posting, allowing the informed posters to be able to argue back for the benefit of lurkers. Feels very MN

Are you able to share screenshots, please?

My organisation is on the SW Diversity Champions list of shame and recently redid some of their HR policies to be more inclusive. I did note that the maternity policy retained the word mother but added the extra inclusive bits about other birthing parents, so didn't exclude anyone.
I recall at one point they were completing a 30+ page for SW so wonder if our TRA HR manager that's just left was the main one driving it all and might be a good time to contact HR to advise them that Stonewall advice is illegal. I'll ask Sex Matters if they have a template but they might be a bit busy at the moment

Wombats I'm on my phone so can't fit more than two in at a time so context/threads are lost, sorry!

With inspiration from @NancyDrawed and @IDidntKnowItWasAParty , and with apologies to The Pogues and Kirsty MacColl, I give you…

The Fairytale of Garden Court (abridged)

It was nearly Christmas
In the think tanks
An old lawyer said to me, gonna be a busy one
And then he tried to tweet
But couldn’t work out how
He turned his face away
And read his next big case

They’ve got cars at the Bar
But they still hit a bin
Blame the kids in the back
Is this excuse wearing thin?
When you first sent that email
It was past 1.00 a.m
Better take some advice
From the likes of KM

They’ve a dog
They’ve a mum
They’ve a new support chum
They’ll lean on you gently and squeeze you for more
You can talk about soccer
But you’ll never block her
Because Allison Bailey is the one we adore.

Will Allison gets her costs paid? Will she get her lost income back?

I believe it was Kids Company, not Kidscape
(antibullying support charity).

Owen Jones' behaviour has become pretty erratic, and on some occasions extreme over the last couple of years.

He has become part of the problem rather than part of the solution on various issues.

This brings back hearing all those people including Cathryn McGahey sickeningly defending the cotton ceiling stuff

Can the support wren sing the tune ?

And the wrens and the snakes from the mumsnet choir still singing female-ly
And the bells are ringing out for Miss Bailey.

In the same way as Rosa Parks became the icon of de-segregation in the US. There had been several other women who had stood up for themselves but for various reasons they weren't considered appropriate as symbols - as you say, among their great strengths is emotional and mental stability, and they are very articulate - they needed these qualities to withstand the tremendous stress fo the situation, and to be able to present themselves succinctly and well.

Can you imagine if either of them had demanded their mother with them, or insisted on having a support animal? SW would have had a field day! (As did we, admittedly . . . 😄)

SerotinaPickeler ace 😁

I wonder why

Crowdfunding paid for her costs and no, it wasn't proven that she'd lost income so she just gets the £22k plus interest.

So far as I understand it you are right, the amount of money Alison Bailey had to spend in legal fees exceeded her payout. Not to mention the time effort and stress the last few years must have taken. And apparently the effective destruction of her career as a barrister. So that tells you what? - that she wasn't doing it for money. She (and we) weren't doing this because we expected it to be profitable. So how is this a win?

1. "I think Stonewall is sexist and homophobic" this is now legally mandated as a perfectly reasonable opinion a person could have about Stonewall and their (her) employers couldn't legally hold it against them.

2. A judge saying - Stonewall's advice was discriminatory but you should have known better than to follow it. You can't blame them for their bad advice.

3. A judge agreeing that Alison was not treated fairly, she didn't win everything -some of it was very hard to prove, but "she won enough"