Jo Phoenix vs The OU Employment Tribunal 2nd October (whispers Ben Cooper)

[ickky]

Employment Tribunal starts next Monday, not sure if it is available for remote viewing.

I have sent a request so we will see.

I've been in recent meetings with people who were offering superfluous explanations that other attendees didn't need. And persisted in offering extra detail to those explanations even when it had been reiterated that the other members were at least as experienced and didn't need the explanations but were raising different matters.

The people who were the target of the unnecessary explanations had to remain conciliatory and civil. The explainers were under no such constraints and were, in fact, empowered to continue by the information that they had announced they were subject to "rejection (sensitivity) dysphoria" and hypersensitivity. Effectively, there is no way to comment on their behaviour without it being interpreted as oppressive and unjust.

So, it's fine for very experienced members to be addressed as if they're incompetent or inexperienced, but it's not appropriate to address that for fear of triggering RSD in those behaving in that in appropriate way.

Double-bind communication and asymmetric power gradients, you say? Oh my.

I believe BC is genuine when he says on timing ' this is not a criticism of anyone...'. From JM it sounds snippy and pointed !

@ickky oh I'm not logging in - I just meant reading the snippets here about the cross examination sounds grim!

I seem to recall from Allison's hearing that BC has mastered his voice and tone to always sound measured and reasonable and it doesn't betray any feelings at all. You can only react to his words, not his tone. It was a marked contrast to Mr Hochenhauser who did a great line in performative outrage.

BC did do some great WTF! really! expressions to camera though at certain points, so I'm sorry that we only see him dimly in profile and in shadow this time.

I would query why someone so very likely to be wildly upset by GC opinions would venture near this podcast anyway?

How else will they be offended?

@RethinkingLife bloody hell, is that in academia, public sector or corporate life? In the UK?

Yes, I will miss the close ups of BC bringing his gaze slowly down from the ceiling to a laser beam focus on the witness as he finishes his question.

Although we might yet be treated to that if any witnesses have to give evidence remotely.

I'm pretty sure one of the things the Judge said on Monday morning was to the effect that this is an in-person hearing and everyone is expected to be present and on time, even if the trains are on strike. I think the single solicitor present online is only accepted because they are ill with Covid.

So I got the distinct impression that no-one will be giving evidence remotely. Happy to be proved wrong though!

She did. Lots of covid around though! And all those mingling academics!

This afternoons TT thread

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1709921171310067973.html

Is it just me or does this line of questioning make it seem as if there is no precedent set that GC is a protected belief in law?...

JM - Biological sex is immutable might make the trans community think that doesn't include me. Do you accept that. Must be right by definition.
JM no permission to call it the OU.

...

JM - missed - you don't accept that the use of GC is trans hostile

JP - GC implies belief sex is immutable.

I had to hit the mute button a few times during the day to take calls, so I missed a fair bit, and I find TT difficult to follow. I can’t discern an overall position from the OU, but what I did catch it seems that OU is trying to position it as a) her recall of events is too variable and this means her evidence is not credible, and b) she deliberately set out to cause offence and/or didn’t care that she cause offence, and c) she wasn’t that upset because she tried to be professional, carry on and fix the situation and wasn’t emotionally incontinent in her WhatsaApp messages.

Whenever Forstater was mentioned, the OU response seemed to be to gloss right over it, so I am looking forward to BC vs the OU witnesses very much.

UK, health and social care, intersecting with business.

I wish I were anywhere near retirement so I'd know that I have a reasonable end in sight.

Rethinkinglife what a terrible situation. It sounds like there's more than one person behaving like this! What are the chances of them meeting each other!?!
It makes me wonder if employers are expected to bend everything around someone's more well known mental health issue like depression or ptsd. Yes they should make adjustments that can make things easier, but would they be expected to force everyone else into completely unacceptable conditions in order to accommodate them? I doubt it.

Thank you for the chat everyone, I do struggle to follow to TT and can't watch the ET.

Is it contempt of court to send in a box of long life batteries?

@LarkLane it's the gift that keeps on giving.

That's literally never been more true than it is right now! 😂

It sounds like there's more than one person behaving like this! What are the chances of them meeting each other!?!

Quite high. It's associated with a diagnosis of autism/adhd etc. and at senior levels it's increasingly common for people to self-declare an identity as "someone with [X]." When RSD is part of other conditions then there's normally a need to consider "emotional inclusion." To be blunt, there's was a sex difference in those doing the (unnecessary) explaining the other day and those expected to tolerate the questioning of their competence/experience. The difficulty, as ever, is the bystander effect because the other men joined in with the (equally) unnecessary explanations as if they'd accepted this chap's implied assessment of the women (2 of us; neither of whom were the least experienced or competent in the room: neither of us were the Chair).

It came up for me reading about JP. I'll stop here tho' as it's making me aware of how foul so many workplaces are and how much women are expected to tolerate because.

RethinkingLife I'm so sorry you have been through that. I read your analysis, duly noted.

Thinking of Jo this morning. Imagine having to psych yourself up for another day of grilling and gaslighting. She must be physically and mentally exhausted. Yet I am so impressed by her eloquence and measured responses. I think LM underestimates her.

Is it 10am start again today?

Not sure what else I can say apart from blimey. Sorry you’re having to deal with this, it sounds insane.

yes 10am start

Thing is, I have a disability which would mean I wouldn’t be able to do a physical job like, say, a police officer or postie. I couldn’t make demands that I’m employed to do a role I’m not fit for, solely because of allowances for my disability.

Therefore I’d argue these people are not fit for senior professional roles if they are not able to act properly.

(RSD can also be addressed therapeutically, a physically fucked up body can’t be)