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.

@Puddlelane123 id go out and come back in again as it doesn’t look like there’s anyone waiting here

@Puddlelane123 Do your sign in details match? I would ring them again and explain that you are being excluded from open justice.

Annoyingly I’ve had to log out to do the school run now but wanted to catch at least half an hour before I left. I am going to complain about the delays though as on previous days it was never more than a 5 min wait

I don't think there will be time for Sarah Earle today.

I'm managing to watch only bits today. I missed this morning. It sounded utterly harrowing. Poor Jo.

That's not the first time JM has had a pronoun fail and lapsed into she/her. JP used they/them.

Agree ickky - just hoping we get through Jo's so she can at least draw a line and not have to carry over the weekend.

I really don't understand JM's line of questioning. She's pushing the line that academics are allowed to research controversial areas and allowed to speak on those areas. But then also seems to be saying that JP isn't allowed to have her views

I've not been able to listen today but it sounds like a case of:

If a woman dares to say men can't be women and that women really do need single sex spaces in some situations that's incredibly offensive and triggering for some XY people plus woke academics and is the worst behaviour ever.

But if people supposedly on the side of those who can't cope with anyone pointing out biological reality are insanely unpleasant to women, depriving them of work, making accusations and slurs, causing real distress then apparently that's fine.

Jo is clearly not a woman lacking in resilience, court cases like this are punishing and long winded. Women without resilience don't bring these cases. If she's been reduced to tears then it must have been really bad - why is that ok but simply saying 'men can't be women' is bigotry and unacceptable?

Is it just that men's feelings count and women's don't?

I always find it remarkable that so many people care about transwomen's feelings. It's a sure sign they're men, to be honest. No one gives a fig about the feelings of biological women as seems to have just been demonstrated in court.

Judge - break 'in 3 minutes exactly'. Has she learned nothing?

Break, back at 3pm.

Obviously thought better of it.

@dimorphism I'm really not understanding how mere words such as 'women' or 'mother' can make people feel unsafe but having all your colleagues signing a letter about how you are a bigot is not supposed to upset you

😂

If a woman dares to say men can't be women and that women really do need single sex spaces in some situations that's incredibly offensive and triggering for some XY people plus woke academics and is the worst behaviour ever.

But if people supposedly on the side of those who can't cope with anyone pointing out biological reality are insanely unpleasant to women, depriving them of work, making accusations and slurs, causing real distress then apparently that's fine.

Entirely agree @dimorphism One rule for them etc

It is still surprising though how often it is demonstrated with no trace of recognition on their part.

The whole thing is a house of cards though, isn't it - once you start picking at it to see what it's constructed around the fragility becomes apparent and the whole thing comes crashing down.

If I'm following OU counsel correctly, I think she is saying that despite the letter and the OU colleagues' response to the GCRN, the OU themselves were not stopping JP doing her work - citing time off due to her surgery and her grief around her mother's illness and death, and her return to work note which said JP was not to have anything to do with the named 324 people. Presumably leading to the OU claim that "therefore this is not bullying/constructive dismissal etc". And entirely glossing over the OU role in JP's mental health breakdown.

I'm also assuming that this morning was so distressing for JP because (as per her witness statement), she went through some very traumatising experiences as a child & teenager, one of which involved people not believing her and belittling her experiences, and led to a court case where she gave evidence. So being in court yet again and yet again having her veracity questioned aggressively must be very triggering for her. She is enormously brave.

her return to work note which said JP was not to have anything to do with the named 324 people

324 named people? Sputter! Looks like constructive dismissal to me.

TT commentary for this afternoon.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1710264403323404675.html

Judge and JM discussing a downloadable and non downloadable witness statements. Leigh Day has explained it JM. JM now explaining it to the Judge.

JM's team can't get a link to be a remote observer. Despite there being plenty of capacity.

Now discussing when JM will be finished with JP, JM has 4 pages of notes left to x examine.

Good God, get on with it.

Why can't they work past 4.30PM?

Having said that she will finish today? 🙄

BC very keen to re examine today so JP is not in purdah over the weekend.

I was in the middle of typing a commentary to this technical discussion on witness statements when my boss called me! Head in hands stuff.

JM's team can't get a link to be a remote observer. Despite there being plenty of capacity

<Snort>