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.

Finished now until Wednesday 10am.

Who are the OU lawyers?
This bundles stuff is ridiculous.

(I'm on caring duties today so a bit askew following today)

@LipbalmOrKnickers IANAL but I believe there is specific software to produce the bundles in the correct way with correct page numbering. I believe it is quite onerous and it will be the solicitors/barristers who produce it rather than the OU.

It will definitely be the legal representatives responsible for the bundles, not the OU.

You may NBAL but you clearly have a better grasp of the software required than the team representing the OU! 😂

@LipbalmOrKnickers 😂 Thank you, as retired HR I find the legal bits really interesting. For example watching how Ben has very specific questions for each witness so that their answers when combined give a clear indication of how unreasonable they have collectively been.

Poor Jo, all that pronoun bias. It must feel Orwellian and ALREADY a repetition of the bullying she experienced at OU.

Every time anyone asks for my pronouns I feel chilled. It's like being asked to chant 2+2=5

With that question, I know I'm going to be burnt at the stake for believing in scientific reality. Then it's a question of whether being burnt at the stake is worth it or not. Bearing in mind I have caring responsibilities. Or if I just have to accept my status as a second class citizen.

Asking for pronouns is definitely NOT a neutral act and is NOT common English usage.

Mixing paper and electronic bundles is common and shouldn't be an issue if the numbering is consistent between the two (I recognise that is a significant caveat).

The use of paper or electronic is usually up to the lawyer in question. I personally can't get on with cross examining from an electronic bundle but I am happy to use it for most other tasks.

The bundles would usually be put together by some overworked junior lawyer. Ime errors with bundles takes up a disproportionate amount of court time. Accordingly judges often lose their shut over them.

*shit

I think the pronouns question is a nod to the witnesses to come.
Just a hunch.

Question for those of you who are far more familiar with the legal system than me - is asking for pronouns and for reasonable adjustments now standard for the start of a legal hearing, along with the scheduling and other administrative stuff to sort out? Or is it dependent on the Judge?

I found the request for pronouns at the start really depressing. I don't remember that happening at Maya's or Allison's hearings. And then did anyone notice that the judge said they were going to refer to the solicitor with covid/connection issues and a conventional female first name as 'Miss (Surname)' unless told otherwise. It's all so ridiculous.

Yes, but it would be more neutral to say to each person 'do you have preferred pronouns?' i.e. people can opt out and have bog standard English usage instead. Demanding everyone state their pronouns is demanding adherence to a particular belief system.

What does the Bench Book say about pronouns these days?

Exactly.

If I am reading twitter correctly, the particular tribunal tweet in which the judge asks for pronouns already has 18k views

"Enquiries as to which personal pronouns/modes of address are preferred, although well-meaning, may be misinterpreted."

In the section on trans people.

So asking for someone's pronouns is possibly problematic, now??

I've observed several of these cases now and know there are highs and lows and it's not over until it's over. But still, not impressed so far.

And actually I think the poor attempt at 'open justice' is damaging to public confidence in the system. Whatever 'side' you're on. We can't see the employment judge, we can't see the other members of the bench, we can't hear either Counsel properly. Are witnesses going to give evidence from the table with the binders under the window? If so they will be so far away from the camera and in such silhouette they might as well be those black 'identity concealed' figures you get on TV. We know it can be done properly because we've literally witnessed it in previous cases. It's a very poor show.

So, as suggested by a PP, “Do you have preferred pronouns” would be fine as it doesn’t make any presumptions. “What are your preferred pronouns” are problematic because it presumes you do subscribe to gender ideology.

In much the same way “do you want to make a request for any adjustments” is fine, “what are your requests for reasonable adjustments” assumes you have a list of them.

I'm on my lunch break so haven't time to read back through every page to see if this has been covered. I applied for access details and a pin, as per suggestion on page 1 or 2) a few days ago and have had what seems like a generalised response on how to apply to the court and provide witness statements etc, but no info on remote access or PIN. Is the case viewable remotely? If so, how did you get access?

If you read to the end of the email, there is a link with a pin number. It is finished now until Wednesday 10am.

Thanks in advance. Just looked upthread and it clearly is viewable.

I agree with dimorphism that her suggested way of asking the pronouns question makes things level and impartial for all.

There's Article 6 of the Humans Right Act also relevant here surely? Which is an absolute right.
Right to a fair and public hearing
Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

We've all spotted that the Judge's pronoun question here might be skewing the appearance of impartiality. I'm sure that Jo's barrister has that duly noted and parked at the back of his mind. He was right just to respond and not kick off at the start of the hearing.

Reasonable adjustments are usual these days, and no bad thing ... disability etc.
As long as it keeps everything level and impartial and FAIR.

There's often a hoo ha at the start of a Tribunal about how things will proceed, bundles, witness and so on. However, in a case like this, it's a poor do not checking what your juniors have put together prior to going in... unless it suits you to have a delay for some reason.

Sorry if I've been overtaken by more relavant posts, I'm not very fast responding today.

Thank you, Icky. I thought I'd checked but I'll check again.