Prof Jo Phoenix vs The OU - Employment Tribunal Thread 2

[ickky]

Abbreviations

JP - Jo Phoenix, Claimant (C)
OU - The Open University, Respondent (R)
J - Regional Employment Judge Young
P - Panel or panel member
BC - Ben Cooper KC, Counsel for C
JM - Jane Mulcahy KC, Counsel for R

OU Departments & Networks:

HWSRA - Health & Wellbeing Strategic Research Area
FASS - Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
SPC - Dept of Social Policy & Criminology
KMi - Knowledge Media Institute
GCRN - Gender Critical Research Network

OU witnesses

CW - Chris Williams, Senior Lecturer History
CT - Catherine Tomlinson, Senior Student Advisor
SE - Sarah Earle, Prof of Medical Sociology, Director HWSRA 2016-22
DD - Dr Deborah Drake, Senior Lecturer Criminology, Head of SPC 2018-21
LW - Louise Westmarland, Prof of Criminology, Co-Deputy Head SPC, 2018-21, Current Head SPC
LD - Dr Leigh Downes, Senior Lecturer in Criminology (in SPC), Academic Lead for EDI FASS 2019-21
PB - Dr Paraskevi Boukli, Former Senior Lecturer Criminology, Deputy Head SPC 2021-22
MW - Prof Marcia Wilson, Dean EDI, 2020-23
CM - Caragh Molloy, Group People Director 2019-23
JD - John Domingue, Prof of Computing Science, Director KMi, 2015-22
PK - Peter Keogh, Professor Health & Society, Member RSSH
CW - Dr Christopher Williams, Senior Lecturer History
SD - Shaun Daley, Head OU’s Resourcing Hub. Head Strategic Resources, Co-Chair OU’s LGBT+ Staff Network
HBC - Helen Bowes-Catton, Lecturer Social Research Methods
NS - Nicola Snarey, Assoc Lecturer Eng Language
NatS - Natalie Starkey, Outreach & Public Engagement Officer Sch Physical Sciences, 2019-22
CT - Cath Tomlinson, Senior Student Advisor
SJ - Samantha Jacobson, Employee Relations Case Manager
RH - Richard Holliman, Prof Engaged Research, Head School Environment, Earth & Ecosystem Sciences, 2019-22. Member of Investigation Panel investigating the C’s grievance

Witness for JP:

SE - Sarah Earle, Professor Modern History Uni of Oxford, Founding member GCRN

Tribunal Tweets - https://twitter.com/tribunaltweets

TT coverage so far https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/professor-jo-phoenix-v-the-open-university

Thread 1
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4905118-jo-phoenix-vs-the-ou-employment-tribunal-2nd-october-whispers-ben-cooper?page=1

Yes IF is being cagey, but Ben is up to the task. Let's count IF's sighs.

Oh IF not enjoying this - every answer being dragged out of him

Oh yes, sigh no.1

Do we need a new thread? Sorry to be pushy but I don't want to lose you people!

Ben getting icy

IF is not allowed to communicate with counsel, but would there be anything to stop him reading about the hearing, eg social media such as TT?

It is prepared and waiting @Melissamelisante 😀

IF: we went round this point several times yesterday. In the opposite view, transgender and GI people say GC is an attack on them

BC: you are jumping to equivalence. OUGCRN not trying to stop GI people publishing etc

IF: some people think GC poses a threat

Yes we do. @ickky?

Here we go..
BC- there's no equivalence is there?
GCRN were not trying to stop anyone from having a platform were they.

An emergency pull cord (monitored and responded to promptly) is an essential safety component of the style of single occupancy 3 walls proper door toilet commonly seen in the uk as a disabled toilet.

We can certainly have more of them, but they will all need the emergency pull cord.

Sorry ickky, of course it is ready to go!

Is he dead yet?

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4917480-prof-jo-phoenix-vs-the-ou-employment-tribunal-thread-3

Quite fascination seeing an academic mind v legal mind

Thanks Ickky

I think the approach of the different baristers is partly personal style, but also relates to strength of case.

If you have a poor case you can't build it on the evidence (because that would go against you) and instead have to try other tactics, such as attacking witnesses to try to make them appear unreliable and undermine the evidence.

If you have a good case you can simply take witnesses through step by step to reveal it, and allow them to look unreliable all by themselves.

Apologies to derail but I have to add to this:

When you start have a seizure or collapse through illness/drugs you often haven’t the capacity to pull a cord. You are relying on people seeing you on the floor of the toilet and then being able to get in (over the top in my case) if the door opens inwards and the body is pushed against the door. I unfortunately speak from experience. Once you have seen a persons arm and unconscious face peering out from the toilet door gap it brings into sharp focus that these types of toilets are unsafe.

Pulling a cord requires someone to be bothered to check the cubicle in a timely manner and to be able to get in to the cubicle. Can you imagine in a school situation? Good way to annoy the teachers too.

I expect someone being assaulted would have the ‘option’ but many people shut down or wouldn’t want to antagonise the situation or draw attention. Gaps lead to prevention of this too. Visibility is safeguarding.

Break until 11.45. I'm in awe of those who can watch and give updates.

@Tinysoxxx Great post, I have epilepsy, I appreciate your contribution there.

Yes, that would make sense. So for the J and panel, someone able to take the step by step route is sending out the message that they have a strong case and here it is. And JM's approach would have sent the opposite message.

Wonder if IF has been reading Mumsnet overnight...