Prof Jo Phoenix vs The OU - Employment Tribunal Thread 3

[ickky]

Started on 2nd October at Watford Employment Tribunal (Radius House, 51 Clarendon Rd, Watford WD17 1HP 01923 281750)

You may attend in person or remote viewing has been quite limited but you can request log in details from

Email [email protected]

Header should read

URGENT CURRENT CASE - Public Access Request - J Phoenix - The Open University - 3322700/2021

Ask for access link and pin and please give your name and address in the email as they check when you connect to the tribunal.

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

PB - Dr Paraskevi Boukli, Former Senior Lecturer Criminology, Deputy Head SPC 2021-22
IF - Prof Ian Fribbance Dean of FASS
DD - Dr Deborah Drake, Senior Lecturer Criminology, Head of SPC 2018-21
LD - Dr Leigh Downes, Senior Lecturer in Criminology (in SPC), Academic Lead for EDI FASS 2019-21
CT - Catherine Tomlinson, Senior Student Advisor
LW - Louise Westmarland, Prof of Criminology, Co-Deputy Head SPC, 2018-21, Current Head SPC
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

Thread 2
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4913946-prof-jo-phoenix-vs-the-ou-employment-tribunal-thread-2?page=1

I was going for Gugu Mbatha-Raw
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GuguMbatha-Raw

But I heard a rumour that Eddie Izzard is claiming it for Eddie self

MW didn't realise depth of feeling or scale of what would happen following launch of GCRN. I really did not believe there would be such a furore.

Dean of EDI can't remember anything that isn't written down.

MW I've been at other uni's where similar networks set up and not been a big thing.
The reaction was overwhelming . From students, staff and externally. Maybe close to a 100 in number. Comms kept track of every single letter and email. Fewer emails were supportive.

Close to 100 objections is "overwhelming" whereas a 300-signatory open letter is apparently no big deal and should t bother anyone. Hmm.

Just received my link from the Court! 👍🏻

Your persistence has paid off, now you need to get through the vetting. 🙄

Did we ever decide who would play Ben in the film(s)?

Yep, that's another hurdle I have to overcome, and I'm a bit nervous about it.
I'm a bit uncomfortable about appearing on screen.

Damian Lewis?

Yes ISTR he was suggested at some point.

On the reexamination point, reexamination is generally minimal. If you have to do a lot your witness has really messed up and you are trying to salvage something. Generally you would just correct misunderstandings (for example if they had answered a question about 'the May meeting' with what you think was testimony relating to a different meeting you might want to try to correct that. Or if the cross examining counsel had asked them about page 1 of a document that looked bad for your case but page 2 looked better you might ask the witness something about that). Asking no re-examination questions is often a sign of confidence. But it can also mean the witness was so bad you just want them to stop digging!

Surely Cate Blanchett – she can do anything (for playing BC, that is)

It is usually in a private screen when the clerk speaks to you, you can turn off the camera after.

About to have a break. MW being given doc refs so she can read them in the break to save time. Back at 3.20.

Poor Prof wilson has home work in the break. Break now til 3.20pm

He would be my first choice but I wasn't sure if I could recall that or it was just wishful thinking.

(Obviously as the support wren, my opinion is almost as important as Prof Fribbance's Very Important Job.)

Ah, right. That's made me feel a bit better.
Thank you.

Israel-Palestine is a lower profile controversy involving smaller numbers.

Wow! On so many fronts.

It’s amazing how many witnesses heard a bit of the podcast but not all, and were only told about its “problematic” nature by other people, isn’t it?

Like Mermaids and the Cass Report.

To be fair, it was discussing previous examples of tensions between groups of OU people, and not a comparison to the current situation.

Can anyone explain to me why JM objected to Ben's question being hypothetical? am following TT but finding it hard to understand the objection

TT commentary

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1712086408855167147.html

Bet they feel silly now