Prof Jo Phoenix vs The OU - Employment Tribunal Thread 4

[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.

The clerk will ask you (in a private remote room) to put your camera on to verify, this involves looking at you, but no ID is needed. You may turn off your camera after this pointless and unnecessary process.

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
MW - Prof Marcia Wilson, Dean EDI, 2020-23
CM - Caragh Molloy, Group People Director 2019-23
LD - Dr Leigh Downes, Senior Lecturer in Criminology (in SPC), Academic Lead for EDI FASS 2019-21
DD - Dr Deborah Drake, Senior Lecturer Criminology, Head of SPC 2018-21
CT - Catherine Tomlinson, Senior Student Advisor
LW - Louise Westmarland, Prof of Criminology, Co-Deputy Head SPC, 2018-21, Current Head SPC
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

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

@Hellomynameisnt I agree that is the way a typical grievance would be dealt with and the HRD would be briefed if necessary.

However, in this case they set up a working group to manage the grievance, the out cry, open letters etc. The HRD was a member of this group to give HR advice and in that situation you either put the ER lead ( who would read the grievance) on the working group or you read the grievance.

Downes is a senior lecturer? I thought from what was said earlier, that they was some kind of research student.

I am now even more amazed at the way them studiously avoided engaging JP directly, but instead kept “running to teacher” to try and get teacher to sort it out.

Hardly the actions of a mature and considered academic, is it?

I suppose if you have people telling you all the time how marginalised and oppressed you are, you start to see marginalisation and oppression everywhere.

I think the 6'5" was a reference to Dolatowski - along the lines of how LD would feel if she they was locked up alongside Dolatowski

The Trans-Elements song needs a poster to be made doesn't it? I've been chuckling about it all afternoon.

Thanks @BenCoopersSupportWren and @ickky for your dedication to the cause.

Sorry, I didn't read tribunal tweets. If she was in the working group, she should have read the grievance.

That is bizarre. No wonder Ben Cooper was shocked.

Placemarking.

Very grateful for the excellent thread admin, especially the threadreader links which are a real help for any of us who don't really use Twitter.

@Hellomynameisnt I know those of us who can log in and watch most of the sessions are really lucky to have the time.

Thanks from me, too. Following (confusedly, at intervals!)

Today was my favourite day so far. I do hope the scriptwriters have something up their sleeves for the rest of the tribunal, and haven’t peaked too soon.

BenCoopersSupportWren · Today 15:51

Who wanted Tom Lehrer-style bingo?

There’s Pronounium, They-themium and Sucking-female-cockium
Podcastium, Amnesium and Idiots-in-the-dockium
And Bundlium, Timetablium and Kicked-into-the-lobbyium
Complicatium, Stonewallium and My-very-big-jobium
Long-grassium, what-the-fuckium and Took-legal-advicium
Busyium, Not-black-and-whitium and Balance-all-the-rightsium
Complexium, Difficult-questionium, Grievance-never-readium
Ben-gaspium, Judge-sighium and Can’t-believe-what-they-just-saidium

These are the only ones which made vipers’ bingo so aerobic
And there may be many others but you can bet they’d be transphobic

Found it, that's brilliant @BenCoopersSupportWren Hope you don't mind me putting it here too.

deleted as already done pp

Wonderfulium @BenCoopersSupportWren

I went out for the early evening and returned to find a ridiculously flattering chorus of requests for a reprise of the Tribunal Bingo Elements Song so, never having been one modest enough to disappoint an adoring audience (😂)…here it is, (with a couple of lines added into the original):

There’s Pronounium, They-themium and Sucking-female-cockium
Podcastium, Amnesium and Idiots-in-the-dockium
And Bundlium, Timetablium and Kicked-into-the-lobbyium
Complicatium, Stonewallium and My-very-big-jobium
Long-grassium, what-the-fuckium and Took-legal-advicium
Busyium, Not-black-and-whitium and Balance-all-the-rightsium
Can’t-recallium, Network-survivium and lots of Synersegium
Witness-snippium, Need-Contextium, Wafflium and Collegium
Complexium, Difficult-questionium, Grievance-never-readium
Ben-gaspium, Judge-sighium and Can’t-believe-what-they-just-saidium

These are the only ones which made vipers’ bingo so aerobic
And there may be many others but you can bet they’d be transphobic

Oops, cross post while I was making the new lines scan!

Checking into the new thread, thank you @ickky

<settles in and opens biscuits> Hobnob anyone?

Thank you Ickky and all contributors. I've just caught up with today's proceedings on the last thread.
Jaw-dropping stuff.

All that assiduous gardening is resulting in a truly glorious display.

Delurking to say thanks for the threads, Stirling as always ickky!

The commentary has kept me laughing (& fuming) as I recover from surgery, so although that's been painful at times, it's given me a boost (& nearly burst stitches). I was hoping I'd be able to join in and watch but I don't think that's going to be a possibility unfortunately so I'll keep catching up here and via TT.

Jo, if you're reading, I hope you realise how much support you have and I'm so sorry for what you've had to endure. Oh and please set up a buy Ben a beer fund, that man deserves it!

I think today has been really important - HR director admitting to not really reading relevant documents before making decisions; then opening a can of worms for the OU by mentioning the other grievances; the. Dr D having to try to explain gender identity and show exactly what it was that Jo Phoenix had written that was unacceptable.

Quite an incredible day, and I imagine JM and her team are having some frank conversations

Ooh thanks @SidewaysOtter I've got the kettle on.

If I were the judge, I think I'd be eliminating the other witnesses now. Something with a questionnaire where they can only take the stand if they can actually remember anything or actually read anything or actually know what they're talking about.

That would be no fun at all.

A legal question. I can understand why from both sides it’s now probably sensible to just let the case run to conclusion. But could (obviously they won’t, but could) the OU now pull the remainder of ‘their’ witnesses? Or does Jo essentially hold the power now?

The very act of observing someone's biology is a transphobic act to LD

I've been thinking more about this over tea, and it captures the essence of the problem so well. For those of us on the GC side, observing whether someone's body is male or female is a fundamental part of recognising the difference between sex and gender. We recognise that everyone has a sex and that in some circumstances it is important, so simply making that observation is a neutral act, a matter of biology like the colour of your eyes or your height.

So, my manager might observe my age because we discuss my plans for retirement. My hairdresser might observe my greying and thinning hair as we discuss what to do with my style. My yoga teacher may observe my flexibility has got worse recently when I struggle with some poses. I don't feel any of those objective, observable things to be a judgement on me or damage my sense of self, even though inside I may still feel like a 26 year old with bum-length sleek shiny hair who can do the splits. I can look in the mirror and recognise the biological reality even as I sigh about the down sides of ageing.

If a transwoman or transman is so fragile that a simple observation of biological reality in a circumstance that matters, like deciding what hospital ward they should be admitted to, does damage their sense of self then surely we are back to this being, at best, some form of mental health issue like dysphoria? Especially, as in LD's case, they are getting offended on behalf of someone who isn't even in the conversation, like the hypothetical vulnerable transwoman prisoner LD was discussing in LD's evidence. The first questions BC asked LD today were exploring LD's position on sex v gender. While LD may say that they recognise the GC position is a valid one, albeit one they disagree with, LD would not accept that it would be reasonable in any circumstances to make the observation about someone's sex. It's simply not credible to say on one hand that holding GC views on sex and gender is a valid position to hold, but then refuse to allow someone to make observations on sex without judging them as transphobic.

Sorry, about the length, just trying to make sense of it in my head.

Lurker, but wanted to add appreciation for the commentary.