Prof Jo Phoenix vs The OU - Employment Tribunal Thread 5

[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
PK - Peter Keogh, Professor Health & Society, Member RSSH
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
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 - tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/professor-jo-phoenix-v-the-open-university

Prof Jo Phoenix Witness Statement (scroll to bottom of page and download)

https://jophoenix.substack.com/p/phoenix-v-open-university?sd=pf

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

Thread 4 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4918479-prof-jo-phoenix-vs-the-ou-employment-tribunal-thread-4

@MyLadyDisdainlsYetLiving Or, do you think the emails from the drafting process are important as they may disclose intent on what the letter authors were trying to achieve? And because witnesses have said they signed in solidarity and not necessarily because they agreed with what it said? If so, there may be still draft versions of the document on the server with comments/tracked changes, which may be as useful as any emails.

This, there is no way the OU witnesses who were signatories would be circumspect in their emails when drafting. The more sensible will have toned it down but the comments would be enlightening.

For me the big OU witnesses so far have been the HR person, IF and KS because they were the ones who had authority to do something and didn't.

@Madcats exactly. I know our staff handbook allowed personal use but made it clear this was searchable and discloseable under GDPR if we got a SAR.

What is the student's responsibility in all of this?

If a student turns up at a lecture to intimidate the speaker or people who have chosen to attend, are they also covered by a university code of conduct? or are they considered to be free agents?

@Chrysanthemum5 I don’t disagree, but LD saying that “male bodied trans prisoner” was not an acceptable manifestation of Jo’s belief illustrated the complete and utter refusal of one side to allow the GC academics to use anything but GI acceptable language e.g. TWAW.

Panel member asking KS q now

I think that the OU will at some point have realised that this is a horribly risky case not to settle but they knew they couldn't settle because to admit that JP was right that the trans activists had acted wrongly and illegally would not have been possible because they are such a captured institution the trans activists, and their fellows called in for a mobbing, could harm the institution even more than this shitshow of a defence they've gone with.

Is this still KS

P - what did you do when you heard that JP had received threats of violence.

Went to working group can't hear

IF was talking about checking in with JP, IF took responsibility.

Agee's @Sisterpita they have done a great job of showing how ridiculous the actions against Jo were. I just think KS and IF in particular are key in terms of showing accountability as they had the official roles of dealing with these issues

I wonder what the witnesses to come are thinking re BC calling KS in effect a liar.

After abusing you the pro VC so abominably to your his face, I BC could have no scruple in abusing you to all your relations.

They're probably going to be very unwell, very contagious, couldn't possibly go.

I wonder if JM regrets her strategy of trying to make Jo look like a difficult person to work with now that we know the type of people she was working with

I doubt most students will care - or know - about employment tribunal cases.

It should make staff more circumspect. But True Believers will just see it as further proof of Most Oppressed status, and most ordinary staff (who don't take part in the mobs) again will neither know nor care.

Panel: OU said they wouldn't take down statements, and then took down 2. Why the 2.

KS: Don't know. Not part of instructions. Can't remember.

Panel: You can't remember, that's fine

Is anyone else having trouble hearing KS?

J: Professor Shakeshift

Oh how true

Good questions by the panel member - why were some statements taken down by the OU but not others.

kS - I wasn't responsible for that

Panel - are you a member of the working group that made the decision?

KS yes but I can't remember

I can hear fine, though I see from chat that others are having trouble.

Amnesia is very contagious in the OU

Judge asking about the KMI taking the GCRN off the network.

J: To be member of GC group didn't need to be GC but be interested in research c sexed bodies

My bold not hers

Amnesia - bingo

I'm not a lawyer, but isn't there also a thing about "perception"? In other words, you don't have to be gay to claim sexual orientation discrimination, if you're on the receiving end of homophobic abuse because the perpetrators think you're gay. So even if not all the members of the network were GC, if they were discriminated against because they were perceived to be GC that'd be enough.

I dunno @BinturongsSmellOfPopcorn , if BC made me look like a blithering gobshite and left my good reputation in tatters I wouldn't be so hot to endorse an ideology. And if students are not getting such lauding from those in positions it's going to take the shine off being so special.