Prof Jo Phoenix vs The OU - Employment Tribunal Thread 8

[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
CW - Dr Christopher Williams, Senior Lecturer History
KS - Kevin Shakesheff. PVC for Research and Innovation
NatS - Natalie Starkey, Outreach & Public Engagement Officer Sch Physical Sciences, 2019-22
HBC - Helen Bowes-Catton, Lecturer Social Research Methods
JD - John Domingue, Prof of Computing Science, Director KMi, 2015-22
LW - Louise Westmarland, Prof of Criminology, Co-Deputy Head SPC, 2018-21, Current Head SPC
RH - Richard Holliman, Prof Engaged Research, Head School Environment, Earth & Ecosystem Sciences, 2019-22. Member of Investigation Panel investigating the C’s grievance
CT - Catherine Tomlinson, Senior Student Advisor
DD - Dr Deborah Drake, Senior Lecturer Criminology, Head of SPC 2018-21😇
SD - Shaun Daley, Head OU’s Resourcing Hub. Head Strategic Resources, Co-Chair OU’s LGBT+ Staff Network
SJ - Samantha Jacobson, Employee Relations Case Manager
NS - Nicola Snarey, Assoc Lecturer Eng Language - This witness did not give evidence.

Witness for JP:

SE - Professor Sarah Earle, Head of the HWSRA

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

TT coverage so far - https://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

Thread 5
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4919223-prof-jo-phoenix-vs-the-ou-employment-tribunal-thread-5

Thread 6
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4921308-prof-jo-phoenix-vs-the-ou-employment-tribunal-thread-6

Thread 7
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4922765-prof-jo-phoenix-vs-the-ou-employment-tribunal-thread-7

@ickky thank you for all the threads and thank you to everyone who has been on here discussing points and giving explanations. And thank you Jo for your bravery in seeing this though

WFTCHTJ · Today 14:47

'Presumably, it's not enough to say that the OU's case was full of holes, BC has to make his own case as well. It's just a bit more nuanced than we'd think I suppose.'

I think it is to do with the burden of proof regulations. The burden of proof is on the claimant to show that the acts were due to discrimination. Once they have successfully discharged that burden, then the burden of proof moves to the respondent to show that it wasn't discriminatory. Although IANAL.

I stand corrected.

Jo needs £10,975 in the next 17 days. Pilgrim needs £7,880 in the next 19 days.

The paper very much gave me the impression that they'd fantasised about being in the French Resistance, and were roleplaying it from an office.

As for the bee puns, it was presumably meant to call to mind a selfless collective. But with the capitalisation of Hive, I was reminded more of en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hive_(character)

Had to miss the last half of BC just as I started to understand he was getting in his stride. Thanks for the company and good humour. I think collective listening really enhances the hearing as someone always picks up a point that I’ve missed, and I greatly appreciate the background knowledge of posters who work in HR and law.

My completely inexpert view is that JM used the oral submission not as J instructed to add additional angles on the written submission, but to speak to the Twittersphere/ general public to establish her lines of argument to gain support for herself as a lawyer. I think she is dissatisfied with her witnesses, has had discussions with DD regarding untruths generally, and used the fact of TT tweeting to try and save face.

I think she had expected the 18 witnesses as a cohort to have demonstrated a group of kind, caring nurturing folk who didn’t meant to be a bit nasty. And even if they were perhaps a little mean without meaning to they didn’t cause any significant problem as GCRN went ahead. In the context of that idea, it was important to paint JP as witch. In effect, however, the 18 came across as a nasty bunch entirely focused on their own self-interest so part one failed completely and part two was kinda dependent on part one so failed too. So, face saving exercise in oral submission.

I found the whole job interview submission entirely and purposefully disingenuous. Recruitment processes take many months (from making business case for post to all the form
filling, advertising and assessing applications) but that is very importantly distinct from
how long it takes to interview and the offer the position. It is seen as best practice to let applicants know within a week and so successful candidates are usually contacted immediately and details of contract and pay confirmed asap so that if they need to they can move to second choice if pay offer, for example, is not acceptable to 1rst.

I’m not saying it was a sham of of a
sunmission by JM but…

By contrast BC was entirely focused on what J and P needed to hear in order to rule as he would
like them too, and that’s not about pants on fire but about the law. I have no doubt his written submission will represent the unreliability of the witnesses overall and from which much can be inferred. They are, I believe, allowed to infer.

What he did in addition to points of law, and his case, was to defend JP in public, again via TT against the accusation of being a witch. He also made clear that the accusation that she is an activist ‘ie extreme’ is bollocks. And he did that for general public consumption because he is a hero and sees he needs to defend JP’s honour and that was the only bit he wasn’t speaking directly to J&P but public.

To me it was clear from his request for questions and the judges well informed questions in response that they are operating at a level of
sophistication I’m not quite sure JM will hear. What she has managed though, is do the necessary work to keep herself in the business of TRA defence biz in ETs through her public ‘statement’.

We’ve seen how the bench book influenced previous judges to throw logic out of the window and so, sadly, no guarantee that Ben’s inestimable and beautiful logic will prevail. We can hope.

So long and thanks for all the fish cheese everyone. Special thanks to @ickky Fingers crossed for JP and I'm off to plant a few little flowers in her garden.

I’ve only skim-read it but what a crock of bollocks.

There are a cohort in academia (who are often heavily unionised) who seem to think we’re in a fight to the death with university management. Any step out of line, any minor capitulation, any weakness will see you hunted down by a rogue PVC in a similar way to lions picking off a gazelle that’s wandered too far from the herd. Hunt or be hunted. The hysteria and hyperbole have to be seen to be believed.

Daft thing is, all the senior management people I’ve met seem like normal (well, normal for academia ) and decent sorts.

Thank you all for the wealth of education as we follow along.

Shall we book a cheese hamper and Viking horns of wine for the verdict? Or would the money be better spent on a nice spa break for Justin so he’s on holiday that week?

Oh, and I think the J made that request re submissions because she didn’t want either party to use the oral element as a pulpit, and waste time. Ben read that well. JM kinda ignored it for above reasons I think.

I see that the judge mentioned dates for a possible remedy hearing. Is that grounds for optimism, or standard practice, does anyone know?

Emotionalsupportviper · Today 12:56

How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is to have a thankless child . . .

Ach, she's not THAT bad! She does like Gorgonzola and Cambazola...

I've just read it. That's time I'm not going to get back. What a pile of utter self-regarding wank.

And the painfully extended beehive/swarm intelligence/just buzzin'/no leader analogy falls at the first hurdle because, as any beekeeper knows, there is no colony without a queen bee.

Unless that was the chief author. Because we know that the mean girl who denies the existence of a queen bee is the queen bee.

Thanks all. Hope it's not weird to say this but nice to see @prh47bridge here, appreciate their measured view of these sorts of things!

😊

But seriously, @ickky, thank you for enabling us all to keep going all the way through two weeks without ever falling off the world.

It's good that there will be a MN record of Jo's case - and Gilbert and Sullivan, and cheese...

Thank you so much for the tweeting & discussion. I read Jo's witness statement for the first time a few nights ago & cried my eyes out.
So much in common with Allison Bailey- I'd say it's almost as if they pick targets with care, but I'd only sound like a conspiracist.

Thank you all so much.

That article! I've skimmed it, can't be bothered to give it more than a few minutes of my time. They bang on about neoliberalism reducing the purpose of universities. Do they never stop to think that if universities hadn't been intellectually hollowed out and filled with made-up non-disciplines staffed by people who haven't got a clue, none of them would have stood a chance of being employed by a university? And the hive... forgive me, animal biology not a speciality, but aren't beehives places where females (workers) basically exhaust themselves sourcing food and feeding it to males (drones)? Or do I have that wrong, in which case I'm happy to be corrected.

I wouldn't read anything into that.

Oh.

😐

aren't beehives places where females (workers) basically exhaust themselves sourcing food and feeding it to males (drones)?

There aren't that many drones, though a few are needed but only to breed. Come autumn, when the pollen and nectar supply reduces the females kick the drones out, because all they do is eat. If they try to get back in, the females chew their wings off and kick them out again. They do exhaust themselves, but mainly to bring on new females and queens.

Thank you everyone for all your hard work. And the cheese.

The worker bees are all female and they do all the foraging and nursing. There are tens of thousands of them. There are only a couple of hundred drones or male bees in a hive. They do no work and their only job is to have sex with a queen. Then their genitals explode.

If they aren't fortunate enough to die of postcoital genital explosion their wings get chewed off by the workers at the beginning of winter and they get kicked out of the hive so they are not a drain on limited resources.

Happy to help. 😁

@CriticalCondition we crossed!

Your username is making more sense to me now!