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

Would you say, @prh47bridge that if an organisation wants to appeal they can usually find some legal grounds for it? Genuine question.

A certain J Maugham, perhaps?

It is well worth listening to Emma Barnett's interview with Jo on this morning's Womens Hour. Jo sounds so sane and normal and was so very clear that she doesn't hate trans (she just thinks it is important to retain single sex spaces in some circumstances).

I'm pretty impressed that Womens Hour were able to get Jo in so quickly (or maybe they moved fast before anybody could complain). It didn't sound as if the judgment was expected for quite a few more months.

Huge congratulations to Jo, but what a truly awful experience. I looked up Dr Downes profile on the OU website. All these buzz phrases - intersectionality, justice, lived experiences, queer theory, on and on. Now all are just a calling card of a certain type of behaviour totally demolished in this judgement.

I wonder which legal adviser they've consulted.

Folding money says it's Stonewall. I'd bet my emotional support dog on it.

The Women’s Hour interview is really good. Emma was clever in choosing the text to read out which allowed Jo to explain her very reasonable and balanced position I.e. not transphobic but the importance of sex in some circumstances.

There lawyers will come up with some kind of argument for them if the client insists, certainly. But the appeal will fail unless they have good grounds.

Nothing to see here. Just a support dog planning an escape before an unfortunate bet comes due.

You can only appeal to the EAT on a point of law so the grounds will be fairly limited eg misunderstood or misapplied equalities law.

The EAT can't revisit findings of fact eg this witness was not credible, X was bullied etc.

There lawyers will come up with some kind of argument for them if the client insists, certainly. But the appeal will fail unless they have good grounds.

Thank you and also @ghislaine for your answers.

The second paragraph is correct. The first is not. You can also appeal if the tribunal did not follow the correct procedures and this affected the outcome, or there is no evidence to support the tribunal's decision, or the tribunal was unfairly biased.

@prh47bridge My first para is not incorrect. At best one might say it is incomplete. However, I used eg, not ie so I was not representing that a mistake of law was the only ground of appeal.

Yes, procedural impropriety (rule vs bias and procedural fairness) and irrationality also could be grounds of appeal on a point of law. That said, it seems to me exceptionally unlikely that the judgment will be found to be irrational and I can't see any evidence of procedural irregularity.

I note that GC Chambers made similar noises about appealing after Bailey but didn't.

I'm assuming that Jo will be awarded damages. Is there any indication how long that will take to decide?

Appealing on the basis of procedural irregularities is not appealing on a point of law. Appealing on the basis that the tribunal's decision was not supported by any evidence or that it was biased is not appealing on a point of law. If you appeal on a point of law, you are saying that the tribunal applied the wrong law or misinterpreted the law. But I agree, the only likely route for a successful appeal would be if OU's lawyers can come up with an argument that the tribunal got the law wrong.

Today is a good day (while stuck in bed with covid) to finally buy Hogwarts Legacy. I have named my character Maya Phoenix 😘

This is a good article. The OU should be ashamed

https://thecritic.co.uk/a-phoenix-rises/

Will Jo be able to ask for costs as well as damages?

IANAL but I’ve seen it said a few times on these employment tribunal threads that it is very rare for costs to be awarded in employment cases. Each side is generally responsible for its own spending.

@Signalbox thanos, that is what I thought.

@JoPhoenix Just finished reading the mammoth Judgement, I must say we all had our doubts at the beginning when your pronouns were asked by Judge Young.

Well she eviscerated them, what an astounding win.

Thank you so much for putting yourself through that, it is such a tremendous help to others going through the same thing from cowardly employers.

Are the new glasses on order yet?

Jo Bartosch in Spiked.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/01/23/jo-phoenix-has-struck-a-blow-for-biological-reality/

Yes.

Gurwinder Bhogal: When intelligent people affiliate themselves to ideology, their intellect ceases to guard against wishful thinking, and instead begins to fortify it, causing them to inadvertently mastermind their own delusion, and to very cleverly become stupid.

I’m so glad you asked about glasses! I am planning how I can sneak a new bespoke pair past my partner…. Perhaps claim I found them? Or say something like “these old things????”

the judgment is amazing. The OU have 42 days to appeal. If they don’t we schedule a remedies hearing. I haven’t even started thinking about that yet! But whatever, we are not quite finished yet. Sigh.

Thank you all on this thread and wider. The gardening you did got us here. The support and laughter through the ET (Deb Drake theme tune will live with me forever)

until later! 👋

You have certainly earnt the snazziest and most bespoke pair of glasses there is.

I really don't see how the OU could possibly appeal. But then their intital case defied belief, so expecting a reasonable response is perhaps optimistic. Still, I very much hope a further deployment of trowels will not be needed - although I'm keeping one handy just in case.

Congratulations Jo! 🍾