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

Did she just say the OU chose to allow the GCRN to flourish. She is trolling us

I was under the impression BC was meant to go first, but also that they each had an hour. So either he started/finished early or they've swapped order.

Mind you, in his position his closing statement could well be just 'You heard the OU witnesees. I have nothing more to add.'

Ah so Drake was concerned to be caught in an obvious lie? Interesting

What is she saying from DD? Can witnesses add things after their questioning

I'm making a cup of tea so missed what she said

That was Dr Drake's mis-leading testimony, was it?? 🤨

Who cares about the poxy speakers??

I seriously don't think my mental health can cope with listening to this nonsense! It's like official gaslighting isn't it?

But the OU failed to deal with it. I'm not sure that argument is as compelling as she might hope - it lets the individuals off the hook, but not the organisation.

JM: People must be free to express their views to the OU. This must be distinguished from actions of univ as to which actions and those actions must be governed by legal requirements.

JM: Individuals expressed view and made request as was their rights. OU decided not to accept them and let GCRN flourish. [my blood pressure!]

JM: After DDrake gave evidence she had a sleepless night [I bet she did] and emailed me to say probably wasn't right c number of people invited to conf. I commend her honesty and determination to pass this on. This am got an email from DD said there were invites to 17 people

DD had a 'sleepless night' (diddums) when she realised she'd lied in a way that could be easily checked (about the number of invitees to a conference / meeting?). So wanted to put the record straight.

Clown shoes.

Maybe she hopes the Judge and Panel are super stonewalled?

Maybe she’s hoping to lull them into a stupor with all this salad?

Maybe Chat GPT wrote this for her?

who knows?

DD emailed JM to say there were more like 17 speakers not 7 at the conference they cancelled. DD was concerned that she gave a false impression of how many speakers were booked.

@WFTCHTJ JM is saying they did because they allowed the network to flourish.

I think JM has a very different definition of flourish to most people

Apparently Dr Drake had a sleepless night over her evidence on the number of speakers at the cancelled conference and emailed JM. She thinks it was actually about double the number she said.

Witnesses have repeatedly been asked by BC to say letter was call to discriminate. Not so

Why did only 1 (?) witness out of 18 want to admit that they agreed with what the letter said then? 🤔Almost like they'd realised it was calling for discrimination and came up with the 'solidarity' line between themselves in a pathetic attempt to distance themselves.

So 1 or 3 speakers not speaking out of 17 is a lot less of an issue than out of 7.

Does this not torpedo her reason for cancelling which was that there wouldn't be enough speakers?

How would you misremember something as 7 when it was actually 17?

Even less reason to cancel the conference then

It's her job. It will be ok. I'm sure.

Probably in an elusive WhatsApp group

The Times is obviously a niche newspaper to Dr Drake.

JM: LW evidence. Those are all small matters at end of 2019 c which JP continues to make submissions on and put in her claim. They are a long while ago. They are what JP set out to do in this case - see in her WhatsApp saying to people put in grievances and put in everything. That's why she had added to her case.

JM: These are out of time. They are small matters.

JM is coming across as not very good here. I think that's probably unfair. You cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

I'm not sure her working material reaches the lofty height of an ear. But she still has the job of rolling it in glitter.