EHRC drops investigation into Baroness Falkner

[ArabellaScott]

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-work/news/update-equality-and-human-rights-commission%E2%80%99s-handling-concerns-regarding-baroness

'The Minister for Women and Equalities commissioned an independent legal expert to review the handling of complaints against the EHRC’s Chairwoman, Baroness Kishwer Falkner. The EHRC co-operated fully with the review and its Board has now considered guidance which has flowed from it.
In the light of the conclusions and guidance shared with the Interim Deputy Chair and Board as a result of the review, the Interim Deputy Chair, supported by the Board, has decided that the investigation into the Chairwoman should now close. The Board will work through any outstanding issues with all parties in confidence.
The Board will also be conducting a full review of the process failures which occurred as well as a review of its own rules and governance to implement any necessary changes.'

Good.

They should be publishing how much money was wasted on this vindictive campaign of harassment.

I am hoping the Baroness will be refunded, somehow.

Noticed this, too.

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-work/news/response-dismissal-employment-tribunal-claim

'A case made against the EHRC at Tribunal has been dismissed.
We strongly denied any wrongdoing and several damaging and baseless claims were made against the Commission, individual members of staff and the Board.
The Commission had a strong and evidenced case to defend all allegations.
Following cross examination by our counsel, the claimant unconditionally withdrew their claim, and the case was immediately dismissed without our witnesses being called to give evidence.
We welcome this decision.
Many of the allegations sought to undermine the EHRC’s rigorous and impartial decision making. Such decisions are always based on evidence and the law.
We are pleased this has rightfully been withdrawn and we can now continue to focus our time and resource in challenging discrimination, promoting equality of opportunity, and protecting human rights in Britain.'

They had no bloody case at all. There never was a case to answer.

I gave a vague memory of hearing that it was members of the EHRC staff who brought this case. If so, fire them all.

Thanks, @ArabellaScott

There are some gendergrifters out there who really thought they ruled the world for while, didn't they?

That's great news,

Very glad to hear this.

She has backed banning conversion therapy for transpeople. I think she has caved.

Hmm. I was disappointed when the EHRC triumphantly refused to get involved in defining 'woman'. At the last WESC meeting.

They seemed delighted to be washing their hands of the issue.

Never been quite able to work out what they were up to, and I wouldn't say they'd ever really been wholeheartedly on the side of women.

Regardless, the investigation sounded malicious and unfair.

Wait what EHRC, the public body who exist to support equal rights as set out in the Equality Act, won’t define women? What fresh hell

Glad that this investigation had been dropped so they can get back to their jobs. They clearly have an awful lot of work to do..

So pleased to see this

Very glad Kemi Badenoch pursued it

it is scary beyond belief that the whistleblowers within the organisation do not understand, apparently, the laws they are meant to uphold and protect

That is the kindest interpretation I can put on it , anyway

On Woman's Hour now.

Sorry - going to be discussed in today's programme. Latest from Gaza first.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4847393-wesc-scrutiny-session-of-ehrc-today-at-145pm

''It would be the government’s responsibility to come up with a clear definition of biological sex, ahead of any formal clarification of the UK’s equalities legislation, Falkner said.
“We didn’t define biological sex – we think it’s for government, with all legislation, to define what its terms are,” she told MPs. “So we leave it to the government, but I think most people would recognise that biological sex is a categorisation which accords with reproductive functions.
“So a woman is a person whose body is designed to produce eggs and a man is a person whose body is designed to produce sperm. We’re not scientists, this is not the definitive word on it, it’s for the government to decide on how they wish to define it.”''

But she has also said legislation needs to be

“carefully considered to ensure it uses clear terminology and definitions and is proportionate and evidence-based”

I think there might be a feeling that it would be better for any legislation to be proposed and scrutinised now rather than later.

Am I reading this right that she's been exonerated and the other side is saying that they've been exonerated?

In the Times today:

Weird piece. Can't decide if BF is saying her behaviours were bad and have since improved, or that the staff interpreted normal management as attacks on them.

The problem is we’ve had indirect comments from both sides about the issues. How can any of us know what the actual rights and wrongs are if the enquiry was dropped?

Saying this as someone who was pretty convinced that Baroness Falkner was the victim of anti- GC shitstirring: I really don’t think she should have done this interview. It comes over as rank-pulling as she’s at the top of the hierarchy. A simple corporate statement to say that she’s looking forward to working with everyone and moving forward now this has been dropped would have been more appropriate and genuinely make it look like nothing to see here.

I’m sure things are super toxic in this organisation, especially now the complainants have been unsuccessful but the situation just seems so inconclusive. And now it’s just a case of he said she said. The Baroness as the leader who is the boss of the chief executive who the rest of the paid staff have to answer to, giving her piece in the newspaper like this is not going to heal the situation. I can’t see how the relevant staff, the Chief Executive that is their boss, and the Baroness Falkner who is the CE’s boss, can work together after this. It’s a mess of dirty linen.

It might indeed have been better if Falkner had made a bland statement on the lines of "looking forward to working with everyone and moving forward". But one can also imagine that she's had a nerve-racking experience where people in her organization have turned against her, and having emerged victorious, she's got the urge to crow about it. But having done that, it probably is best if she puts the emphasis on getting back to normal.

It says in the article that the EHRC’s costs are more than £200,000. What a ridiculous waste of money and time that could have been spent clarifying some of the murky legislation.

You can’t get back to normal where bosses’ bosses are doing interviews against their own staff. It puts the middle manager (in this case the Chief exec) in an impossible position. It puts the line manager of whoever made the complaint in an impossible position

Just realised that I missed saying in my post, that this interview is also importantly making staying in the organisation virtually impossible for the complainant/s unless they are extremely thick skinned and determined.

The kind of interview that Baroness Falkner has given is IMO only justifiable for after she herself has left the organisation if she still wants to have her say.

HR good practice would be that incumbent long term leaders do not give interviews of this kind. Baroness Falkner doesn’t mention her full confidence in working in future with the whole organisation: Is this even a corporate press office endorsed interview?

It is poor leadership to expect to get the best out of people by simply doing things to assert your leadership (including via national newspaper interviews) rather than to attempt consensus leadership by working internally at length with an unsettled organisation on rebuilding mutual trust. Truth and reconciliation type work in this scenario.

So much so, that I wonder if she is planning to leave (fair enough after everything that’s happened) and is eyeing up her next moves while wanting to clear her name publicly. This interview feels as though it may have been more spoken for Kemi Badenoch’s benefit if she’s the minister in charge of appointment to the role.

It's so weird - I can see the words "In the Times today:" but not the link. This has happened before, Igneo