Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Rachel Meade - it's a win!

692 replies

BreadInCaptivity · 09/01/2024 12:35

x.com/legalfeminist/status/1744697995822526961?s=46&t=88gZvdSnTk70X8b2ZUPZtA

OP posts:
Thread gallery
38
pronounsbundlebundle · 10/01/2024 18:07

LoobiJee · 10/01/2024 18:01

Here’s what the ET Judgment says about the events.

“This Claimant’s response to the complaint dated 23 November 2020

  1. The Claimant has said that she was naively unaware that any posts she had shared or liked, any petitions she had signed, or any organisations to whom she had donated, were discriminatory or offensive. She said that she had not fully read or analysed the content some of the articles or links before posting. She acknowledged showing a lack of judgement in her use of social media. The Claimant said that she had removed all posts and unfriended any organisations or friends that may share posts to her Facebook account which may be seen as being critical towards minority groups. She said that she intended to access training around LGBT+ issues.

  2. Attached to the response was a statement from Jackie Gilroy, the Claimant’s Team Manager (Ms Gilroy), to say that she was confident that the Claimant had never practised in a discriminatory way and that her work with minority groups was exemplary. Ms Gilroy said that the Claimant had readily and unprompted acknowledged that she now realised that her posts on Facebook were ill considered, but she understood that she was taking part in a wider debate and it was never her intention to discriminate against any group. Ms Gilroy said that the Claimant had now assured her that she had removed these posts and that her profile does not reveal her profession in any way.”

And then this…

“The First Respondent becomes aware and concerned

  1. On 22 July 2021 Ms Gruska, who had replaced Ms Gilroy as the Claimant’s manager, sent Ms Barry the Second Respondent’s letter confirming that the Claimant’s case had been closed without a hearing with a warning apply to her registration, and attaching the decision and the investigation report. Later that day at 16:06 Ms Barry sent the investigation report to Senel Arkut, Director of Health Partnerships (Ms Arkut) with a covering email indicating that the Claimant’s immediate managers had no concerns about her practice. Ms Arkut forwarded the email at 16:07, without comment, to Ms Flaherty and Ms Ffrench. The Claimant was asked to attend a Teams meeting that afternoon and suspended on gross misconduct charges.”

And then

“The Claimant’s letter of suspension dated 22 July 2021

  1. Mr Arkut advised the Claimant that she had been suspended with immediate effect pending the outcome of the disciplinary investigation under the Council’s Disciplinary Code. The Claimant was advised that the serious allegations could, if substantiated, constitute gross misconduct under the Council’s Disciplinary Code on the grounds of: • Bringing the Council into serious dispute. • A breach of trust and confidence. The suspension letter echoed the charges brought by the Second Respondent. Ms Barry was also suspended that day.”

And finally

“Lifting of the suspensions of Ms Gilroy and Ms Barry by the First Respondent

  1. Ms Barry, who have been suspended on 11 November 2021 and Ms Gilroy, who have been suspended on 2 November 2021, on the grounds that they had failed to report concerns regarding the Claimant’s allegedly discriminatory posts, were informed that their suspensions would be lifted and that Ms Barry could return to work on 2 February 2022 and Ms Gilroy on 10 March 2022.”
Edited
Show quote history

WHAT?!! So these people were, essentially, suspended for 3-4 MONTHS for having the moral backbone not to join in a witch hunt and for speaking the truth about RM's professionalism in her job.

I really hope they take SWE to the cleaners. Unbelievable.

Helleofabore · 10/01/2024 18:08

LoobiJee · 10/01/2024 18:01

Here’s what the ET Judgment says about the events.

“This Claimant’s response to the complaint dated 23 November 2020

  1. The Claimant has said that she was naively unaware that any posts she had shared or liked, any petitions she had signed, or any organisations to whom she had donated, were discriminatory or offensive. She said that she had not fully read or analysed the content some of the articles or links before posting. She acknowledged showing a lack of judgement in her use of social media. The Claimant said that she had removed all posts and unfriended any organisations or friends that may share posts to her Facebook account which may be seen as being critical towards minority groups. She said that she intended to access training around LGBT+ issues.

  2. Attached to the response was a statement from Jackie Gilroy, the Claimant’s Team Manager (Ms Gilroy), to say that she was confident that the Claimant had never practised in a discriminatory way and that her work with minority groups was exemplary. Ms Gilroy said that the Claimant had readily and unprompted acknowledged that she now realised that her posts on Facebook were ill considered, but she understood that she was taking part in a wider debate and it was never her intention to discriminate against any group. Ms Gilroy said that the Claimant had now assured her that she had removed these posts and that her profile does not reveal her profession in any way.”

And then this…

“The First Respondent becomes aware and concerned

  1. On 22 July 2021 Ms Gruska, who had replaced Ms Gilroy as the Claimant’s manager, sent Ms Barry the Second Respondent’s letter confirming that the Claimant’s case had been closed without a hearing with a warning apply to her registration, and attaching the decision and the investigation report. Later that day at 16:06 Ms Barry sent the investigation report to Senel Arkut, Director of Health Partnerships (Ms Arkut) with a covering email indicating that the Claimant’s immediate managers had no concerns about her practice. Ms Arkut forwarded the email at 16:07, without comment, to Ms Flaherty and Ms Ffrench. The Claimant was asked to attend a Teams meeting that afternoon and suspended on gross misconduct charges.”

And then

“The Claimant’s letter of suspension dated 22 July 2021

  1. Mr Arkut advised the Claimant that she had been suspended with immediate effect pending the outcome of the disciplinary investigation under the Council’s Disciplinary Code. The Claimant was advised that the serious allegations could, if substantiated, constitute gross misconduct under the Council’s Disciplinary Code on the grounds of: • Bringing the Council into serious dispute. • A breach of trust and confidence. The suspension letter echoed the charges brought by the Second Respondent. Ms Barry was also suspended that day.”

And finally

“Lifting of the suspensions of Ms Gilroy and Ms Barry by the First Respondent

  1. Ms Barry, who have been suspended on 11 November 2021 and Ms Gilroy, who have been suspended on 2 November 2021, on the grounds that they had failed to report concerns regarding the Claimant’s allegedly discriminatory posts, were informed that their suspensions would be lifted and that Ms Barry could return to work on 2 February 2022 and Ms Gilroy on 10 March 2022.”
Edited
Show quote history

That is fucked up. It really is.

pronounsbundlebundle · 10/01/2024 18:09

Meanwhile there aren't enough social workers and many people struggling without getting the help they need in a timely manner. How many people suffered actual harm because these 3 women were suspended and not in post? Because of a witch hunt. I'd like to know.

Signalbox · 10/01/2024 18:16

I really hope they take SWE to the cleaners. Unbelievable.

I think they were suspended by WCC not SWE. Could be a very expensive cock up.

Froodwithatowel · 10/01/2024 18:16

Its a good point.

What is the cost to this service and their work in terms of paid man hours and staff stood down? In fact what is the cost to the taxpayer of all of this witch hunting? The police who can't attend muggings but can spend hours doing the high cost acts of arresting and questioning women suspected of heresy? The tax payer money paid to Stonewall in the first place?

This fur coat and no knickers stuff needs to stop.

Needmoresleep · 10/01/2024 18:22

And what is the cost to those families needing social services support in having an abrupt change in case worker.

LoobiJee · 10/01/2024 18:24

Signalbox · 10/01/2024 18:16

I really hope they take SWE to the cleaners. Unbelievable.

I think they were suspended by WCC not SWE. Could be a very expensive cock up.

Edited

Yes, they were suspended by their employer, City of Westminster Council, after one of them forwarded the information about the Social Work England decision on Rachel to their line mangers, but without adopting a condemnatory stance towards Rachel.

Basically Rachel’s direct managers took a sensible approach to the complaint against her. Unlike their more senior colleagues / the investigator.

Their more senior colleagues took a biased and punitive approach to the complaint and Rachel’s two direct managers got caught up in the fallout from that alongside Rachel.

pronounsbundlebundle · 10/01/2024 18:24

Froodwithatowel · 10/01/2024 18:16

Its a good point.

What is the cost to this service and their work in terms of paid man hours and staff stood down? In fact what is the cost to the taxpayer of all of this witch hunting? The police who can't attend muggings but can spend hours doing the high cost acts of arresting and questioning women suspected of heresy? The tax payer money paid to Stonewall in the first place?

This fur coat and no knickers stuff needs to stop.

You've summarised it better than me.

So many public institutions are on their knees (schools, social work, the NHS) in thrall to this madness wasting literally hundreds of thousands of pounds on the emperor's new clothes.

It's such a waste of taxpayers money and is causing so much real harm both directly and in terms of all the things that AREN'T happening because gender woo is taking up so much time and energy.

Like the Post Office, people in management positions who let this harm happen really need to be held accountable. I wish the Tories would pull their finger out.

WallaceinAnderland · 10/01/2024 18:25

Dennis Kavanagh on X

This has been an extraordinary time for the West, a deeply intolerant civic religion grew up in the shadows of dead ones, wore the clothes of gay rights, pretended marginalisation and set about the sadistic work of making people's lives hell.

https://twitter.com/Jebadoo2/status/1745048591192694791

https://twitter.com/Jebadoo2/status/1745048591192694791

TheFireflies · 10/01/2024 18:25

I wish WCC luck in recruiting and retaining their social work workforce. They’re going to need it. As an experienced SW myself, there’s not a hope in hell I’d ever apply to them, and believe me in this job people talk about employers.

Signalbox · 10/01/2024 18:36

LoobiJee · 10/01/2024 18:24

Yes, they were suspended by their employer, City of Westminster Council, after one of them forwarded the information about the Social Work England decision on Rachel to their line mangers, but without adopting a condemnatory stance towards Rachel.

Basically Rachel’s direct managers took a sensible approach to the complaint against her. Unlike their more senior colleagues / the investigator.

Their more senior colleagues took a biased and punitive approach to the complaint and Rachel’s two direct managers got caught up in the fallout from that alongside Rachel.

Show quote history

Bloody hell. This is going to work out very expensive for WCC isn’t it? Hopefully though they will now have thoroughly learned their lesson.

JanesLittleGirl · 10/01/2024 18:59

Signalbox · 10/01/2024 18:36

Bloody hell. This is going to work out very expensive for WCC isn’t it? Hopefully though they will now have thoroughly learned their lesson.

Show quote history

It will be expensive for council tax payers in Westminster. There will be no impact on the senior team who will continue to feel that they are in the right and the tribunal is wrong.

Signalbox · 10/01/2024 19:03

JanesLittleGirl · 10/01/2024 18:59

It will be expensive for council tax payers in Westminster. There will be no impact on the senior team who will continue to feel that they are in the right and the tribunal is wrong.

Show quote history

Since they discriminated against and unnecessarily sanctioned x3 employees you’d think that might amount to gross misconduct.

JanesLittleGirl · 10/01/2024 19:16

Signalbox · 10/01/2024 19:03

Since they discriminated against and unnecessarily sanctioned x3 employees you’d think that might amount to gross misconduct.

Show quote history

Do you think that WCC HR will spend a nanosecond thinking about doing that?

RapidOnsetGenderCritic · 10/01/2024 19:22

MrsOvertonsWindow · 10/01/2024 08:11

Helen Joyce speaks powerfully here about the impact that parents of children who think they're the opposite sex can have on society. In the work place, in social groups and of course, most dangerous of all, as politicians.

We know that following Stonewall law makes people sound like incoherent fools. But the parents of these children also have a silencing impact on those around them. If they're politicians, then this is incredibly serious and goes a long way to explain why so many of them have stood by and watched all the evidence of this monumental medical and social scandal unfolding. Either because they're complicit or embarrassed to raise concerns in front of those who are parents.
PM has one transactivist brother and one who's a sex offender with YC having a transactivist son? Are they capable of changing and finally standing up for safeguarding children and women's rights?

https://www.tiktok.com/@peterboghossian/video/7252427901528771883

Show quote history

The pressures on parents are difficult to handle well. Some parents assume that supporting their children requires affirming them, and once you have set off on the affirmation path it is particularly difficult to turn back. Others start off questioning, and have to face the distress and anger and scripted manipulation from their child.

Most parents start from a place of ignorance. I thought I was quite well informed, but the source of my information was Guardian articles so I was misled to some extent. In my case, I was desperate to understand better, so I started reading much more widely and discussing with anyone who had a viewpoint. I read books by transgender people, and found that they contained, in between some things I could agree with, complete nonsense backed up by pseudoscience. I discovered that Queer Theory eats away at norms without any discernment of the good reasons behind some norms. I found my way here, where there is actually pretty well-moderated discussion, and saw the truth of what many posters were pointing out.

I have started to speak out, sometimes anonymously online, sometimes by being open about our family situation with other family members and friends.

All this has left me close to estrangement from my son. It is a big price to pay, keeping my integrity as best I can, trying to work out what my loving duty to him means practically, knowing that being honest with him risks losing him.

Politicians are always vulnerable to accusations that they are mistreating their children, so they have that extra pressure on them. Have you noticed that parents’ perspectives are rarely heard? It is all part of the trans ‘most vulnerable’ narrative which has been so successful in silencing any dissent.

Xenia · 10/01/2024 19:39

I saw the BBC article too just now posted above. Very good decision.

helleborus · 10/01/2024 20:06

It's in The Times too 🙂
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f42639d1-5315-4d3f-aadc-16fdbd69553a?shareToken

ArabellaScott · 10/01/2024 20:29

yourhairiswinterfire · 10/01/2024 19:02

Excellent.

ArabellaScott · 10/01/2024 20:32

I see the BBC commenter is working hard to pepper her viewpoint with suggestions that gc views are 'toxic'.

It wilnae work, hen. Everyone already read this bit:

'she was suspended for sharing views online that were gender-critical - where one believes that sex is a fact of biology that cannot be changed.'

And did their wtf.

MrsOvertonsWindow · 10/01/2024 20:34

Thanks @RapidOnsetGenderCritic for sharing that. I can only imagine the complexity of all this for parents.
I am so disappointed with the teaching, social work & medical professions for selling children out so comprehensively. Instead of working together with parents supporting children they've abandoned all responsibility for safeguarding leaving parents adrift.
Awful.

borntobequiet · 10/01/2024 20:58

Yes, the bit in the BBC report from their LGBTWHATEVER person tries very hard to present Rachel’s views and behaviour as unacceptable. It’s a nasty, sniping, poisonous piece. I think I’ll complain.

PurpleSparkledPixie · 10/01/2024 21:03

Thank you @LoobiJee for breaking that judgement down. I can't read walls of text so your posts have been incredibly helpful ❤

ArabellaScott · 10/01/2024 21:15

borntobequiet · 10/01/2024 20:58

Yes, the bit in the BBC report from their LGBTWHATEVER person tries very hard to present Rachel’s views and behaviour as unacceptable. It’s a nasty, sniping, poisonous piece. I think I’ll complain.

Good idea.

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 10/01/2024 21:17

It’s fantastic news but I do wonder just how many more of these cases will be needed before organisations step back from the madness.