Another GC employment tribunal. Adam's vs Edinburgh Rape Crsis

[Rainbowshit]

x.com/tribunaltweets/status/1746830866020442400?s=46&t=AjtjSItRj-kgZwRzL-pdyQ

Claiming constructive dismissal for GC beliefs.

ERC CEO is a well known transwoman know for controversial "reframe your trauma" remarks.

Ooh - here's the rub!

NC: Why didn't you point out change in charge?
MR: was following advice given (aka DON'T MENTION THE WAR!)

I think the system's starting to bow under the strain a bit - my video is just colourful blobs at this point.

MR has not heard of the Forstater case!

Hasn't heard of Maya case!! Pull the other one!

Exactly!

Chinny!

MR has had no training on the Forstater case. Ever.

Ahh, MR clarified that she was aware of the Forstater case but unfamiliar with the name.

NC: Had you had any training on implications of employment relations re freedom of expression. Or on implications of Forstater.

MR: No.

NC: Have you heard of Forstater?

MR: No. I mean, I don't know. [!!]

NC: I'm surprised you haven't heard of Forstater. Have you had any training touching on that at any time.

MR: No. [Running out of !!!s here]

Can anyone see if her nose is growing as she speaks

Given the reverse ferreting going on generally about these cases (eg article in the guardian today) is it a sign that the smart money is on rape crisis Edinburgh having a poor case?

Flimsy wouldn't begin to describe their case, I'd have said

Given that this witness was overseeing the disciplinary did she not think to get advice on the law in this area?

People who are watching, how does this witness come across? Complacent? Dim? Worried? Does she realize what she's saying?

I keep hearing Mridul as Riddle, which is giving strange JKR vibes.

And of course rape crisis centres are so well funded they can afford to throw money at cases like this? Or maybe the Board are a bunch of fools and not brave enough to do their role as trustees

I wonder whether this is another case where the claimant asked for a frank admission of wrongdoing and the company/charity realised that this would be such an awful prospect in terms of reaction from activists that they've glumly decided to go through a tribunal.

I've only watched a bit but this witness seems totally out of her depth

Never heard of Forstater. Is this what happens when you live in an echo chamber.

Well this is awkward...

So she wrote an email but doesn't know who she sent it to so can't say who the redacted person was who received the email

Is there anyone else who feels stressed and slightly physically sick every time an abusive male is referred to as 'she'? I can't imagine how I'd feel if I were the woman abused by that man. It's just dreadful.

It's funny how organisations using public money care about emotional damage from pronoun use only for certain people and the majority of the population can just fuck off.

Literally sat open-mouthed at the email that (may have) been sent to MW.

MR is claiming that an addressee on her email didn't exist when she looked at the email earlier. That looks like an attempt to protect Wadhwa.

Yes I think this is right. For most of these cases it would be sensible to settle in the early stages. But their moral position and fear of repercussions won't allow them to admit they've fucked up.