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.

I'm only reading the commentary here and TT but does anyone else feel there's an element of this woman having been thrown under the bus/chucked in the deep end as she was new and inexperienced?

We're going to need thread 2. I'll put it up.

👍

That is a pattern with other tribunals as to whom the investigations have been given to.

This woman came in ready to defend and deflect to the detriment of another woman. I'm not feeling sorry for her at all.

So 'fuck terfs' is 'unfortunate wording'

but trying to figure out safeguarding and the need to communicate the truth of whether there are sex based services for rape victims is a cause for misconduct proceedings against the person trying to safeguard the rape victims (just in case what she'd asked for insulted a trans person somehow) that are dragged out over months, made the recipient ill and leave the job.

Okaaaay....

I do think her greeness of the position was used to MWs advantage! She was too happy to do exactly what she was told to do without much pushback from her despite her apparently being uncomfortable with bits of the whole thing.

[MR needn't worry about anyone thinking she is from Harvard]

No, I think she does sound like Claudine Gay etc. And she knows that.

The age old question.

NC: Disciplinary meeting notes - did you have a clear understanding of what the instruction was.

MR: nothing was to be shared with service users that gave an indication of staff members' gender or medical history. And that the organisation did not employ men. And also that if there was any discomfort with anyone then an alternative could be offered.

Her speech is becoming increasingly staccato.

She knows she's fucked it.

And that ERC has thrown her as a sacrificial lamb.

Good.

I agree, she's lied in court, there is no way she won't have known "Forstater"

If she didn't know Forstater before asked to run the disciplinary she should have known about it with even a basic level of work to prepare for the disciplinary

HOW can they say 'the organisation doesn't employ men' when they're totally changing the meaning of the word 'man' away from what most people mean by it and they know it.

And the CEO is a man as far as 99.9% of the population are concerned. And they know that too.

Fucking gaslighters. Even if they are explaining women to include men who think they are women - they can't use the term female as that definitely excludes TW

NC: are you saying all those elements - gender/medical history, not employing men etc - had been made clear to RA before 15 June?

MR: Believe so.

NC: Kim Townsend would know best about this.

MR: And we relied heavily on her interview for that.

NC: Here is KT's answer to that q. Discuss that service users had asked if AB was a man. Qs about what they could say - AB is nb, nothing else.

MR: There was also Katie's notes and we used that as well.

NC: Under actions agree - Kim to take to senior team re nb workers. RA asking c no clarity around nb workers. RA doesn't accept this is an accurate account of meeting, but even if it were, Kim still needs to take this to senior mgt. So no answer yet.

MR: Taken into context I don't believe going back to senior mgt means there's not a clear instruction.

[MR has found the word 'context' and is holding onto it like a life ring]

I feel like NC is using the give them enough rope approach!

I don't feel sorry for her, but it seems clear why MW chose her to 'run' the disciplinary hearings and why she's now flapping on this washing line

So they deliberately set out to lie to users at their most vulnerable time

How can they live with themselves? Why do the feeling of men matter so much to women who are supposed to be there to support other women

ERCC 'does not have men on the volunteer team' - weasel weasel weasel.

HOW can they say 'the organisation doesn't employ men' when they're totally changing the meaning of the word 'man' away from what most people mean by it and they know it.

It's of dubious legality to include most MTF trans people, the single sex exceptions are based on the EA characteristic of sex, not self id gender identity.

Just got chucked out is everyone else still in?

Yes

NC making MR bitterly regret using the word 'disingenuous'.

WFTCHTJ

There's currently one person waiting on the lobby.