Another GC employment tribunal. Roz Adams vs Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre #2

[nauticant]

Claiming constructive dismissal for GC beliefs.

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

There was live tweeting from twitter.com/tribunaltweets or if Twitter doesn't show the tweets, look at https://nitter.net/tribunaltweets

Abbreviations:
J: Employment Judge McFatridge
RA: Roz Adams, the claimant
NC: Naomi Cunningham, barrister for the claimant
R or ERCC: the Respondent, Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre
DH: David Hay KC, barrister for the respondent
KM: Katy McTernan, ERCC Senior management
MR: Mairi Rosko, ERCC Board Member
MS: Miren Sagues, ERCC Board Member
KH: Katie Horburgh, ERCC Board Member
AB: ERCC staff member (name redacted)
NCi: Nico Ciubotariu, COO of ERCC
MW: Mridul Wadhwa, CEO of ERCC
BP: Beira's Place

Witnesses:
Nicole Jones (NJ): 18 January 2024
Mairi Rosko (MR): 19 January 2024
[more to follow]

Thread #1: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4985570-another-gc-employment-tribunal-adams-vs-edinburgh-rape-crsis

NC: reads response from RA.
'This seems a minefield to me. Interested to know more c legal framework to protect service users and people.'

NC: RA trying to get to bottom of legal position.

MR: Yes, she appears to be.

[This is getting more common now - MR saying it seems to be, appears to be, as though she doesn't believe RA means what she says.]

It's relevant to this just in particular but talking about previous names is appropriate to ANY job which might require a DBS.

Very, very good point.

How can AB possibly be suitable as a counsellor in this situation.

@Hedgehogdetective that's such an awful experience for you to have gone through, I'm so very sorry. I've been reading every link and bit of info on MW.
I hope that you are in better times now.

So MR wasn't first choice to run the disciplinary. I wonder why the first choice didn't want to do it?

PMK

Apparently they were too busy.

Another person who didn't want a conversation probably. RA seems to have been the only person able to communicate in that place.

Probably. I think personally I would have backed off much sooner than RA did. But then I'm not great at dealing with work conflict so tend to withdraw rather than try and resolve an issue (which brings it's own issues).

Yes I imagine someone with more experience than MR would know to be too busy to handle this

can an employee just say 'I find discussing this upsetting' where that thing is integral to them doing their job? And the employer unquestioningly going along with that even if the reasons why thing needs discussing are to do with safeguarding?

That's a safeguarding red flag.

Why does AB's wishes override the service users safeguarding?

Re the wrong name being used, are they accidentally using the birth name of a non binary person who no longer uses it?

I'm really sorry you had that experience @Hedgehogdetective

@pronounsbundlebundleAm I allowed to say that I don't want to be involved in something to do with my job because I find it upsetting? Surely revealing your sex to a service user counts as doing your job in this context?

I have known this happen, not taking a case or piece of work, where it is fairly easy to reallocate and there is a very good reason because it would be triggering.

So to be clear, it doesn't matter if the service user is triggered by the centre lying and obfuscating about sex but it does matter if an employee breaches safeguarding because not to do so will be 'triggering'.

Ye gods.

No, they are using AB's current name/initials. (Which is what is written on all the documents, so it's very easy to slip up)

Is this the tribunal chair talking now?

Yes, and he's really going for it!

He doesn't sound happy with how ERCC handled things in respect to supporting RA

He's not impressed with their behaviour I think from the sounds of his question

Oh dear MR has really been left to carry the can by ERCC

Good for him!

Kid gloves for AB

Harassment for being a kind person and trying to help everyone, particularly service users, for RA

I'm just back. Has there been an afternoon break?

I don't imagine MR will be feeling very happy after this. And I don't envy her having to deal with AB's unhappiness at being misgendered and having AB's actual name used

If the usual sliding scale of starting with the sensible witnesses and ending with the batshit ones hold true, we are in for a treat next week