Another GC employment tribunal: Roz Adams vs Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre #3

[nauticant]

Roz Adams was employed by Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre (ERCC) as a counsellor. She is claiming constructive dismissal for Gener Critical (GC) beliefs. The CEO of ERCC is a well known transwoman known for, among other things, controversial "reframe your trauma" remarks.

There's live tweeting from https://twitter.com/tribunaltweets or if Twitter doesn't show the tweets, look at https://nitter.net/tribunaltweets. There's an informative substack here: https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/adams-vs-edinburgh-rape-crisis-centre

This post explains how to get access to watch the hearing: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4988632-another-gc-employment-tribunal-roz-adams-vs-edinburgh-rape-crisis-centre-2?page=24&reply=132419912

Abbreviations:
J: Employment Judge McFatridge
RA: Roz Adams, the claimant
NC: Naomi Cunningham, barrister for the claimant
ERCC or R: Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre, the respondent
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

RA gave evidence over 15-18 January 2024.

Witnesses:
Nicole Jones (NJ): 18 January 2024 (on behalf of RA)
Mairi Rosko (MR): 19 January 2024 (on behalf of ERCC)
Katy McTernan (referred to both as KT and KM): 22 January 2024 (on behalf of ERCC)
[more to follow]

Thread #1: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4985570-another-gc-employment-tribunal-adams-vs-edinburgh-rape-crsis
Thread #2: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4988632-another-gc-employment-tribunal-roz-adams-vs-edinburgh-rape-crisis-centre-2

Witness doesn't agree that MW is biologically male

Did KM just say that MW isn't biologically male?

NC you talk c staff member right to privacy. How work in practice. If su insists they want to see bio female you will accommodate that.

KT you misunderstood. If someone wants to see a woman we'll accommodate that. If someone wants to see someone who's a biological woman we would talk about the support available but wouldn't discuss an individual's bio sex.

NC so no circs in which you would enable a su to be sure that someone she's sitting alone in a room with discussing her sexual trauma is bio female.

KT if someone v strongly didn't want to be supported by a nb or trans worker we wouldn't allocate them. But we wouldn't discuss a persons' bio sex of gender history

NC everyone know MW is bio male and legally male not having a grc

KT I don't agree that she is biologically male [screaming]

You wouldn't say if any of your female staff are actually TW?

NO

KT: I'm not prepared to say that none of the support staff are tw

I'm not prepared to say an of our support staff are transwomen

NC it can't have been agreed what was to be said because Kim had to go to MW for advice

Im glad I've got you as a little support group.

We can all scream at the madness together.

NC SO, how can it be misconduct for RA to ask for guidance

KT cos she went to AB and the impact that that had.

NC but it can't have been agreed what had been said cos Kim needed to go to MW for guidance c what to say

KT can see there's some confusion.

NC not some confusion. Destroys whole basis for investigation.

Here I am! Just joined.
Call me picky, but if I was appearing as a witness in a tribunal I think I'd have washed my hair.

KT I don't agree that she is biologically male [screaming]

Wait Mmmnotsure, did she actually shout this out or something?....or are you internally screaming at the batshittery?

Are you watching on a massive screen because I can't even see people properly

We are all screaming the witness wasn't

MW has contempt for a woman's right to say no - chilling according to NC.

MW surely can't stay in post after this tribunal. How can he have any credibility?

Contempt for a woman's right to say no

Chilling

No

I'm impressed you can see that level of detail. 😂Mine is a postage stamp size.

Still, shouldn't comment on appearance.

Telling the service users there are no men is positively abusive? I don't agree

Oh sorry, thanks for clarifying. Scream away people....

I wonder whether the ET decision will address the very thorny issue that in such an ideologically captured organisation it is not possible to formulate a workable policy that is helpful to service users who want a female supporter worker.

NC MW stance re bill (women able to say no to male intimate examiner)and response to Kim both illustrate MW's stance - contempt for woman's rights to say not. Horrifying coming from CEO of ERCC. Chilling.

NC Telling su not men on staff team isn't reassuring. It's the opposite. Abusive.

It's abusive to tell users there's no men in support team

doesn't agree

yes it bloody is!!

It's annoying because normally you can make the main window bigger and hide all the other nonsense but you can't on this one.

You'll end up driving the trolley straight into the shelves if you aren't careful.

Don't forget the milk.

Fuck me. I bet thats her dry January fucked. She will be needing a few drams after this.

Thanks for new thread @nauticant