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

NC re slack - AB sharing link to Guardian. Says that this shows, outside of v small minority, general public agree with support of trans people or don't care. Especially young people. My take is that transphobes are going to die out q quickly

KM Don't remember seeing it or drawn to my attention

NC Any mod of slack channel - for eg making sure no one uses it to bully anyone.

KM Anyone could take concerns to senior leadership team

NC this is pointed at RA?

KM don't agree

NC AB more than a decade younger than RA

KM probably

God the ageism is off the charts

NC being corrected on pronoun usage by witness.

AB was not particularly #bekind in the Slack channel.

KM pointing out that NC has mis-pronouned AB.

[KM is in her fifties. So was MR if I remember rightly.]

Haha KW is SO QUICK to correct misgendering of AB, it's the only time she seems certain of anything's!

It sounds like some quite clear age discrimination has been written down in quite unpleasant (at best) language.

NC RA email enquiry to AB is not at all what bullying looks like, but this is.

KM [wait for it...] I don't agree

If KW is so confident to correct pronouns in a COURT OF LAW, imagine what it's like in that workplace!

.

Correcting NC's grammar for 'misgendering' when you can't answer straightforward questions seems about as wise as poking a bear imo.

Also a completely surprising (not) lack of care about how NC identifies. Maybe she's agender and doesn't believe in gender based pronouns? Are we into compelled speech and why does KW think she has the authority to compel the speech of a prominent barrister?

The totally groundless sense of moral superiority is really breathtaking.

Witness trying to distance MW from the whole shit show

Yes you're right. Idk if that's the organisation's position or if the witness just said something confused.

But it's obviously very difficult, perhaps impossible, for a woman to get an assurance that her counsellor will be female. Either because they think trans women count as female, or because they refuse to talk about the bio sex of anyone.

There is a lot on X on my trending list but only congratulations https://x.com/johnarmstrong5/status/1749534452261286314?s=61&t=W8z-NdrPTYy21FuiQuezcw

Once again:

Who sets organisational positions at ERCC?

I'm still to see any hint of decisions being the result of a culture of discussion or grassroot lead.

So who sets these organisational positions?

Its a really important question.

NC reads from grounds of claim re belief, acts relied on for harrassment. Inc MW email, disciplinary process and outcomes, treatment of grievance, allegations of transphobia. All those things happened to RA cos seen by some in org and esp by MW as holding transphobic views.

KM Didn't happen cos MW though RA transphobic. It happened cos of things raised by a number of people which were investigated

NC Any dissent from TWAW / TWAM is considered transphobic by ercc

KM not cause of actions

NC cause of any of them

KM not specific cause

NC All of these things happened to RA cos of her protected sex realist belief

KM don't agree

Witness rozs actions rather than belief being investigated

KM it was RA's actions rather than her beliefs that were being investigated.

Where was MW to say to an older member of staff, that they could raise a complaint when you needed them to?

This witness does like a long long pause

KM doesn't want to get drawn into how old AB is dentifies as.

NC got KM to agree that she asked the question about AB because in her view sex matters.

Wow finally KW accepts something!

NC Was RA's raising q of how to answer su a manifestation of the belief that sex matters

KM Trying to process the q

NC Do you agree that q RA asked, of how to answer su enquiry, was a manifestation of her belief that in this service sex matters? She only asked cos she thinks sex important.

KM yes, I suppose that makes sense