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 is being like a sheepdog here, separating KT out from the rest of the ERCC pack. Basically saying you're not a zealot like the rest of them, perhaps with the implication of, imagine what we would have been hearing if it had been eg MW/Nico at the tribunal. Lots of comments around you don't know, do you. Nico and MW aren't here.]

The thing is that AB would never have been mentioned if they had a policy in place, this is entirely of their own making.

I'd LOVE to know what the tribunal judges are making of this!

I've been kicked out. I shut computer as I headed out the door because I almost forgot to pick up child from school so aghast was I at the utterances from a rape crisis centre worker who denies the existence of biological sex (what do they think rape is done with?) - is it a break or is it just me?

But as we've seen, with MW in place such a policy, that would benefit service users, couldn't have been written.

You'll have to log back in

The witness is sounding very down in the dumps!

This is the ENTIRE issue though.

There IS no LEGAL definition thats in law cos the law is so poorly written and is a clusterfuck thats been made worse by being deliberately undermined.

Thus its allowing all these fuckwits to say that its not set in stone whilst actually in practice having a definition that the organisation operates by but is some sort of omerta to talk about (and only benefits the males and nb working for the organisation) to the detriment of women and then throwing a woman under the bus when she does ask for a firm clarification of the organisational policy by saying its transphobic to ask for how they operate.

Its like saying you have a formal risk assessment for fire as an organisation, but when someone asks for the policy forcably removing from the organisation for insubordination and therefore gross misconduct and then saying 'well actually we don't really have a fire risk assessment, we all just understand what a fire is and that we need to run away from it and anyone who questions this doesn't take fire seriously'.

We are at level of fuckwittery.

A rape crises centre staffed by men and women refuse to acknowledge a woman’s lack of consent to men.

AB and witness think it's OK for service users to express their gender identity preference but not their biological sex

Bloody hell!

It's ok for a client to request gender identity but not sex?

Please note child is fine and I was not late.

And anyway my definition of 'late' and your definition of 'late' or indeed the school's may not be the same. They're so timephobic with their 'it's a 3.15pm pick up time'.

Thanks Boiled, I've got to go and get ANOTHER child now. FFS. Will be relying on this thread to catch up.

😂

You would think a rape crisis centre staff would not throw the words 'violent' and 'humiliating' around lightly out of respect for their clientele and a sense of proportion based on working with them.

They are operating on the basis that literally everyone shares their extremist belief that any male who identifies as a woman is a woman. That's absurd. Hardly anyone actually shares it. And they are hiding behind obfuscatory language.

You may have to rely on Tribunal Tweets as well, NC manages to confuse everyone!

A B talks about transphobic clients

WTF

There's no discourse with pp who hate you ( AB )

You'd think....

DH has gallantly manned (sorry personed) up and offered to get other child as his meeting's finished early.

They'd better bloody let me back in.

AB should not be employed at a service helping vulnerable rape victims if AB thinks women wanting biological women support workers is transphobic.

4 waiting in the lobby

INterview notes.

NC Passage evidences an enquiry into how RA thinks and feels.

KT y

NC AB talks c transphobic clients, who'd be upset to find tw in woman-only space.

KT yes, but also how transphobia damages other people

NC AB says, there is no discourse with people who hate you. AB feels RA is arguing for people's right to be transphobic when accessing the service, - ie by wanting to see a woman, meaning a female woman.

KT AB is talking about how the impact of people being transphobic has a damaging impact on other people

But they do believe everyone shares their view. I had a discussion yesterday with a zealot and we both shared the same poll with each other to prove our points on what percentage support either stance.

It was the YouGov poll from 2022 which clearly shows a majority view for sex realist beliefs.

I hate the deliberately obfuscatory language. It should not be so hard to ask a simple question about biological sex and gender identity.

And service users shouldn't have to go through convoluted contortions about "I would like a support worker with a female gender identity who doesn't identify as trans" in order to not get a surprise male worker.