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

AB is equating disagreements with hatred?

No

"My needs and beliefs are more important than those of vulnerable women who have been raped."

Nothing quite says narcissistic better than that.

NC is wonderful

The staff at rape crisis are there for the politics and the salary, aren't they? And not for the women survivors.

Its a crystal clear example of an organisation losing complete sight of its purpose.

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

And NC's point about heresy is proven.

And that care about damage is only for a particular group of people and it isn't the service users.

I know KM slightly. She has a NB adult child. Casts a particular light on some of her responses.

around puberty age?

Imagine working at ERCC, working with traumatised women who have been RAPED AND SEXUALLY ASSAULTED, and actually saying with a straight face that someone asking a question is 'violent and humiliating'.

I just can't with these self-absorbed idiots.

This is all because a woman was having hurty feelings about anyone acknowledging her previous (and current) woman status now she identifies as non binary!

NC AB has learnt from someone that what RA wrote about AB is a breach of the EqAct. AB is affirmed re her feelings of upset about what RA had done. The investigation didn't look at that. Where did AB get that idea from?

KT Don't know

That makes sense

Watching NC navigate this, and doing so with an understanding of the "philosphical" underpinnings of gender identity ideology, and thinking back on Ben Cooper's arguments, you can appreciate how a barrister handling one of these cases without having developed a deep level of understanding would make a pig's ear of arguing the case. The subject matter is so unreal, inconsistent, and intangible that the understanding is very important.

It makes me wonder whether a specialist gender-woo bar will emerge.

NC is wonderful.

Back in!

So to be clear, you can't talk about sex, but you can talk about gender - isn't that direct discrimination against those who believe in sex and not gender identity?

And you definitely can't have a conversation to clarify which you mean?

They seem to think talking about biological reality is worse than actual rape. Which makes them not really fit for purpose.

I know KM slightly. She has a NB adult child. Casts a particular light on some of her responses.

I wonder if that was a consideration in the ERCC's choice of who they wanted on the stand? Two women with a "trans" child.

NC In interview no one challenged anything AB said.

KT I was only the note taker

NC you did say earlier you would have challenged if anything seemed wrong.

KT nothing to make me step outside of note taking role

Helen Joyce's comments on people with trans children spring to mind here. You will not get anyone who is more willing to argue that up is down.

'hates you' translating as: refuses in her traumatised state to subordinate her perceptions and needs to your chosen imposed fiction on her.

And more of the extreme hyperbole and thinking in a way insensitive to at best, and flat out disrespectful and dismissive at worst, in this particular working context.

I seriously couldn't deal with this level of navel gazing bullshit at work even if you paid me mega bucks.

Roz navigated her way through this was with such care and compassion and She was treated like shit on their shoe!

So essentially women who've been raped have to submit to coercive control to get any 'help'. What a good use of taxpayers money (hopefully obvious sarcaasm).

if it should have been obvious to roz why was Kim not disciplined for asking same thing

I won't be holding my breath, @AlphariusOmegron. I made a small tentative change a few days ago but it was quickly reverted. There were a load of other corrections by others but they don't last long. The page is protected now.

Some waffle on response from witness

Brilliant question from NC: Did the email from Roz tell anyone anything they didn't already know?

Every crazy idea of gender ideology is on trial and being exposed by Naomi this afternoon.

It's a joy to watch - but we just should never have needed to.

They seriously can't see that Roz coming back and asking further questions was because they hadn't given her a satisfactory response that would satisfy the clients question.

It's bloody nuts.