Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Another GC Employment Tribunal: Roz Adams vs Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre #4

1000 replies

nauticant · 23/01/2024 19:31

Roz Adams was employed by Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre (ERCC) as a counsellor. She is claiming constructive dismissal for Gender 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 or KT: 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): 22-23 January 2024 (on behalf of ERCC)
Miren Sagues (MS): 24 January 2024 (on behalf of ERCC)
Katie Horburgh (KH): 24 January 2024 (on behalf of ERCC)

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
Thread #3: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4990903-another-gc-employment-tribunal-roz-adams-vs-edinburgh-rape-crisis-centre-3

OP posts:
Thread gallery
14
Rightsraptor · 23/01/2024 22:45

Can anyone help me with the link to today's TTs? I've scrolled through the last pages of the previous thread but can't find it.

Thanks.

RethinkingLife · 23/01/2024 22:46

Iris Child: I will not say it

I think of this poem every time there's a tribunal or every time I worry a woman will be injured or imprisoned for believing sex is material.

say it!
say it!
say it please!
just repeat it after me

what if I hit you in the head?
what if I claim you want me dead?

not if you're backed
not if I'm sacked
not for your please
not on my knees
not to a judge
I will not budge

I do not want to tell a lie
and say that you're the same as I

I will not say it just for you
I will not say what isn't true
I will not say it from a jail

I will always know you're…

Rainbowshit · 23/01/2024 23:02

nauticant · 23/01/2024 22:44

You're welcome@Rainbowshit. And I hope you don't feel I've nicked your thread, I just happened to be around to set up the succcessor threads when it was needed.

Absolutely not! Really thankful you were around to keep it going! Bloody work getting in the way of my keeping up with the threads!! 😂Thank you!

GrumpyMenopausalScathingWombWielder · 23/01/2024 23:56

Place mark

IwantToRetire · 24/01/2024 00:36

(A bit out of sync as I hadn't realised the other thread had closed, so may not make much sense here)

Letter signed by Rape Crisis Scotland, January 2023, which talks about SSE but then goes on to say -

That is the point I am trying to make.

Rape Crisis Scotland as the federation management group reflects what is being said or done by their members. They don't dictate policy, they reflect it. Which is how WA (WAFE) in England runs and Rape Crisis England.

But because they have said members of the federated group operate services that include TW doesn't mean its a Federation policy imposed on member groups by them.

That is why their statement re the court keys is of note. And I checked and it was issued 4 days after the case started.

So whether for pragmatic reasons, or actual beliefs, for a funded group is Scotland to make this statement is significant (if a bit after the facts. (Do you remember the video of the meeting where all those women sat saying nothing when a woman at the podium tried to challenge Nicola Sturgeon)

And that is why I also said about groups not being the playthings of individuals, because that is the problem. Many groups are run by people who have no experience or training, and probably no commitment to say feminism. And employ people like them ie not on the basis of belief based practices. And to some people VCS jobs are well paid and with benefits.

This rot set in years ago. Long before trans issues became more dominant. Within a few years of women's groups getting funding, funders and local governments were saying there is no longer any need for women only services.

The TRA agenda has always had the MRA agenda to base itself on.

But one of the other factors all of us need to remember, is that if all of us who say we think this is a primary concern for women's groups were actively involved as MC members, volunteers or whatever, the gradual mission drift of so many groups might not have happened.

As I said up thread, commenting on FWR is one thing, but it will never have the same impact as being there in person.

Voluntary sector groups just like other organisations, can by hijacked by individual agendas, as much as by a weak MC.

If none of us were there or are prepared to be there, it is another reason why things fall apart.

And by the time we notice it is too late and we spend all our time playing catch up.

Or waiting for an individual woman to stand up and we all clap from a distance.

IwantToRetire · 24/01/2024 00:41

Karensalright · 23/01/2024 19:58

Read the debate about what RCS Scotland and England mean by “a woman only service”., and agree with all the suspicions expressed.

What i would like to say being from the women's sexual violence sector pre 2015, Is that i blame local authorities.

They had ever decreasing financial envelopes so were in the habit of including male services(such as perps programmes) in commissioning and tendering processes. So not only were women's services going to have to take a financial hit in funding, they had to address male and trans services, if they had any chance of securing the tender, and service.

Add into that the England based RCC federation was wholly created by the government and is a QUANGO. With no fiscal independence

The only other choice they had was to go it alone without public funding, which was the death knell for i think 50% of services for women.

For those who chose to go with the flow, they became vulnerable to TRA infiltration which is actually what has happened.

So to some extent women's services are a victim too, question is of their own making, or not?

What should we here do?

Many many years ago when Ken Livingstone in London talked about funding women's groups (to create dependency on Labour) there was a meeting held to discuss whether women's services should take the money.

Lots of discussion and emotion, with the vast majority saying we need the money to provide proper services, and because we are all such committed principled feminists there will be no mission drift or (as most groups were then collective structures) hierarchies to boss us around.

Only the Anarchist Feminists said it would be a mistake and the beginning of the end.

How right they were.

Datun · 24/01/2024 01:08

Placemarking. And thank you!

BoreOfWhabylon · 24/01/2024 01:14

PMK
Thank you! Flowers

GwenniMcKinney · 24/01/2024 03:10

when we're doing the honour roll call of women who won their tribunals can we not forget Sonia Appleby

she is often forgotten and yet she was one of the the whistleblowers who raised very serious safeguarding of children concerns around the processes at GIDS /Tavistock, remember her colleagues were instructed not to bring safeguarding concerns to her, although she was the safeguarding children lead for the trust !

UtopiaPlanitia · 24/01/2024 03:22

Finally caught up with most of today’s excitement: I read the 155 page Phoenix judgement (it made for an excellent read) and now I’ve just caught up on the ERCC threads and the live tweets.

I swear that when I was at school and uni I never stayed up late to make sure I was up to date with my reading materials for the next day; I’ve turned into such a swot in my middle age 🤓🤓😊

Thanks everyone for the input and analysis on the previous threads - yous rock 🤘

stealtheatingtunnocks · 24/01/2024 03:33

So today is the last day for evidence and the judges might ask qs. Then they go and chat and decide. And write up a searing damning report on what happens when a charity loses sight of its purpose.

ill never forgive this board. They took something amazing that women built from Nithing and they violated it.

Rightsraptor · 24/01/2024 05:42

Thanks for the TT link, Boiled.

Rightsraptor · 24/01/2024 05:44

I second your comments about Sonia Appleby, @GwenniMcKinney.

AlisonDonut · 24/01/2024 06:10

What I really want to get to the bottom of is, is the funding meant to support female only service users?

And if so, it is the service offered supposed to be delivered by females under the EA exclusion?

If so, then why are they allowed to employ males?
Why did the non binary person not hand their notice in when they decided they were not a woman any more?
How do they provide a woman only service, but then go in to say they provide women only sessions specifically on a Tuesday?
Do they really mean women only on a Tuesday and what is the difference staff and user wise to the rest of the week?

Who is auditing the use of the funds? What is the proportion of females to males getting any actual support?

How do they get away with not putting anyone involved with any of Roz's interactions into the actual tribunal? This makes a mockery of the tribunal system.

If they are offering males and females support, and the funding allows this, why not just say that is what they do?

nauticant · 24/01/2024 06:33

Does anyone know what the process is for closing submissions in Scotland? Does counsel for each side present them verbally to the panel or are they presented in written form? If it's verbal, do they follow on from the witness testimony or will there be a continuation of the hearing at a later date?

OP posts:
HarpQuartet · 24/01/2024 06:59

Thank you for the new thread. I'll be following proceedings today, so have between now and (I assume) 10am to read thread 3!

Justabaker · 24/01/2024 07:00

nauticant · 24/01/2024 06:33

Does anyone know what the process is for closing submissions in Scotland? Does counsel for each side present them verbally to the panel or are they presented in written form? If it's verbal, do they follow on from the witness testimony or will there be a continuation of the hearing at a later date?

Morning all.

They have agreed written submissions first and then they may diary a day to expand and comment on the other side's submissions. From a TT perspective - submissions are the hardest thing to live tweet because they are from prepared remarks peppered with case law.

And thank you for the poem - we loved it!

Another GC Employment Tribunal: Roz Adams vs Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre #4
AlisonDonut · 24/01/2024 07:02

Thanks to all the Tribunal Tweets coven, you make such a massive difference to the visibility of all the insanity.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 24/01/2024 07:19

Re funding, to receive Scottish Government funding you are required to be trans inclusive I think.

ComeTheSpringLobelia · 24/01/2024 07:23

AlisonDonut · 24/01/2024 07:02

Thanks to all the Tribunal Tweets coven, you make such a massive difference to the visibility of all the insanity.

Hear Hear!

DrBlackbird · 24/01/2024 07:25

@IwantToRetire just clarifying that I wasn’t saying TWAW (from last thread) as you seemed to think I might be.

Rather, I was saying that if a person believed/said that MW was a biological woman, as one of the witnesses was reported to have said, then at a stroke all this goes away because there’s no need to even ask if your counsellor etc is female, they just are. And all RC’s do become single sex.

Your wider point about the importance of saying something in person whilst true is, as we’re witnessing, harder said than done. Especially as the initial steps to TWAW start with something much quieter and more acceptable and in light of female conditioning to be nice. Proverbial frogs in the boiling water.

Even Jo Phoenix said the criticism was chilling and not only did she feel silenced, she was silenced until she felt compelled after a letter with over 300 signatures led to death threats. It must take an articulate and confident person to continue in the light of the silencing.

PonyPatter44 · 24/01/2024 07:26

Last time i was so engrossed in ETs was when the original film came out! I've followed Allison, Maya, Jo and now Roz in their journeys and I'm so proud of all of them for standing up for women.

Not clever enough for poetry at this time of the morning.

BezMills · 24/01/2024 07:54

AlisonDonut · 24/01/2024 06:10

What I really want to get to the bottom of is, is the funding meant to support female only service users?

And if so, it is the service offered supposed to be delivered by females under the EA exclusion?

If so, then why are they allowed to employ males?
Why did the non binary person not hand their notice in when they decided they were not a woman any more?
How do they provide a woman only service, but then go in to say they provide women only sessions specifically on a Tuesday?
Do they really mean women only on a Tuesday and what is the difference staff and user wise to the rest of the week?

Who is auditing the use of the funds? What is the proportion of females to males getting any actual support?

How do they get away with not putting anyone involved with any of Roz's interactions into the actual tribunal? This makes a mockery of the tribunal system.

If they are offering males and females support, and the funding allows this, why not just say that is what they do?

I really hope the judgement specifically mentions the absence of particular witnesses, and if there was a sick legalese burn about how that was an epic fail, I wouldn't mind.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.