Another GC Employment Tribunal: Roz Adams vs Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre #5

[nauticant]

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: 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
Thread #4: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4991883-another-gc-employment-tribunal-roz-adams-vs-edinburgh-rape-crisis-centre-4

A while ago a read an account from a woman who went to a party with MW. Apparently he would take all the women aside and ask them one on one “do you think im a woman?” This woman was so shocked at being asked she said “oh yes of course”. Later in the evening MW was surrounded by women who had affirmed his identity and he was saying horrible things about the “transphobes” in the room who didn’t rhjnk he was really a woman. She said that the effect was to see who the true believers were , and to get women onside. The blogger said it was very difficult to stand up and say anything in this situation. I imagine MW is very good at dividing and conquering.

I think some of the semi admiring posts about (the wet behind the ears slippery, barely an adult at the times of the events) final witness are really missing NC observation of her potential as a politician.

IMO NC was referring to her impressive ability to dodge the questions and hold the party line, (AKA lying whilst appearing not to)

Despite what she must have been able to see as plain as the nose on her face, that NICO investigation report was loaded with value judgements of a TRA nature.

Forgive my venom, just thinking about RA and the SU’s at the heart of this sorry case

I'm a day behind but I just don't know where that NB staff member gets off!

How much of a self-absorbed arsehole do you have to be to be working in a frontline job with extremely vulnerable women and:

1. decide you are NB and take on a traditionally masculine name, and
2. refuse to engage with any discussion on how these changes are to be managed, and
3. refuse to allow disclosure of your sex to service users?

This person should be nowhere near vulnerable women.

Many of us were absolutely rooting for Mhairi Black when she was first elected because she seemed to be straight talking and took no bull shite. Although she was young and fresh from uni, many Scottish women were genuinely pleased to see someone who might shake things up a bit.

More fool us, right?

There are several MSP's who are very young and have very little experience outside of politics. and it shows. The Elect Her event at the Scottish Parliament was led by young activists who had next to no experience but had 'passion'. This witness appears to have been a lead on a (really quite important) disciplinary case with experience from her uni job her sole actual work experience. It's disrespectful to the women facing the disciplinary and frankly, unfair on the witness for giving her this amount of pressure.

I couldn't give one single shite what school the witness went to. But Edinburgh posters commenting (generally) on the private school culture which proliferates in Edinburgh and being told to be quiet doesn't surprise me. It's a bit of a taboo in Edinburgh after all.

The only one I'd allow near vulnerable women is the very able Roz Adams, whom they were so determined to get rid of.
I certainly don't admire the last witness for her confidence etc.. Total empathy bypass for those who have been raped, utterly determined to defend the indefensible MW.

A busy day of meetings for me today so only just caught up on thread 4. Some of us in the voluntary sector actually do have to work 😁

Will catch up on this thread now, thanks everyone!

Thank you everyone for keeping us all up to date.

So infuriating that MW is not there to be called to account. This outrageous nonsensical behaviour has come from the top.

I haven’t read the whole thread, so apologies if this is covered elsewhere:

1. I imagine oral submissions is for maximum transparency/so these points are public and before journalists etc
2. muslim service users of ERCC - can any Muslim mumsnetters comment, would it be important for religious reasons to have a biological woman as your counsellor/ person to whom you divulge this very private information?

If she wants to go into politics, she'll need to get much better at judging character. This lot landed her in an employment tribunal at 23.

Yes, I think it was Helen Joyce who talked about 'moral injury' - being unable to do a part of your job that you are required to do and that safeguards the people your job is supposed to protect.

Roz Adams has suffered a moral injury. She was made to tell service users 'there are no men working here' when she knew that was not true and any potential service user who knew who MW was would also know it was not true.

I don't know anything about her education, but I found her testimony and her appointment to be the most chilling of the lot. Her lack of understanding of the profound impact of the Forstater judgement on matters like this, her lack of real life experience, her utter confidence in this pernicious ideology with no thought how it might affect victims. The fact she is so self assured and ambitious, if she does become a politician, she'll be no friend to ( biological ) women...

How ridiculous. MW is a complete narcissist.

She might be very pleased with her performance today, but what she said in evidence will follow her around the internet for the rest of her career. Same for the rest of the weasels. Just as we see how Jo Phoenix's former colleagues behaved, now preserved for all to see in the Tribunal decision. That's a Judge and legal panel speaking, not the terrible terfs.

Their performances hardly improve their work prospects outside of the right side of history pond. Any decent employer doing a bit of background research will stop and think.

Thinking if had to bid in to funding that required a trans inclusive approach.

And would probs produce data on % of population thought to have an identity that differs from their birth sex

Then purpose a weekly hour percentage of a specialist service for said group

And a specific post dedicated to said specialist service area. As an addition to main biological female service, with clear referral pathways, etc.

THEN IT OCCURRED TO ME WHAT MW MEANT ABOUT INCLUSIVITY AND INCLUDING.

He thinks that if you do not include trans into all of your service areas, then it is not inclusive.

What a mind fuck

I don't know anything about her education, but I found her testimony and her appointment to be the most chilling of the lot. Her lack of understanding of the profound impact of the Forstater judgement on matters like this, her lack of real life experience, her utter confidence in this pernicious ideology with no thought how it might affect victims. The fact she is so self assured and ambitious, if she does become a politician, she'll be no friend to ( biological ) women...

I agree. Not going to give her a pass just because she's 23. Torquemada really really believed what he was doing was right and moral, so do any number of fanatics who cause pain and suffering.

'I have the privilege of being a woman who passes. So, you know. And I use that to my advantage, because that has given me access to spaces and to people who normally would not ... not all trans people would have that access. So I use that effectively. Ya. And I think I use my personality, which of course not everyone has, you know, a charming personality. I use that to my advantage'.

What does Mridul sound like here? I can't say.

Being wrong is being wrong. Age is no excuse. Unless you are less than 13 years old.

So what happens if one of their female support workers identifies as a man? The ideologues that run the service could no longer say they didn’t employ a man or that service users would not see a man. Yet neither could that person be asked to leave (not that they would ask that of a member of the sacred caste) because that would be direct discrimination on the grounds of gender reassignment.

You are not being specific enough. When they say ‘trans inclusive’ they mean men (transwomen). It would count as ‘trans inclusive’ to include transmen but presumably they are considered men so are excluded.

@SaffronSpice it is pretty certain that this is what confused Ros this person AB chose a male sounding name (why?). So Ros could not avoid the issues staring her in the face any longer.

Where would AB be in my model of service?

I would move her to the trans only service area, out of respect for bio women's only service. She wouldn’t be able to claim about that since she was no longer a woman.

Surely the answer to MW here would be “I think of you as you know yourself to be”. That would surely flummox them.

@WeeBisom If i found myself in the room and was asked that question by him i would probably say, my dear it is obvious you are a man having a jolly good time fucking women over, so now just fuck off out my face. And all my RL friends know i would.

Always baffles me that 'allies' insist that TW are not male.
It's like they're actually trying to erase trans people.

Transgender is where 'sex and gender don't 'align''.
Surely by insisting a TW is a female person who identifies as a woman they are trying to pretend they are not actually trans? Trying to deny their existence?

It's also a lie. If they have no problem with someone having one sex and a 'different' gender (based on the GI assumption that there is such a thing as sex and gender matching or not matching) why are they dishonest about it?

Actually truth be told i would probably say far more than that and lose my shit to boot, and cause one of them piano stopping moments

are confessionals okay here?

It's funny @Karensalright I was just describing MW to DP and I used pretty much the same description as you did in your post about 35 mins ago.