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

Eearly in the proceedings we had to listen to the fact that an obvious non typist had spent her spare time typing up a transcript of a (was it a three and a half hours?) meeting?

I have to do Transcript of a ten minute phonecall at some point. I've just spent over a minute trying to make sure I got one sentence that is about 3 seconds long right and that's in my own sodding voice so I know what I'm saying in that moment!

It must have taken just forever fur that woman to type that transcript so why the fuck didn't they pay someone to do it? That bit is just so insane!!!

Agree BB.

When I was a trainee I had to transcribe a 58 minute disciplinary meeting. I am a fast typist and it took me nearly 8 hours to get it right. People talking over each other, muffled voices etc.

It must have taken just forever fur that woman to type that transcript so why the fuck didn't they pay someone to do it? That bit is just so insane!!!

Agreed. I've previously expressed my incredulity that they paid for legal and HR guidance but it didn't occur to them to adopt the time-saving method of hiring a transcriber so that the outcome could happen within a reasonable timescale. I've no idea what they were thinking.

I think they were thinking RA was a bigot so her feelings didn't matter

I had to do transcriptions recently as part of some studies I was doing for a qualification. The conversations were done over Microsoft Teams so I had the participants’ permissions to record and I used the built in transcription functionality, which helped with a starting point. It at least identified who was speaking!

Even so, I had to go through each one and correct for accuracy and it took me 2-3 hours per hour of conversation. If I ever had to do transcripts in a professional setting then there’s no way I’d be doing it myself unless they were going to pay my full hourly rate!

I have been an audio typist and they reckon 15 minutes of clear audio takes 1 hour to transcribe (transcribes are real scribes)

And that is clear audio, no umms and aahs, no mumbling, no repetition, no vocal fry.

It is a professional skill, it just shows how little they know that they think they can produce an accurate version themselves. I'd be questioning that!

Further to Red's epic post above, one of the problems of interpreting the Equality Act has been brought in by that bloomin bundle chap, who pontificates that simple words like 'man' and 'woman' are not defined, therefore open to any old interpretation you choose. W ⚓️

I’ve been reflecting on the OUs second statement.

I wonder if their legal team have digested the 155 page judgement and said you don’t have any grounds to appeal.

Yes, I think that's right. Which could be worrying as his first, terse, statement might more truly reflect his own opinion.

Possibly, the second statement would have been out earlier but the OU's legal team took some time to stop ROTFL when he asked if they had grounds to appeal.

I am heartened by the fact that I'm not just incredibly slow at transcribing, but that it is a dedicated profession in its own right (bows down to all those with way faster fingers than me!) And just more proof that the ERCC couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery.

Very interesting thread by Trina Budge with a deep dive into the funding and policies of ERCC, based on KH's comment that they are now seeing survivors of "all genders".

x.com/hightreebud/status/1751036172661387546?s=46&t=SPorwN-mokktL467rcZ57g

Same.

I was reading that earlier.

At some point someone with some sort of power over them needs to address the fact that ercc are fucking things up left right and centre!

This is very vague but I did read that the duties of trustees under Scottish law are to promote the stated aims of the charity, and that this might cause problems for the trustees of ERCC as the current tribunal clearly shows that their primary aim is to promote the TWAW agenda.

I don't think it's exactly their top priority but ERCC's TWAW agenda - or perhaps we should say, the approach they have taken to inclusion - is interfering with their stated charitable aims. And the trustees have failed to recognise or acknowledge that. There are other ways to provide a service that supports trans inclusion which do not require a universal blind acceptance that TWAW and would not interfere with their primary charitable purpose.

Oh hang on I misread the tweet - Katie Horsburgh seems to be saying that ERCC is now a fully mixed-sex service though it wasn't at the time.

I have been thinking about earlier posts on this thread about the financial impact on ERCC if they have to cover costs. Then there are the reputation impacts with service users and funders and governance issues re charity regulation. ERCC is potentially a busted flush.

Beira’s Place seems to have been set up with very experienced leadership and strong governance. Would BP be in a position to step in to provide leadership if ERCC looks like it could fold? It would be awful for rape survivors in Edinburgh if one of the main service providers could not continue.

Note: Before one of our monitors pitches in to criticise RA for bringing the case, she was trying to meet the needs of and advocate for her service users. She is not the problem here.

Oh hang on I misread the tweet - Katie Horsburgh seems to be saying that ERCC is now a fully mixed-sex service though it wasn't at the time.

Yes, apparently only for less than a year.

So its charitable aims have changed. Hope the funders are all on board with that.

Again, there are ways to run a mixed-sex service that don't have a dire effect on women. Only it doesn't look as if ERCC has found one.

So its charitable aims have changed. Hope the funders are all on board with that.

They were changed in 2014 according to Trina but ERCC has only just started being fully mixed sex.

It looks like they didn't care to even consider females who have been traumatised by males, or try to look for a way to support them, at all.

ERCC is there to support and validate MW first and foremost

I wonder how carefully the Board has examined that charity funds have not been used outside their restrictions to include adult men... (Making a point about those who are men and identify as men, as we know the main funders' position is TWAW so that's a separate point).

Certainly based on what we have seen in the trial, I wouldn't have very much faith on the competence of the Board to a) understand the governance and legal environt they operate in, let alone to b) challenge operational decisions. They all came acros as employees, not as Board members.

Boards should be policy decision driven. CEO and staff should work within policy, staff via CEO should alert board where there is a policy gap.

Thats how its supposed to work, not as it happened make it up as you go along and discipline someone for saying what is the policy please

I suspect the first statement was a knee-jerk reaction to an outcome they thought wouldn't happen. Plus a bit of bravado to save face, hence the references to considering an appeal.

Then either they read the whole judgment or their lawyers did and explained it to them, at which point they realised just how badly this had gone and just how difficult it would be to find grounds on which to appeal, let alone the chances of winning an appeal.

Sorry for my ignorance but can anyone tell me what happens next on this case and when?

Oral submissions from counsel for claimant and respondent scheduled for April 3.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4992537-another-gc-employment-tribunal-roz-adams-vs-edinburgh-rape-crisis-centre-5?reply=132485364&utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share&utm_source=copylink

After that, tribunal will reach their judgement and issue their report which will take however long it takes. Good chance it won't be available until Summer at earliest or more realistically September and beyond.

I'd like to be wrong.