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

Basically unless its possible to use those words you can't explain the reality of the situation

NC: the Equal Treatment Bench Book has not status in law. It cannot be used as the basis to object to the way I'm presenting my case. It should not have an impact on the freedom of speech of advocates, or on clarity or truthfulness of judicial proceedings.

Anyone else feeling that they are witnessing history?

What this hearing shows is that this area of law is not for people who decide to self-represent. It needs experienced counsel who know the law and the surrounding context inside out.

Brilliant from NC.
Applies also to the BBC style guide, voluntary press codes etc.

Definitely.
NC blows me away every time I hear her speak.

NC. BLIMEY. RESPECT.

(I keep being terrified that it's me with my microphone switched on.... but my screen says it isn't)

I see from TT that she also notes it predates Forstater and therefore is out of date.

And let us not forget the huge conflict of interest of a certain political activist judge involved in writing the ETBB

Was it the main player in Allison Baileys case? I can't remember her name.

I looked it up, was it Michelle Brewer? of the bin accident fame?

I will say this again. It was a BINCIDENT.

I WILL make BINCIDENT happen.

😂

Another long and important stretch by NC:

A GRC doesn't impose any social obligations at all on individual, there is no obligation for an individual to pretend to that someone has changed sex. The GRA is a fancy sort of interpretation act where in certain circumstances some men are deemed to be women and some women are deemed to be men. The Equality Act has an elaborate scheme of exceptions. The Equality Act clearly recognises that privacy decency etc are about bodies and not certificates.

But in any case, there's no impact of a GRC in the case in front of the ET.

NC asking to find for the claimant on all counts

That was about Article 8 rights and that according to counsel for ERCC, ERCC was under an obligation to conceal AB's sex if that's what AB wanted.

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/human-rights/human-rights-act/article-8-respect-your-private-and-family-life

Ouch “NC: And, not one single GRC is in play here. “

So in legal terms everyone’s sex is as recorded at birth.

NC Even if Mr Hayes was right... 😂

The point NC is arguing over is ERCC's claim that AB has a right for ERCC to keep AB's sex secret from service users.

And thus Article 8 is not engaged at all. Besides which, that interpretation gives no rights to the service user.

He must just want to just wave the white flag at go home now! 🏳️

got sidetracked where we up to?