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

oi - mind your fucking language.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/03/transgender-boss-rape-charity-accused-of-heresy-hunt/

An article in the Telegraph (did a filtered search of news stories including Roz Adams in last 24 hours and it's the only one that comes up.)

"Me me me me me me me me me"

That seems a likely summary.

Thanks everyone, just caught up. Looking forward to hearing the outcome. Still nothing in Third Force News, which is absolutely appalling but no real surprise.

I deeply hope she wins. And thank you @Karensalright for laying this out so clearly.

Caught up 🎉

Thank you all here plus Justabaker and the rest of the Tribunal Tweets witchy fingers.

The Times has now written about some of the evidence from this tribunal
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rape-crisis-centre-run-by-trans-woman-hid-sex-of-its-counsellors-x0q9xnfv2
See also https://archive.ph/CBPNy

And the archive link for the Telegraph article up thread is https://archive.ph/vTdcl

I think I do understand and I agree. If this case was an episode of The Good Fight, it would be called "Sex Matters".

David Hay was trying to discourage the Tribunal from looking at the merits of GII compared to GC beliefs. He argued that RA had acted against policy and that was that. "Them's the rules", as it were. But NC's view was that the policy itself has to be legitimate - a rape crisis centre can't not centre the needs of the service users, for whom sex does matter, and especially not on the basis of a crackpot ideology. Using correct pronouns rammed her point home.

Thanks @Karensalright that's a helpful summary. I had missed that Roz had spoken to a board member about this - to not bring up a safeguarding concern is a complete dereliction of duty as a trustee

Karensalright - "Where MW tripped over his sari"

That wins the internet today (Ok I see you posted last night but still genius)

As far as I recall, the exchange that started the whole stramash was about a female worker who (tries not to eyeroll) has a non-binary gender identity and adopted a common male name. Roz wanted to know if she should say something to reassure a client that the person they were seeing was actually of the female sex. The ERCC being a mixed sex organisation providing counsellers of both male and female sex.
It had nothing whatsoever to do with male people and their gender identities (but it obviously massively triggered MW, and here we are)

@Karensalright
Why on earth has your post been deleted?

@Karensalright Oh - I thought your post was clear and insightful. Why did it go? If someone complained about the wording please can you edit and repost?

Agree the now deleted post was informative and well written, shame it has been removed.

I dont know why - how do i ask?

That was a weird deletion. It's clear that this thread is triggering someone...

Misgendering? Have MN not got the latest from Stonewall and Police Scotland? Sure, some might consider it rude but, if being rude is banned then...have they seen AIBU!?

Report another post of yours (any one) and ask the mods that way.

I personally thought your post was well written, highly informative and, as far as I could see, broke no guidelines.

I think the fact that it was so informative was problematic to the person who reported it.

Absolutely Bez
@MNHQ why on earth was karensalright's post deleted ?

It was very informative.

I suspect correctly sexing a specific individual was the pretext.