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

KH has just said they've changed their policy to deal with AB situations. Over the past week have witnesses been giving evidence about the old policy at the time of the AB situation or the new policy?

Service users have the opportunity to change support worker (we just won't tell them originally if it's a man or a woman but will gaslight then instead)

I'm assuming worknest are captured and stonewalled?

I imagine so, doubt a ra ra TWAW org like ERCC would use it otherwise

Witness ends comment with '... and I think its really important we're clear on that'. Total politician speak.

The Pretenders' Brass in Pocket has just popped into my head.

"I'm special, so special.
I wanna have some all of your attention.
Give It To ME"!

NC: "Aren't you being a bit of a politician there?" 😂

NC aren't you being a bit of a politician there

Ha! NC - aren't you being a bit of a politician there?

[Another mention by KH of national service standards.]

KH AB not the problem here. Choice of name...

NC Choice of name flagged to su that AB may be male. That creates the problem. Predictable result is that sus will ask qs

[ERCC have changed their processes since to have initial meeting for sw to meet su and disclose id - KH: if they want to]

KH we all know what it's like to try to find a therapist that you gel well with.[Yes, of course KH, THAT's the problem, silly us, not that you think it's okay to be putting raped women in with a man]

...
[later on]
NC Aren't you being a bit of a politician here...

From their website. Revisit your policies
While understanding and respect are key facets for an employer to grasp when it comes to LGBTQ+ inclusiveness, the journey does not end there.
According to Stonewall, more than a third (35%) of LGBT staff have hidden their sexuality at work in fear of discrimination. With that in mind, in order to embed greater equity into the culture of the organisation and make a substantial change, something more tangible is required.
This is where policy and strategic planning will take centre stage, enabling businesses to cultivate a culture of diversity. For instance, in respect to terminology, while it’s one thing to make a conscious effort with this, baking it into policy and procedure is another entirely, and will further safeguard the inclusiveness that the company is aiming to cultivate.
This could be as simple as moving away from traditional “he” or “she” pronouns, and implementing “they” or “them” as standard parlance.
Other such policies may concern areas such as dress code, benefits and talent acquisition procedures. Ironing out systemic inequalities in these areas is likely to provide quick, easy wins, allowing the organisation to swiftly move away from potentially discriminatory practices.
On the strategic planning side of things, similar goals can be achieved by benchmarking against the practices of other modern organisations. New and innovative ideas to cultivate LGBTQ+ inclusiveness in the modern workplace are emerging every day, and with corporations taking note of each others’ initiatives, this innovation will only be

I'm wondering if she had posters of Nicola Sturgeon on her bedroom wall growing up?

At what point do a board say that "actually, this may not be the best work environment for you because you don't want to talk about sex and sex is a key issue that is relevant on a daily basis."

Its like saying you have a fear of blood, but want to be an open surgeon. Or being terrified of water and being unable to swim but applying for a job as a kayak coach.

Is anyone else getting booted out all the time? I've had to rejoin at least half a dozen times.

Talking about Roz was asking for MW etc to be told that she wasnt transphobic I think

She's tacitly admitting that the views were the issue here.

Oh, she's floundering now

"in an investigation of discriminatory views"

Oh please keep saying that.

This witness obviously thought Roz was a massive transphobe

Service users have to feel assertive enough to do that.

Note the earlier comments about this witness on this thread - arrogant, cocky and overly confident were used.

Vulnerable service users will often have massive issues with anxiety and confidence. This means they are much more likely to disengage with the service rather than challenge.

Would this woman understand this?

KH I'm not sure MW said RA transphobic in so many words. I made MW and nico aware of outcome of disciplinary.

NC RA asked for MW and nico to not say she was transphobic and there was no evidence. You didn't give her a straight answer to that. Unreasonable not to.

KH Not unreasonable. There was conflicting evidence c RA's views, not clear to me what her views were. To say can no one make those accusations again closes ability to staff to express those concerns if they occur again.

[KH has read the pack in preparation for today. Of course.]

To be fair, they also have an article about the forstater judgement.

I counted about five mentions of 'views', although they've all been saying it's not about views.

KH if we said to senior mgt they couldn't raise a concern c member of staff they couldn't do their duty to other staff members. I brought it back to policy. All staff allowed to think what they want, and do what they want outside work, but have to adhere to our policies

It sounds like she's saying that "transphobic" is a necessary word to implement their policies, and if you take it out of the vocabulary then you can't maintain discipline properly. Is that a fair summary?

No! She's to blinkered without enough worldly experience to understand not all women can speak their mind like she can or even that some women don't even realise they are allowed to speak their minds