Teacher Kevin Lister's court case starts today on Tribunal Tweets

[Imnobody4]

Kevin Lister, a maths teacher of 20 years, is taking New College Swindon to an employment tribunal alleging he was fired for not affirming a student's preferred pronouns.

https://twitter.com/tribunaltweets/status/1770010705019711637?t=46yG9nCCclvIz5b4-iq4cg&s=19

Well of course they can’t - but the law allows for litigants in person and I think it should not be discouraged.

Nobody is discouraging litigation in person. It’s just a simple fact though that they have less chance of success.

Just joined this and listening.

Interested to hear your thoughts @chilling19 It's been quite hard to listen to so far.

He needs proper legal representation.

Although he is making some good points, he keeps losing his point because he is arguing his own points.

For example, his point about being referred to LADO - he almost got to the crucial point that him raising a safeguarding issue would not, in any other circumstances, have led to this. But then he lost the thread - if he could have followed that to its natural conclusion, he could have made the point that he was discriminated against for his GC views.

Also, his original safeguarding report was not investigated it seems. They jumped straight to 'burn the witch'.

Kids are kids, they will always push boundaries and follow fashions.

It’s the adults who have capitulated to all this that is unforgivable here.

Not the only teacher face tribunal over transitioning safeguarding concerns this week: https://christianconcern.com/news/teacher-sacked-for-raising-concern-over-child-transitioning-to-have-case-heard/

Whoever Nikki is, she just turned off her camera in the nick of time.

More glorious sunlight pouring in, many residents of Bristol will be peaking today as the cult is exposed

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/bullying-teacher-believed-transgender-pupil-9178415

“I believe the student was immersed in a cult. I believe transgender ideology is a cult and should not be encouraged and supported in schools.”

Mr Lister denied he held “extreme” views after agreeing he believed that if a parent supported their child’s wish to transition, they should be “investigated for Munchausen’s by proxy”. “It is not my job to push their children towards a Munchausen’s by proxy route,” he added.

I don't think the comment about Munchausen's will help his case, but it's good to get this out there. Plenty of people will agree with him about this being a cult.

He clearly has strong views and as a personality he is one of life’s members of the “awkward squad”. I think many people will agree with him about it being a cult.

Should his demeanour affect the case though? I can see how he may irritate the judge, but the facts aren’t in question are they? That he was dismissed because he refused to use particular words. Cut and dried free speech case I would have thought - unless I’m missing something?

Should his demeanour affect the case though?

I think the issue will be more that he hasn't managed to get to the crux of the issue with his questioning of witnesses. From what I watched yesterday he was making assertions during his cross examination of witnesses but not actually using the opportunity to question the witnesses in relation to policy / training / procedural bias in the school towards trans and against anyone who is GC. I didn't watch today though so perhaps things improved. If what I watched was anything to go by I am worried he will fail because he hasn't proved his case and the judges won't have the information they need to rule in his favour.

Cut and dried free speech case I would have thought - unless I’m missing something?

IANAL but I'm not sure this is really a free speech case. For most of us speech is limited within the workplace. It's a discrimination case.

IANAL but as experienced member of Trib Tweets I'm not sure this case was winnable even with good representation.

I can envisage an approach that set out the unbalanced approach of the school (essentially affirmation only) plus failure to follow up on his safeguarding complaint(s), plus the LADO referral, the violation of confidentiality in the training course, the contrasting treatment of teachers who affirmed vs teachers who were skeptical and the school's last of pastoral care of him.

However, having observed him at the tribunal for a couple of days, I would guess that he did violate the code of conduct in his public dealings with the student and he was easily provoked by the student crossing over into bullying. He did not bother to check the school's policy on trans issues prior to accepting employment, he did not take steps to officially question and request changes to the policy in an attempt to 'balance' out the school approach to transition.

I have heard gossip that he fell out with his legal representation at some point, resulting in the self representation. I wonder if its because they were saying things he didn't want to hear.

Even if he doesn't win - I think his case and the evidence has cut through to the general public and that's good.

Is the case continuing today? Have logged in and only getting conference host repeats

But it's gruelling, and galling. In my case, the judge was really rude and abrupt and seemed very impatient with me. My husbands ex employer bought a Bristol based barrister with a clerk, there were several witnesses and my husband only had me - it was a further extention of the bullying process, really, and it cost them a lot more to put us through it than it would have to settle.

Did your husband win his case?

I'm wondering if the parties have asked the tribunal for another hour to finish their closing argument?

Tribunal tweets might have an update. (I don't do X/Twitter)

This is the impression I got from watching justabaker. I feel sorry for him though because I feel like he’s come up against all this trans stuff which he rightly perceives to be harmful and bonkers but the way he’s dealt with it has been clumsy and at times inappropriate especially when he has approached and confronted the young people directly.

Live stream back up.

I think the panel have been reading the written submissions

The Bristol post article suggests he wrote the pupil’s name on the board when they were suggested to enter a girls’ maths contest.

I imagine listing names - Sarah, Julie, Samira, Fred, Jenny- just felt too dissonant. (Is that the word I mean? Internally contradictory).

Ta!

I think the judge made it very clear yesterday that the claimant needed to be clear in understanding the difference between being discriminated against because he "held a belief" as opposed to the way he "manifested that belief".

I'm not sure he's taken it on board.

Also the way he manifested his belief seemed a bit like a bull in a china shop and not very measured...

Can anybody clarify for me a couple of questions about the girls only maths competition?

Was it (a) external to the school or (b) internal to the school or (c) a competiton that the claimant devised himself just for that class?

And student A actually asked to enter the competiton even though they wanted to be identified as a boy?

Painful. He needs a barrister

I assume it was something like this competition.

https://ukmt.org.uk/mathematical-olympiad-for-girls

This is what he said about it in his Daily Mail article.

the pupil — now 'Liam' — wanted to enter a maths competition for girls. I put her female name, 'Lizzie', on the board with the other students to reflect that the competition was for girls.

This action was deemed transphobic — and I found myself suspended.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12887549/I-sacked-20-years-teacher-standing-gender-ideology-new-guidance-welcome-writes-KEVIN-LISTER.html

So yes, she wanted to enter the competition for girls, even though she was claiming to be a boy.