GC Employment tribunal cases have an incredible 78% success rate

[fromorbit]

Prof Jo Phoenix has been doing the sums:

Employment tribunals involving secular gender critical claimants and including full admissions of liability as wins.

12 wins (admission of liability + claims upheld @ ET/EAT)
2 settled by agreement
2 ongoing appeals
2 unsuccessful
1 dismissed at preliminary hearing stage (ruled out of time and/or claimant did not have employment status)

If we include County Court and First Tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Division)

16 wins
2 settled
2 ongoing appeals
2 unsuccessful
1 dismissed

Final tally (so far): 18/23 wins (of cases we know about).

78% success rate.

The context for these GC discrimination belief wins? last 15 years shows less than 5% belief discrimination claims win at hearing & circa 15-20% are unsuccessful at hearing.

But we are winning at a rate of 78% and 3% unsuccessful.

https://x.com/JoPhoenix1/status/1833489501471043829

Mumsnet gardeners are getting AMAZING results. We are winning and we are going to keep winning till everyone admits biological sex exists and it is fine to say it if you are secular.

It isn't just the gardeners. Everyone who comes on Mumsnet or reads it {that includes the TA trolls - Waves thanks guys!] has helped in these wins by helping boost the campaigns and spreading the word. Lots more winning to come.

Hurray! Nice to have some good news. Thank you for posting!

The high GC success rate is a pretty damning measure of employers flagrantly breaking the law and the seriousness of the bullying and harassment that claimants have been subjected to. It’s appalling.

Brilliant news - not least as more will come forward and the employers will increasingly realise they're being unlawful

People who are fundamentally dishonest and claim to believe contradictory things have a hard time when actually having to answer questions as to why they treat people appallingly.

Great to see but so frustrating that all these wins have not resulted in more change in employers policies and culture. If this many wins hasn't done it what will?

Every single case I sent carrots to has led to a win, so I’m at 100% including contributing to Jo.

I haven't read the link, but I’d image the percentage of 78% would be higher as initially when Maya lost it was the thinking back than that if you said a man can never be a woman was “wrong think” but that has changed.

Someone tell the Fox Killer, he might start winning if he backs the right horse for a change.

Or would the success rate go down if he did? He doesn’t seem very good at what he does🤔

I think there needs to be a more proactive and publicised campaign - much like Stonewall of previous years - an organisation going into / contacting major corporations with the message - here are the stats - are you breaking the law? - how are you supporting your staff to be GC? - we can help you make sure your policies are legal…

not much will happen if HR departments who are already captured are left to work it out on their own

Every part of the public sector seems to need that.

“The context for these GC discrimination belief wins? last 15 years shows less than 5% belief discrimination claims win at hearing & circa 15-20% are unsuccessful at hearing.“

Up to 5% win.
Up to 20% lose.

What happened with the remaining 75% of belief claims not about GC belief over the last 15 years?

Terven Academicals top the league.

Obligatory statement, these wins and settlements are at enormous cost to the central figures, emotionally and financially.

On a slight tangent, I was interested to see Metanoia Institute (James Esses) advertising for a Head of Governance and Compliance. It's something I've noticed after Terven Academical cases…

https://www.metanoia.ac.uk/about/careers-at-metanoia-institute/head-of-governance-and-compliance/

https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/mr-j-esses-v-the-metanoia-institute-and-others-2206164-slash-2021-and-2206708-slash-2021

Why is GC couched in terms of being “secular”?
Is GI defined as a religious belief?

Because until the late 1990s, nobody anticipated that some givens like sex would need to be defended as a belief rather than a reality. However, relevant legislation meant that Forstater could only be posed on the grounds of a firmly and sincerely held belief, rather than comparable to accepting the existence of gravity.

Secular is used to indicate that it is not a belief that is connected with religious or spiritual matters.

encouraging for those still in the pipeline, like the one to protect single sex facilities at work.

The effect may not be immediately apparent but sometimes tankers take a while to slow or turn. Human resource departments will be taking note.

Yes - but is GI specifically designated as secular or is it only GC/sex realist facts that are so described?

WooHoo!
I hoped someone was keeping score,well done Prof Phoenix.
Given our organisational capacities I cant help feeling we would be better at running the country.

This isn't related to GC tribunal cases directly, but I was involved in a case where a senior HR figure ran the dept like her own personal fiefdom. Even forgetting her history, she single-handedly cost the company hundreds of thousands of pounds on this one tribunal. It was only when the CEO stepped in to avoid the whole shit show hitting the papers that she grudgingly was forced into settling.

She kept her role and a few months later she was appointed to the board of an influential HR org (if you know, you know). So this awful, incompetent human was allowed to continue to wreak havoc in her existing role, and to advise on professional standards for her entire industry.

Point being, these people do. not. go. away. They may go underground or reverse-ferret, but they are still there, influencing, whispering in ears.

I read it as Jo Phoenix excluding those cases where people's GC beliefs have a basis in religion ie.not basing their objection on science or fact but because the bible says so.

I'd like to know the breakdown backed on cases versus
Public Sector
Private Sector
Third Sector
and
Political Parties

I wonder if the public sector/civil service/charity sector has no compunction about continuing unwinnable claims because the ideology is so firmly imbedded and it's not their money, they are free to squander. Are they hoping that a Labour government will change the law so that GC wins end, after all, Whitehall is thoroughly captured. The fact that they can treat our money with such contempt is astounding. Business is a different issue, they all will eventually put profit first (hopefully)

I'm reminded of a saying attributed to Einstein “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”

Fuck no, the terven barristers and lawyers are pin-sharp and brilliant. No way do we need Jolly bumbling along and buggering it all up.

I can’t access at the moment.

Did Jo work out how many involved Stonewall champions, and how many were advised by Stonewall?

Very true. This is why the end of GLP's trans interventions in cases is a sad loss. The TAs often employ competent lawyers in the US, Canada etc which are depressingly effective. JM wasted 200,000+ pounds in failure, worse than failure because he made TAs look like time wasters and inclined the law more in a reality based direction. GLP's 8 trans cases had a 100% failure rate either in court or more usual not even getting there.

We have amazing lawyers, but it is even better when your opponents employ hopeless ones.

For the many who want more info on how the cases break down Jo is writing up a full listing in a document.

When it is complete we need start sending it to every appropriate place we can think of. It comes down to that old adage - Let them hate us as long as they fear us.

Right now, the TAs are still holding on because of one big factor, Fear. The fact that GCs have to be ready to use the law to attack every sexist organisation in the UK is sad. However, the reality is we have to keep doing this tell they learn women are REAL and they are not going to be erased and want to be able to call out gender nonsense.

As soon as we do that the vast majority of people who are on our side will feel more and more free to speak up.

It is working. Look how we have come.

So depressing that so many cases are needed on GC beliefs (=acknowledging reality).

The next big wave will be about facilities. I have filed an Employment Tribunal complaint against NHS England (national umbrella org for the whole NHS in England). A thread about that is here: Employment Tribunal Case to Protect Single-Sex Facilities at Work | Mumsnet

I'm not the only one to complain about employers, there's a nurse in Fife in Scotland, and then the Darlington nurses.

Then we have cases against service providers; Emma Harding vs David Lloyd gym chain, and Sarah Summers against Brighton's Rape Crisis Centre Survivors' Network.

There are more, no doubt, bubbling under the surface, people going through grievance processes with their employers.