Do we actually know what the grounds of the discrimination complaint are yet?
Am I right that the grievances are that:
- NHS Fife failed to provide an appropriate single sex changing space for SP (because they allowed Dr Upton to use it and suggested she change in a cupboard instead)
- NHS Fife inappropriately suspended SP when she asked DU to not be in the changing room
- NHS Fife then inappropriately dragged out the suspension/return to work process
From what I can tell, point 1 is fairly black and white. If Dr Upton doesn't have a GRC then he remains legally male as well as biologically, so NHS Fife erred in saying he could use the female changing room.
Point 2 is less clear. I don't know what the precedent is, but I'm a bit worried that SP will be considered to have harassed Dr Upton because she "confronted" him. An alternative avenue would have been to bring the discrimination claim without the discussion in the changing room - based on point 1, I think like the Darlington nurses. IANAL so I have no idea where the line is on harassment/bullying vs an awkward interaction in a stressful situation. I think this is why there has been so much focus on both the specific details of the interaction in the changing room and on any indication that SP might have had an agenda prior to the actual changing room discussion.
Point 3 presumably depends on the specifics of the NHS policy, the exact nature of alternative shift patterns offered and why they were unsuitable etc. I've seen another tribunal where a support worker won a claim on similar grounds (unreasonable suspension about a disputed cigarette break and then asked to work on a different ward with a different patient group), so I think this is fairly likely to be upheld too.
However, I honestly cannot understand why JR spent the best part of a day cross examining Maya Forstater on various blog posts, opinion pieces and research articles. It's just not relevant.
I remember following TT for Sonia Appleby's employment tribunal and it was extremely focused on the minutiae of emails, meetings and communication between different employees at GIDS and the Tavistock. There was none of this grandstanding or character assassination stuff.