UCU being taken to tribunal over discrimination for 'gc' views

[ArabellaScott]

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/gender-critical-documentary-makers-take-ucu-tribunal

The filmmakers of 'Adult Human Female' are taking UCU to tribunal.

I'll try to find an archive copy.

UCU is the national body which sets the policy for all the branches. So the point that he wasn't a member of the Edinburgh branch is irrelevant.

Also weird stuff that if Wayne didn't complain against other groups why should have feel he can complain against UCU?

Enjoying how prof wayne refuses to let the UCU barrister set the agenda. Sometimes when he asks clearly leading questions Prof Wayne answers the important question not the question asked. E.g over the definition of woman where he was trying to make out it had some sort of copyright by KJK and was not a normal dictionary definition and prof Wayne pointed out KJK doesn't have a copyright on the term and it's just a dictionary definition (which I note MAGA is not.... really disliked the attempts to link a basic statement of material reality to MAGA too. FFs.)

Particularly loved the bit when Prof Wayne noted he's done a lot of academic work on representing marginalised communities who struggle to get their voices heard! Thank you prof Wayne.

For example he hasn't made complaints against the Staff Pride Network, another network, the Edinburgh University Pride Society, a Edinburgh University student newspaper. I mean, so what?

I wonder if a lawyer knows why he is going this way? Is it a legal argument that you have to take action against everyone, even if you have no legal relationship to them?

Exactly. The UCU is paid for by academic subs which are not cheap. So Pro Wayne has the right to question and in this case sue them for not supporting him.

Oh the concept of 'decent' academics and how they base their views on evidence. How many of the TRA academics would be included in that?

So now the line is that if UCU attacks didn't mention Wayne and O'Neill by name, then there can have been no adverse impact on them in terms of the campaigning against the film.

Lunch. Return at 14.15. More questions for Wayne after lunch, maybe. But counsel for UCU is being clear is mud here.

Got it - so by taking this to tribunal the film makers have increased publicity of their film and other academics will have viewed it and now taken a view on them based on that. So it's all their own fault for calling attention to their transphobic film

So it’s a) a publicity stunt, b) a chilling attack on freedom of speech, AND c) a dogwhistle to transphobes.

Gosh, that’s quite a lot for one short film. And there was me thinking it was just women talking about women’s rights.

It appears that the bundle is being hosted by the claimant's solicitors during the hours when the ET is sitting.

https://jrlevins.co.uk/mr-m-wayne-ms-d-oneill-v-university-and-college-union-3309730-3309731-2023/

Yes I agree with this, and I agree it’s overreach. I would much rather the union went back to fighting for its members’ interests instead of posturing on fashionable issues that have only very tangential connections to their membership. Palestine is one of these - I don’t see how, in making this such a key UCU issue, they can avoid alienating and upsetting some of their members (and potentially creating conflicts with protected characteristics). I guess gender identity is another such issue.

I would be very interested to know if there are any actual regulations around what unions can and can’t do on these sorts of things.

Looking at the bundle, UCU's position seems to amount to "we didn't do it; and if we did, it wasn't because of their protected characteristic; and if we did, they made us do it". Is that about the size of it, legal bods?

Er......I didn't even know that bundles had to be 'hosted' anywhere..

oh well, there goes my promising legal career <puts sharp suit back into wardrobe> 😞

I think that this is the solution that arose out of the to-ing & fro-ing regarding the bundle on Day 1. You can scroll through the bundle to read it but cannot download or copy & paste. The idea is that observers can follow the proceedings referring to the bundle when necessary but are not able to download & post particularly egregious snippets on MN or Twix.

It mirrors proceedings in court where documents might be made available for people to look at but wouldn't be given to someone who could take them away and make photocopies.

I used to work in a public service job where people could view documents, including maps. You could not take a photo or make a photocopy. People who came to look at the documents could however make a sketch of the maps/doucments if they wanted to, with paper and pencil/pen.

Thank you for this but, now that I've had the chance to look at it, I don't believe it is the document from which the Judge read. It doesn't say anything about commenting live on proceedings and about the distinction between observers and journalists, which was what worried Tribunal Tweets, and me, earlier. I still haven't received a reply to my enquiry about what document it was, though.

I wish the judge could see the video. It's hard for pp to understand just how unhinged TRAs can be if you've not been involved in this.

I wonder if the video does include 'experts'; surely, for example, JKR or Maya F should be considered 'experts' in terms of the level of unhinged abuse they've endured.

I seem to recall JKR has had to involve the police many times. What constitutes an 'expert' especially given - as we've heard - academics are scared to study these topics or to admit to doing so and include such work in their published academic output.

It might be worth next time obtaining an 'expert' such as a police offer who deals with online threats, such as the ones against JKR.

Also, what about the actual video footage of women being attacked? There's the video of KJK in New Zealand where it's clear who the attackers are. She's just trying not to get trampled / punched.

In fact there are MULTIPLE recorded Let Women Speak events disrupted / attacked by TRAs. I would be FULLY in support of the Judge and Panel watching a few of those.

'Non Binary Liberation Officer'? Good grief.

Yes! UCU has an obligation to defend everybody, regardless of their views. That’s the whole point of a union. Which is why I ditched UCU a couple of years ago. I was incensed that they would take my money (approx £40 per month) while disparaging and refusing to support me as a gender critical feminist. The sheer arrogance was too much.