Did she agree that women need single sex spaces really though? I think her testimony was that DU was a woman so no problem.
She was also of the mindset that it’s ok because no one else complained.
Both just as bad positions to take as all the others. She might have expressed the view that others have a right to their opinions but none of her actions support that other than she doesn’t seemed to have fully signed up to the witch hunt.
But that only appears to be the case based on how she is describing trying to conclude the suspension. I don’t think she cared about the witch hunt or she would have done something more after KS couldn’t stand up the accusations of racism. When KS said nothing in reply to being told she might be culpable for not reporting it at the time what did LM do? Nothing. She still used the accusations to bolster the need for supervision for SP’s return to work and supervision was discretionary not standard practice.
The idea that this would somehow protect SP from further bogus accusations is hokum. Supervision is for a relatively short period of time and would do nothing to prevent such as, and this is the kicker, they were made up not actual.
LM ended the suspension because she knew that. She knew therefore that they did not have a legal leg to stand on and was trying to play both sides — placate SP whilst using the suspension supervision to mollify DU.
It’s definitely a reasonable strategy but does not demonstrate any interest in resolving the core issue SP has brought to their attention.
LM could have said, for example, this won’t go away until we as a management team really face the issue of the impact of self id on single sex spaces and how they impact women.