Custody officer job withdrawn for GC beliefs - Gribbon (SP legal team) is his solicitor

[InterrobangsArePureBias]

I wonder how many more of such actions will be launched. To adapt Jimmy Doyle’s phrase, “the spectacle of this nation’s [lanyard classes] enforcing moral auto-lobotomy as a condition of entry to [employment]”.

A prison custody officer who was sacked for saying he would not address male-born transgender inmates as ‘she’ or ‘her’ has launched legal action against one of the UK’s largest security firms.
Army veteran David Toshack, 50, was dismissed by GEOAmey during a training course only days before taking up a role as a prison custody officer (PCO) at Kirkcaldy Sheriff Court.
The father of three told a safeguarding workshop that he would not be comfortable using a transgender inmates’ preferred gender pronouns and expressed his belief that a man could not become a woman.
It sparked a horrified reaction from bosses at the firm, which employs thousands of justice workers across the UK, who said his views were against the law and company policy.
…
He said: ‘I’m just a normal, working class person who’s never been in trouble with the law before, not got a criminal record, lived a good life. I’ve been prepared to go and fight and die for my country, and then I have come back here and been told that there’s certain things you can’t think or can’t say.’

https://archive.is/bxjqC

Original story about David Toshack in Daily Mail: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14963309/Prison-custody-officer-sacked-refusing-call-male-born-trans-prisoners-her.html

who is in the legal team apart from MG?

I'm not feeling hugely optimistic that he'll win on the pronoun argument, especially in Scotland, where the establishment is very strongly behind gender ideology. It would make a real difference if he did though. It will be interesting to see what the tribunal think about procedure, as according to the newspaper article he hadn't started working under his contract yet (this will no doubt be clarified).

It doesn’t matter if he was under contract or not if the reason he was let go was because of a protected characteristic. It is still discrimination.

In terms of pronouns, I do think the way they have currently been used in courts shows courts are biased in this matter.

Yes, he's protected by discrimination law, but you probably wouldn't expect the same disciplinary process for someone who had not yet started working under their employment contract. I don't think this is a straightforward claim.

It doesn’t matter what disciplinary process is used, if it discriminatory it is unlawful.

Tribunal Tweets will be live tweeting on the 28 January. I assume the 27 January is a reading day.

I am available to live copy and paste the tweets from the 28 January.

I have a 30 minute call at 2pm on the 29 January, and I am unavailable on the morning of the 30 January till about 11.30/11.45am.

I don't think it's as simple as that. We'll find out soon enough though.

You don’t think discrimination is unlawful?

that was the position in the Mackereth case I think. The nuance between having the protected belief and what amounts to a reasonable or unreasonable manifestation of it. The application of Higgs v Farmors School should be interesting too.

The employer must manage an employee with a PC as a full rights employee when the employee chooses to sack with cause when the PC is the direct reason.
Eg the Er can remove an Ee who is in a wheelchair/has cancer/etc if the Er follows a fair process and proves the Ee cant carry out the role.

If the Er failed to follow the process they will loose that section even if the ET agrees the Er could have lawfull removed the Ee from the role.

According to the newspaper article, the employee wasn't actually an employee at the time in question. The employment had not commenced. Let's assume that's correct. They can still bring a discrimination claim (as you can if you are alleging that you were turned down for a job for a discriminatory reason, or if you are offered a job and the offer is then withdrawn for a discriminatory reason). Are you saying that even at the pre-commencement stage there should be a kind of dismissal process by the employer? You can't technically dismiss a person who is not an employee.

imo👀
😉

The Ee man turned up for company training was issued a uniform and other company property.

That ^ is a contract for the job.

The relationship is a Master/Servaent one. The M pays the S money to carry out lawful instructions.

The M has the upper hand as the payment is needed by the S for a livelyhood. So if a M creates a situation where a S carrys out an instruction on the sole expectation of pay the Courts will give the S the benefit of her/his expectation.

It is up to the M not to create a situation where the S holds a (honest) belief that carrying out an instruction(s) will result in payment.
Eg cafe who hire 16 year old for a day "training" to carry trays/clean tables and then says sorry no job [(edit) and we dont pay for training time. Your benfit is you have a recognised skill you carry into you next interview and our referrence làdedàà...]

In this case there is a safey induction run by inhouse or specialist contract which will be specific to the company.

He was not there on spec or as a applicant who had prior qualifications.

He had to do the induction to reach his pension.

He has a PC all of this is covered :
Read the ad
Turn up for the interview
pass selection (that is offered a conditional contract)
pass the induction bit
pass the supervised training bit
pass the 2 year bit
hit retirement
collect pension

When he reads the ad and turns up for selection the selection process has the fair process built in.
Eg he was the only application
and at the door he is handed a pronoun badge¹
and he said no thanks
and the panel no badges
but they have a score for badge or no badge
but they dont ask any pronoun questions
when the interview ends he would have got the job if he had got that score.

¹ replace ^ with pregnancy/headscarf etc and ■ below where the contract □ conditions are not honoured

He passed the selection and has a conditional contract which said
□ we within 2 years can let you go for no reason or any reason other than a PC reason.
And
□ if you have a PC we will prove we would have let someone with no PC go for the same reason
And
□ after 2 years (PC or not) we can only let you go if we prove gross misconduct (Ee breaches contract first)

They will argue that a condition of the contract included (addressing people using pronouns) is with in the scope of any reasonable contract and the Breach was therefore by the Ee so gross misconduct

I just googled David Toshack. The fourth result on google is a link to the FSU Facebook page. On google, under DT's name, it says "He pleaded guilty to two counts of sexual activity with a child under 16, meeting a child following sexual grooming, child abduction, and ..."

Obvious misinformation if you already know a bit about the story, but it could be damaging for him if people see that and think it's true. The timing, just before his tribunal, is suspicious too (to me, anyway!). I decided to contact FSU to let them know, only to find their website's been hacked by TRAs.

Am I wrong to think these people are trying to influence the tribunal? Is it just coincidence?

GRA likely to be irrelevant because so few people have GRCs
(less than 6000 men in the whole UK)

@HamSandwichIrnBru do you get the same result with a "secret mode" search?
I find that my search can be thrown by prior search data as google is now designed to show you what it thinks you want to see based on your personal profile/country/location/whatever ..

The employer pushing a metric would be a serious data breach/ handling issue.

But gaming the metric by could be possible by another party...

@AnSolas yep, same result.

I hadn't suspected the employer of foul play, but calling him a paedo seems like classic TRA behaviour!

This is what I am seeing doing a Google Search, logged out of Google, in a Private/Incognito window.

(Might be a wait until the screenshot passes Mumsnet scrutiny and is revealed)

I got the link and pin for tomorrow, anyone else?

Yes got mine this afternoon

From Tribunal Tweets (TT) on 21 January 2026

Tribunal Tweets expects to be reporting from the Edinburgh Employment Tribunal from 28 January 2026 on the case of David Toshack vs Geo Amey Ltd.

David Toshack (DT), the claimant, asserts that he was dismissed from his role as a prison custody officer, during the final week of his six week introductory training course. His appeal against dismissal was not upheld.

[I will be pasting from Tribunal Tweets on this tribunal from 10am]

A note on how I paste and why it can be pasted very quickly after TT has posted.

Anything from TT is pasted in its own post. If I comment on the post I put my words in square brackets [like so] at the bottom so you know it's me. But this is usually a comment in a delay or technical issue.

I generally post my own thoughts in their own posts to keep TT and me separate.

If it doesn't say From TT at the top, then it's usually my own comment. Sometimes a TT paste can slip through, so if it sounds like the court, I probably forgot. But that is rare.

I am a speed reader which helps and I generally don't read the tweets until I paste them.

I have three Chrome windows and a Notes app open at the same time.

1. I copy from X which is open in a Chrome window on my iPad mini.
2. The Notes app is also open and I paste them there where it already says From TT so I don't type that every time. If I don't paste into Notes first, the separate lines indicating who is speaking get lost. So this is to make it easier to follow.
3. I then highlight and remove time stamps and usernames that have come from X, before highlighting and copying all the tweets and pasting them on MN which is open in a separate Chrome window.
4. I also have a separate Chrome window so I can catch up with other internet things without getting confused.

I do like to read everyone's comments and join in, and I also like to make and drink tea and need the loo, so sometimes the tweets come in batches. If something crucial happens and I haven't posted please be patient.

If MN goes down, or X goes down, I post again as quickly as I can in bigger batches.

If I have to step away I will try and warn you so others can take over pasting.

I'm always happy to answer questions about my methodology.

I ❤️ you @MyrtleLion

<blushes>

From TT

We expect to be reporting today from the Edinburgh Employment Tribunal on the case of Toshack vs Geoamey Ltd.

Mr Toshack (DT) asserts that he was was dismissed because of his gender critical beliefs. His appeal against his dismissal was subsequently upheld. He is claiming harassment, discrimination and indirect discrimination on the grounds of his gender critical beliefs.

Our Substack with background on the case is here:
open.substack.com/pub/tribunaltweets

We are a volunteer collective of citizen journalists. Please follow us on @X, our Substack and consider subscribing.

Abbreviations:
DT/C - David Toshack, claimant
DH - David Hay, KC, for claimant
MG - Margaret Gribbon, solicitor for claimant
GA/R - GeoAmey Ltd, respondent, a British company specialising in prisoner transport.
BR - barrister for respondent
J - employment judge
(names as we have them)
J/AJ - Employment Judge Amanda Jones, sitting alone
MM - Michael McLauglin, advocate for Rs.

@MyrtleLion
You are amazing. Thank you for doing this.