Kelly v Leonardo Employment Tribunal Thread 2

[ickky]

If you want to observe send an email to

[email protected]

Subject line

Ms BM Kelly v Leonardo UK Limited Employment Tribunal – hearing Case number: 8001497/2024

Ask for the link and pin to observe.

State you are a member of the public and give your full name and the email address you will use to access the tribunal.

Abbreviations:
C or MK - Claimant, Maria Kelly
NC - Naomi Cunningham, barrister for C
KW - Katy Wedderburn, solicitor for C
R or L - Respondent. Leonardo UK
ST - Susanne Tanner KC, barrister for R
J - Judge
P - Panel member
GC - gender critical
GI - gender identity
AL - Andrew R Letton VP People Shared Services Leonardo - respondent witness

Tribunal Tweets coverage here

https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/kelly-vs-leonardo-uk-ltd

Thread 1

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5416903-kelly-v-leonardo-employment-tribunal-29th-september-10am?page=1

Echoes of SP/NHSF - NC has brought up L's failure to follow their own grievance timescale, delays at every stage of MK's.
I think this is a very strong point, it's hard to waffle your way around not following your own procedures.

I've got my ear to the speaker and NC keeps deafening me

From TT

NC [ref p145] This is the grievance policy. Sure you're familiar with that document and that you looked it in relation to MK's grievance. Quite demanding timescale for the stages - five working day gaps between steps. Tight timetable but that's what it says.

NC: But in MK case every stage was delayed. And unacceptable reasons for delay given. [goes through some dates. AL agrees that normal timescsales were not followed]

I can say for myself (in a male dominated sector) that I had not really heard of Maya or understood any of the trans issues prior to Feb 2025 when I accidentally clicked on a thread here on MN.... If Andy is like I was and gets all his news from mainstream media - Guardian and BBC - then he won't know will he? That is why this is so sinister that the BBC coverage is bad. If the BBC don't cover it, then it doesn't really exist for many people - myself included pre February at least.... The media blackout is to blame for a lot of ignorance.... it is an absolute scandal. Democracy stops functioning if the media don't do their jobs properly

Are you in HR though @KnottyAuty? He is.

But surely it will have been covered in HR professional magazines etc?

Is @ickky here? Will we be needing a new thread soon?

From TT

apologies - my internet connection glitched and have missed some Qs]

[AL is describing discussions had during MK grievance process about how to address]
NC: And this was 16 days after the meeting
AL: Yes

NC: This was not a complicated grievance, with evidence to evaluate. It was simply 'you are letting men use the women's toilets, that's not legal'
AL: It was complicated to take into account everytihng that needed to be.

Surely as part of his role, he should keep abreast of legal matters.

But surely if you were sat giving evidence at a tribunal concerning this issue you would have received legal advice, and any advice worth it's money would have included the legal background.

It was.

@TwoLoonsAndASprout Don't worry, it's ready and waiting.

They get regular HR briefings all the time. It was in Personnel Today for example.

But AL isn't just anybody, he's Head of People or whatever his title is. It's his job to -how did he phrase it? 'keep abreast of' the law as it applies to employment and the workplace.
He never even heard of M Forstater and the WORIADS judgment.

I don’t believe him.

"There weren't any complaints '

Grievance meeting, Andy. Grievance meeting! How does that happen without a fucking complaint?!

😘

From TT

NC: All you had to do was take proper advice and then decide either you are right or we are right
AL: I don't accept that, took time to look at all angles, to consider budgets, all that. Some points anwsered quickly but the overall issue more complex. Much to discuss.

NC: The outcome letter was 31 days after the meeting.
AL: Yes
NC: [p304] - this email asks for a clear idea of what the cause of 6 week delay was. I don't think you have explained that here yet?

AL: I think I just explained - it was a grievance with a number of points, we needed to get all the information together, the biggest factor was to get everyone on board with the facilities we should provide.

Now it's just complete but but but from him

Lunch back at 2.05

He didn't think it applied to him because they hadn't sacked anyone for their GC views.

Me too, it took them a reprehensible 3 minutes to reply!

AL: I think I just explained

Think harder Andy.

From TT

NC: The notice of appeal is p335 but the meeting wasn't until 19th September.
AL: I can't recall dates?
[NC & ST look up doc]
NC: first grievance began June, surely this should have been treated with more urgency?
AL: We tried to get the right people involved, we were diligent, to get it right.

NC: That's the end of a topic, so a good moment for lunch?
J: Agree. We will re-start at 1.05pm

[LUNCH]

Yes, I imagine you’re right!