Kelly v Leonardo Employment Tribunal Thread 3

[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

Thread 2 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5420656-kelly-v-leonardo-employment-tribunal-thread-2?page=1

I’m sure in lots of ways he is perfectly lovely but he’s made an utter fool of himself and his position over the last 2 days. You are also spectacularly missing the point. You say “I've always been proud of the companies support of LGBT community,” when this case has absolutely nothing to do with this. Any company in the UK is bound by law to provide for ALL protected characteristics. You don’t get to provide wheelchair ramps or a prayer room and say we’ve done our bit fuck the rest of them. Leonardo has a legal duty to recognise the sex of woman and provide for them, regardless of whether they also tick other boxes for protected characteristics. Unfortunately Andy made the mistake you have and has thought providing for LGBTQ+ colleagues he didn’t have to provide for just boring women.

Oh! I assumed it was a woman. I should know better. Boy is my face red!

BoswellToday just feeds TT into ChatGPT, there is no original thought goes into those roundups.

I try to avoid him like the plague but I saw a post in the week that made me scream with laughter. "Governments from Westminster to Holyrood..." it said, as though the land between those two was littered with tiny houses of parliament.

It really is poor form for a bloke consultant to monetise AI, off the backs of volunteer TT women's work, and then not even fact check the bollocks that is churned out for him.

Poor kind misunderstood Andy.
He was only following orders.

Ye gods and little fishes. If that's the calibre of the heid yins at Leonardo.

Thank goodness as a company they are not involved in producing anything that would have real-life consequences if not done properly.

@lcakethereforeIam, I'm making an assumption from the 'outside the debate' comment. And the tone of the post.

I'm snorting tunnocks though my nose at "proud of the companies support of LGBT community, even though I'm not remotely affected by it. "

It's OK, Andy's Pal, we are not going to point and spread rumours that you are GAY, this isn't the juvenenile boy's toilets you know!

"Unions and HR in lock step." is quite a thing to be proud of though. Are you sure you're not management? Mmm?

They also tend not to realise that most of the time the men in question are men with a penis, not without one.

quoting@Xiaoxiong
** found this info document produced by Make UK "10 ways to support your trans employees" - see point 10 in particular regarding toilets (www.makeuk.org/system/files/documents/Make%20UK%20HRL%20-%20Transgender%2010%20Ways%20to%20Support%20Oct%202023.pdf)

I tried this link but it goes to a 404 page not found. I hope somebody archived it before they pulled it

Weird that random bloke 'not remotely affected by it' winds up on a MN thread about it?

@Bluebootsgreenboots oh sorry about that - does this work better without the brackets:

https://www.makeuk.org/system/files/documents/Make%20UK%20HRL%20-%20Transgender%2010%20Ways%20to%20Support%20Oct%202023.pdf

So I've been thinking about this:

NC: So until the autumn of 2024 when single-occupancy ones designated, then IF the C is right then the only available facility for her was the accessible toilet?
AL: Yes

and later

NC: Not my point. You cd have given TW respect and dignity by keeping them out of ladies loos and offering single-occupancy instead?
AL: Well we considered that, but TW were already using the ladies, so it wd have been outing them if we changed policy.

He's saying the TW can't be restricted to single-occupancy loos as that would be outing, as they magically look exactly like women and no-one knows they are men. But MK will be restricted to the accessible toilet (as she no longer wishes to use the ladies' toilets as they're actually mixed-sex). Won't everyone then think that MK is really a man?

Plus the use of 'folk' always makes me wonder. I know that the word is not exclusively used by believers in gender idiology, but it is popular with that group.

No - it's still there...

So presumably all the organisations who are members of Make UK are following their unlawful advice. Perhaps EHRC should be taking action against them?

And behind Make UK, I place my bets now, is the looming shadow of Stonewall.

The screenshot from Make UK doesn't seem to want to load but it says:

"Allow transgender employees to use facilities which are appropriate to their gender identity."

How can an organisation that claims to advise on HR and Employment Law still have this up on their public website?

I like the start of that document actually. Point 1 (grr, can't copy and paste). But basically, "Train all employees... how to challenge any inappropriate behaviour." So that should include how to challenge men in the women's loos or changing rooms, yes?

Point 10, allow transgender employees to use the facilities appropriate to their gender identity.

Well, how is that working out? Costing everyone a lot of money in legal cases, it seems to me.

Make UK have a piece on the SC clarification, updated in May

Supreme Court rules on legal definition of a woman and EHRC issues interim update | Make UK https://share.google/spmPVVZS0ZQFDUAYm

They seem to be using it as an opportunity to tout for business but, from a quick read, it is broadly accurate.

Yeah, I assume it's an attempt to make them sound ditsy and harmless.

That's a weird-ass organisation. It doesn't seem possible to find out from the website who they are or what they actually do as a company, beyond putting on a rag tag bundle of low-rent training courses?

Why do they put the word suitable in air quotes?

It's either suitable or it isn't.

This is interesting reading: https://www.theretailbulletin.com/interviews/qa-sharon-broughton-lucy-atherton-make-uk-hr-employment-law-11-03-2024/

https://www.makeuk.org/services/hr-and-legal

I can almost hear a Scottish friend's dad using 'folk' instead of 'people' in general conversation, so I suspect that is just a coincidence. I have no idea really, but the tone of it sounded like an older, like-minded friend of Andy wanting to curry favour by sticking up for him on here.

I don't think transgenderUK types are able to put on a veneer like that, or they would make a better effort of not sounding like teenagers on everything else they write!

It's a much older organisation - the Engineering Employers' Federation - rebranded

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Make_UK

you only need to look at threds on the CIPD discussion forums, the HR Ninjas FB group, or the HR reddit to see how utterlly incompetent many HR professionals are, including the 'heads of'. My pal works in HR and wants to leave as its not what it was - you can get the qualification entirely online in mere months with chatgpt helping with your essay answers.
We still have a long long way to go to initiate change.