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

@Easytoconfuse don't mistake me, I agree he is way out of his depth here and HR guys (or persons, really) should know better. But at least when faced with the consequences of his lack of thinking he admits it. It's refreshing compared to the Bumbas and Searles of this world,not to mention ReframeYourWadhwa.

I'm sure he's never pictured his granny in the loo, actually, or any woman he might love. Men like to pretend womanly affairs don't exist. I still remember the humiliation of having to tell my otherwise lovely husband about sh in the bath right after our third child was born because I couldn't do it without squatting down. And crying desperately "why did you make me say it out loud, I had cleaned everything and I'm bleeding by the liter" (only in French).

Agree with @ChimpanzeeThatMonkeyNews (sorry if I'm over interpreting here) that men as a rule are terribly bad at handling disgust, in the sense that they prefer to live with it than clean it up. See men's loos. See children's diapers. Etc.

Yes, I get that, and thanks for explaining. Isn't it nice to be somewhere where we can exchange views and learn without having tantrums?

I'm now looking at my son and thinking 'I need to train him better.' So I asked him (23, 6 foot plus, a ringer for Peter the manly man, autistic and all the tact of a dead pot plant) what he thought about women's loos. His answer 'They're nicer than mens, and they ought to be left in peace. If they're happy, they leave me in peace or do nice things for me so it's better all round.'

If he can work that out, then surely we can train the men who love us and get it out there that way? I know it's hard, but, as he regularly says plainitvely. 'I'm not psychic.'

I once asked a woman who had been a flight mechanic during WWII how she managed being the only woman in her unit of engineers. She told me she had to be a bloke.

When I came into the predominantly male IT industry fifty years ago, it was the same story.

Women had to prove they could do what men could. I came across many supportive men. Even if some eventually revealed hidden sexism such as “no woman will be a senior programmer before the age of 25”. I showed him.

Women's progress depended on us not being different. Yes we had separate toilets but that was it. Everyone took that for granted. The reality of women’s needs was hidden, partly for reasons of personal dignity but also to convince men we could do the job.

I think that is still taken for granted. Consequently men don’t see that situations they see as awkward but unproblematic are difficult or threatening to women.

I’m not saying it’s women’s fault that women’s needs are not clear to men. But I can see why they are a surprise to many men.

That's a very cute answer from your son! And quite rational, too. I'm very glad some men (and some women) are finally learning that Hell hath no fury like a woman who knows her rights.

Actually you're prompting me to go one step further: are there any True Believers who are both (I) men, but not trans-identified and (II) not playing TRAs for their careers (which would actually make them Untrue Believers, but indistinguishable from TB)? Lammy is pure stupid. Starmer has retreated. Streeting has done some thinking. I mean, even Peter Tatchell is no TB (while he insists on being kind, he has acknowledged that TWANAW which if he had been female would have branded him a transphobic bigot).
I think if you're a female TRA and not in it for the career (Bumba), you must needs be a True Believer (Searle, Chapman) because you cannot just ignore the issues and conflict of rights. If you're a male, well, you can just pretend there are no issues and get on with being kind without screwing your brains too much.

Yes, I agree with you on that.

@Easytoconfuse i’m from an engineering family - dad (mechanical), both grandfathers (electrical x2) (one actually worked on this site and may have known AL historically) as a result I know masses of them.

standard quip is “if all else fails read the instructions” so I’m not sure that they would necessarily have read the sign on the door!

Through you do get a beautiful process diagram for cooking Christmas dinner. That one blew my SILs mind (none engineers in sight in her family or their friends as far as I can tell).

It blew our families mind that it was novel to her as for us it was just accepted. When I shared this on social media all the engineers/ children of engineers I know started sharing theirs too.

Admittedly my Dad’s version (retired, strong traits of neurodiversity) was the most carefully created with ruler drawn lines and colour coding but the diagrams existed in houses up and down the UK (and a few abroad too). The engineers approach to planning a complex meal.

Now my Dad is dead and if my SiL cooks a roast type dinner she creates her own as do my siblings and I.

The diagram sharing has become an annual tradition with some of my friends and our WA group will ping with pictures. Partly I think driven by me as it’s a way to remember my Dad at Christmas. One of my close friends, an engineer, unexpectedly died two years ago, Christmas 2024 her bereaved partner joined the chat as the diagrams had apparently become part of their Christmas tradition too and he was also using the opportunity to remember her with people who loved her. In fact he told us that she used to spend longer on the diagram as she knew she would be sharing it!!

That’s lovely @BeaTwix

But isn't that exactly the problem that "menopause awareness" (etc) was supposed to get over? It seems to have gone straight past the people like AR who need it most. The decisionmakers! Though goodness only knows what it consists of in reality.

Agreed, and I can't think of one. Maybe it's because (and sorry for the controversy) men and women are different. I love my husband of 40 years dearly but I don't understand the way he thinks any more than I'm sure he understands me. That's fair enough because often it's only in hindsight that I can work out what was the last straw. Living with an autistic son and daughter I've learned that I have to say very bluntly, that I am having a bad day and I am close to my limits. Or, as the dear son says. 'The fuse is getting close to the explosive.'

That's why I think we need it simple, clear and legal. We could have something like. 'No men in the women's changing rooms or loos.' Then we could train our small boys to wee in the loo. I used a rubber duck when DS was small, and he played 'soak the duck.' I used a bit of hammerite on its head when he got the hang of that to improve his aim and we called it 'hose the duck.' Then no one has to explain anything or justify the need. No if's no buts, no transphobia or other accusations. I'm sure that's how it used to be...

That's really nice @BeaTwix I'm so jealous! Wish it was that simple from mine.

Only please don't make it my responsibility to "train" my adult DC (or DH for that matter) to give that response. Educate, maybe, but in the end they have minds of their own. Very much so in my family!

I’ve always felt that “menopause awareness” is a largely tick box, virtue signalling, low cost and minimal effort PR stunt with very few actual benefits for women.

It shows yet again that a lot of men when they think and consider “people”, women are not in that group. I assume that this comes from a lifetime of as men, only ever considering women when they need one to provide a service. They expect that the service will happen as/when required with no dissent or objection from women.

If that’s how they think, every action that has been taken makes logical sense.

NC’s questioning of AR is a masterful incremental introduction of the concept that women are people to someone who has never encountered it before.

I felt the same so I skived out of my workplace one. I wish I'd gone along now! If they do another one I will. (They may wish I hadn't...)

Agreed.

The absolute most basic need for menopausal women is single sex toilets within a reasonable distance as flooding is real.

So deeds not words is my feeling about workplaces becoming more 'menopause friendly'.

The whole case shows such bone-deep ingrained sexism at Leonardo it's actually quite chilling.

No understanding of women's needs or rights. No care about obeying the law - not if it inconveniences one man!

And a disregard for this particular female employee's safety.

I am so glad NC pointed out the glaring double standards in the way Leonardo look at safety of men who consider themselves trans and women. Thereby showing that they don't really think of trans identified men as real women.

They were so concerned about the frankly very distant likelihood that their male trans member of staff might be outed that they were willing to put a target on MK's back and subject her to almost certain death and rape threats.

They could have had extra toilets, I'm sure it will turn out to have been a cheaper option. But no, extra toilets aren't the issue are they, it's very clear men's access to unaware and unconsenting women is the issue. No single, lockable toilets will do!

Better to expose their female member of staff to the notice of violent men who routinely threaten death and rape to any woman who dares ask for a single sex space. 5 mins on X would have shown them that this was a certainty.

MK is so brave. There will of course be many other women at Leonardo who want and need a single sex space but given the extreme punishment meted out to MK by management for daring to speak up as clearly demonstrated by this tribunal of course most of them won't speak up - how can they?

Yes @AmaryllisNightAndDay but my memory of that is how much it focussed on loss of mental acuity not details of physical changes.

Also menopause is only part of the whole issue of women’s lives and needs being different and that not being recognised. Clearly women’s needs for private space in toilets for their many needs has been completely missed.

Me Too has been and gone as well. Many women have said how women’s toilets were a refuge.

Women still have greater family responsibilities, suffer more sexual harassment and miss out on promotion and pay. Even after years of publicity.

When we had a decent women’s movement we looked at women’s lives from every aspect and all combined holistically. You can tell I’m a second wave feminist!

Good point about that. My view comes from my dad reckoning there wasn't much difference between training a child and a good sheepdog because you needed, love, limits, clear expectations and calm. I'd add chocolate biscuits to that! For them if they're good. For me if they're not.

DH says his mum used to say the same!

I actually feel a little sorry for this HR guy. On one hand yes he's obviously been professionally incurious and has got the law wrong - which as an HR person is literally his job.

But at the same time, he is probably the most targeted and indoctrinated - sorry, I mean "highly trained" - in trans rights thinking within the organisation. Imagine you are a nice guy working in HR at a male dominated engineering company, came up through the ranks, maybe a bit older and worried you're a bit out of touch and there's a mandate from on high to improve reach to youngsters and look good on the old LGBT stuff. I can imagine he was a sitting duck for all the trans activist misinformation coming out of organisations like Make UK, who are effectively pushing Stonewall law out into their members via policy and legal advice.

I bet he went through hours of training, conference panels, bumf that he was reading and stuff he was hearing from his peers at other companies on his Make UK committee lapping it all up and nodding along without ever even once thinking about how it affected the women in his workplace. Or if he did think about it, he might have then thought - well the women might not like it but they need to get with the times, like me! I'm hip and with it, and down with the kids! And anyway there's a secret squirrel toilet they can use, and I have to support the poor trans people in the office first, like I'm being told I have to by everyone else in my industry. I think that's also why he kept bleating about there never having been any complaints from women, because that was proof in his mind that he was doing the right thing.

I hope the penny has now well and truly dropped that they fucked up. But he will quite rightly be able to say that he was advised by every expert he consulted, both legal and HR, that this was what he was supposed to do. Add to that that every other organisation he knew about was doing the same and his position, while wrong, is at least understandable.

I'm not sure what I am. I do know that in the group I was in 40 years or so ago, women all looked out for each other and the handmaidens would have been called 'a man's woman' and watched very carefully. My education was widened by the older women I had the privelege of working with who taught me when to watch out, and I knew that they had my back and I'd got theirs. My manager's secretary was a truly formidable lady, who could reduce big tough Pete the plumbers to small shamefaced boys with one glance and a 'Well!' These days she'd be a uber Karen so we need to reclaim that phrase.

Rainbow lanyard-itis.

I've been exceptionally busy this week so am trying to catch up on these threads but regarding 'lovely Andy', he seems to have simply not given a thought to women at all.

One exchange between him and NC basically read -

'Erm, yes I agree that women might have been uncomfortable.'

'Oh, I hadn't really considered that there might be quite a lot of women in my workplace who might have experienced trauma or domestic abuse etc'

Erm, yes, badging the single occupancy toilet into a female toilet probably would have solved all these problems at a stroke and would havemeant that we didn't just wipe out all female single sex toilet facilties while men kept theirs'.

'But, but, but.... I mean, one single man felt uncomfortable! We had to hop to it to make that man happy ASAP!'

'Lovely' he might be but he really didn't consider women at all really, did he?

Frankly I'm over calling stupid little men like this 'lovely'. Ignoring the needs of half the population, including the half that includes your mother at the very least, is not 'lovely'.

It's misogyny.

Yes, I'm referencing a previous poster who apparently works with Andy and posted a defence of how 'lovely' he is.

I don't know Andy. I don't think he's particularly 'lovely' given his complete disregard of women.

It is misogyny but if we are to reclaim the mind share of HR bods like this up and down the land, we have to understand how they got there.

And I don't think this guy is motivated by being a raging sexist pig - I think he was a combination of lazy and thoughtless, highly indoctrinated, and a sheep following the herd.

It's misogyny by omission or thoughtlessness, rather than active misogyny if you will.

We have to build a golden bridge for people like this to cross over, especially HR people, if we want equality legislation to be followed in practice and women's rights defended.