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

NC just told him he should have taken sensible advice

God I wish MNHQ would bring back the laugh reaction. 😡

Back to institutional cowardice.

I bet he's furious right now

No, but there are lots of swans who get quite cross with people boating on the lake. They're softies if you take them poultry corn.

Less surprising than it would be now. In 1970 around 8% of Scots 18 year olds were in higher education, rising to 14% in 1979.

It would be higher for men than for women, though.

Oh she's really needling him now, the word cowardly used several times.

I'm really hacked off that TT can't hear/transcribe AL's responses, this is a really fundamental area of questioning, and it would be great to hear how he is attempting to defend himself and L.

So depressing to see the trade unions just give up on supporting basic workplace rights for women.

Which would have been easier than falling off a log!

Take advice on FWS judgment.
Apologise to staff for fucking up, in the first place.
Told staff to behave yourselves and use the right god damn toilets.

From TT

NC are you saying it because you think it's legally defensible?
AL - we had ground to defend. [again more that's impossible for me to hear]
we are in a position to defend, maybe views have changed that....[again muffled

It’s scary to see how badly they’ve been captured.

From TT

NC I want to suggest that you couild have taken sensible advice, you got it wrong and commicated this to the staff and use toilets for their sex, that's what you should have done
AL - that is your opinion. My opinion is that we have an obligation
NC = you should have faced down objections and told staff you have to obey the law.
AL - that's your view

Yes, I noticed that.

It's scary that it's not his view that you should follow the law.

NC You have to obey the law

AL That’s your view

?!?!?

🤯

Cowardly again.

Imagine if the SC had said commercial drivers must take a break from driving after 2.5 hours. He would absolutely have told the union it was the law and they could fuck off.

NC As a way of treating your employee that's despicable

NC done

Say what? Honestly, some of these quotes, I'm thinking, that's not from TT, is it? Someone is making that up as a joke?

Sounds good. It would be a pity not to have any walls, though?

That's your view is so childish.

It reminds me of when we were teenagers in the 90s, we used to respond with 'that's just subjective to almost everything we didn't like. As we were kids who thought they were being clever.

From TT

NC and ultimately you are defending this claim so you can say 'it's not our decison, it's the employment judge and this is a cowardly way for your company and you personally to behave. That's bad enough, judges have to make unpopular decisions. The other person you are deflecting to is the C.
AL I am trying to find solutions.

NC she has to go back to work next week
AL
And she has to face her trans ID work colleagues, the ones she has been at pains not to blame she has to face them
AL yes
NC she has been universally outed at the women how made the claim

AL we will manage the relationship when C comes back to work
NC you say she followed a cause. But if you had followed the law this wouldn't have met the news cycle.

NC it is inevitable now that trans activists will be stirring up trouble against C
AL up to this I was unaware of this
NC she will be seen as a terf
AL [muffled]
NC the effect of your contact is to put a target on C's back

He is not necessarily especially intelligent. I read he joined as a toolmaker. I don’t know if that is correct. He is in HR. I presume he knew how to press flesh, network and who to ingratiate himself with. Work in Leonardo’s interests.

He is cunning enough to promote the ‘I believe TWAW line’ as if that makes him ‘principled’, and offers him ‘a get out of jail free card’ about how MK (and implication any other woman who dared complain) was treated. Any stress, discrimination, harassment, bullying or intimidation of women in the pursuit of any lad’s desire rendered to just a mere side effect. Sanctimonious and not to be repudiated (especially by actual women as he does know who is a woman). I think that is disingenuous. He knows that people can’t change sex. It is the prioritisation of men’s wants over women’s needs. I think he just doesn’t give a shit about women. If the higher ups were having a bit of a snigger at the suggestion of women standing up for themselves being landed with a ‘hate crime’, I wouldn’t be surprised if it was a bit of a joke throughout the Company how women could be left unable to defend their rights on pain of censure or threat disciplinary action.