"Darlington Nurses" vs County Durham and Darlington NHS Trust Tribunal Thread

[ThreeWordHarpy]

Five nurses working at Darlington Memorial Hospital have filed a legal case suing their employer, an NHS trust, for sexual harassment and sex discrimination. The nurses object to sharing the women’s changing facilities with a male colleague, “Rose”, who:

• identifies as female
• has not undergone any physical or hormonal transition and has full male genitalia
• has cited inclusivity policies
• is backed by the trust’s HR department
• has been granted access to a single-sex changing room for women.

The NHS trust’s HR department dismissed the nurses’ concerns, stating they should “broaden their mindset” and “be educated”. More details can be found at Sex Matters

The hearing is due to start on October 20th and is scheduled to last 3 weeks. To view the hearing online email: [email protected] [[email protected]] requesting remote access to the case of 2501192/2024 Hutchinson and others Vs County Durham and Darlington NHS Trust, starting 20th October. Also include your full name and your role in the hearing (eg member of the public or observer). Note, it is likely you will need the same full name and email address to log into the hearing, and the name will be visible to other observers.

The hearing will be live tweeted by https://x.com/tribunaltweets. An alternative to Twitter is to use Nitter: nitter.net/tribunaltweets or nitter.poast.org/tribunaltweets. Tribunal Tweets have more background to this case on their substack, including links to their coverage of the earlier hearings.

In earlier hearings reported at http://archive.today/nh5v9, the claimants were supported by the Christian Legal Centre and represented by Pavel Stroilov (solicitor) and Bruno Quentaville (barrister). The respondents were represented by Simon Cheetham KC. We do not know yet if the same representation will be in place for the October hearing

Background information from Christian Concern who are supporting the nurses via the CLC.

From TT

NF At the top you refer to the statement you prepared w your solicitors. Look at bundle 3, p313. Title is self explanatory - yr answers to the Qs during the resolution proceedure.
KD Yes
NF Finally, in para 32 of yr statement, u speak of a poster on the CR door re inclusive CR

Phew thought I was going to be speed skimming in the car park at school pick up. Nice to see you getting a break from thread leading too.

Shame Dawn has gone, we’ve now got a bunch of students who’ve been at the pub arguing with a Newcastle man across Edge’s argument with two young women.

everyone else is inside court clearly

From TT

NF Looking at the plan. where did u see the poster. Are there 2 doors into CR?
Yes
NF Indicate where u saw the poster.
KD it was on the outside of the main door b4 u entered. And another on the inside of the internal door [points them out]

From TT

KD U saw on the outside going in.
J For the public online, y'll be aware that no-one must record and no permission given. And no live tweeting unless given permission.
SC Good pm. Yr employed as a staff nurse since 2019?
Yes
SC Yr WS, in para 4 on p31

I've only got TT (applied too late for remote viewing). I'm a bit confused as to what NF is trying to do / establish in her questions

R's counsel has a good clear voice, not as deep as his counterpart, slightly more clipped.

It would be wrong for me to steal all the glory.

I think she's establishing the layout of the changing room, that there was a sign on one of two doors talking inclusive changing rooms and that posts on Facebook of Rose show a man.

The usual format is that the claimant's counsel will take the witness through various bits of the bundle, ask them to confirm that it is correct, do any other bits of clarification and then the respondent's counsel will question the witness on their statement.

From TT

SC U say u saw RH in the surgical areas in 2023
Yes
SC Is an operating dept technician
Yes
SC Roses's employment aslso since 2019?
KD I only saw from 2023
SC When did u start using the F CR?
"023
SC Rose will also say from 2019
KD I cant say. Different secondments and working patterns

SC U werent aware of RH prior to Aug 2023, or heard anything?
Correct
SC The main event in 2023. U tell us u had to walk past RHs locker. When were u aware of Rose having a locker?
KD Had seen leaving once before but hadnt thought about it. But then saw R's locker.

From TT

SC U had to walk past RH,
Yes
SC Wearing?
Tight black pants w holes in them. he was getting changed in CR wearing nothing but boxers. It was the end of day so presume was changing - was half dressed I'd say
SC The allegation is Rose asked you if getting changed 3 times

Is Tyler Rose's 'dead name'?

SC seems to be avoiding using any pronouns when referring to Rose.

Let's see if he can continue that throughout.

From TT

SC Rose will say Rose didnt know u and had no reason to ask you
KD I'm not mistaken at all
SC Towrds end of shift
Yes
SC Normally busy in CR?
It coincided at end of shift being together
SC U say the main incident but havent mentioned others?
KD The canteen incident but

KD no others in the CR
SC I say he didnt say these
KD It absolutely did. It brought back the trauma of a chold, why wld I do this to myself?
SC I'm not denying yr childhood trauma. cld seeing Rh be enough of a trigger?
KD It was the smirk and the exact words I heard by my father

Good luck with that!

Judge has warned about comments from observers, so be careful!

She's keeping it together but this must be very traumatic for her. Admire her greatly.

for the avoidance of doubt, I am commenting on what TT has reported.

Yes, painful

Yes, the judge was made sure to state that we weren't to "live tweet" but it's not clear what he might understand by that term.

From TT

SC RH absolutely denies this. Will look at other issues
J Wld it be helpful for KD to read these?
SC bundle 1 on p117, I will ask about the harassment claims. Conduct in CR. Spending longer in the CR than necess on many occasions in boxers or fully dressed

KD I saw RH once but others many times
SC Longer times than necessary?
KD That's someone else
SC So yr saying re the one occas w tight boxers
KD Yes, asking when I was going to get changed
SC Walking around in boxers and sometimes dressed
KD This is what others have said

SC In a CR, I have to pick up scrubs?
KD If work in theatre
SC Have to walk to my locker, isnt e'one walking around to some extent
KD I'd expect fully dressed
SC The 4th is Rose initiating convo w you?
Yes
SC That's not a problem to talk?
KD I see as harassment w what RH said

KD no others in the CR
SC I say he didnt say these

It worries me a little when people post on here about what they’ve seen or heard while viewing online, especially when the judge has specifically said that no one is allowed to do so. TRA’s regularly read Mumsnet threads and will look for any excuse to have the court withdraw permission for online observation.