"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.

Poster:

Some housekeeping in case posters were worried about the impending end of this thread - thread 2 is all cued up ready to go when this one is nearly full. I've had to actually do some work and attend some meetings this morning (outrageous!) so missed BH's testimony but I'm already to go join this afternoon.

I've said before I've had some scepticism about aspects of this case, but

The nurses going to the media when they did, speaking to Wes Streeting, being interviewed...

...has had a massive impact on public opinion and policy.

The core fact of the case, that biological men are allowed in NHS nurses changing rooms isn't in question.

PS I'm as confused as fuck about this sign.

I also spotted that SC referred to RH will say and then quickly modified it to RH's statement. Have they really decided that the optics of having RH in the witness box are worse than not having him? Crikey.

Yes, it matters. The nurses are being challenged on the claims about his behaviour, both in and outside the changing room. So they are being attacked in terms of their credibility during their XX. His witness statement clearly denies these behaviours, but if he won't turn up and face XX himeself, what weight can anyone give those denials in face of what all these nurses are saying he did?

I think from a practical point of view a mere nurse going up against the NHS about the latter's outrageous treatment of nurses involves such an imbalance of power that getting media interest is effectively essential in (slightly) evening out the imbalance. That involves providing details that makes reporting meaningful.

It has the character of whistleblowing.

but if he won't turn up and face XX himeself, what weight can anyone give those denials in face of what all these nurses are saying he did?

I believe the nurses oc. However if I were Rose I wouldn't turn up even if I were innocent - likely images all over the media/social media and serious harassment.

I agree with Nauticant, they fought fire with fire - and told the truth about what was going on internally, to the press an act of blowing the whistle IMO

But that takes us straight back to the Great Unanswered Question - why on earth are the Trust fighting this, because it exposes said RH to just that?
Edited due to brainrot

I’d be rolling my eyes a lot at hours of detailed questioning because a bloke was in the women’s changing rooms. I mean, come on. What else is there to say!

I also think that details of RH going into the public domain was as a consequence of his behaviour and what County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust did in response.

The images are already out there, he looks like a man as he is male. It's not the nurses creating his maleness nor causing his behaviour in using the wrong facilities.

The sign was discussed with the witness KD yesterday. It is an element of the harassment case. There were in fact two copies of it, one on the inner door of the CR (accessible only with a PIN) and one on the outer door. It appeared in July 2024 ie after the nurses started their claim. Neither KD nor BH knew who had put it up. The nurses and MN's suspicion is that it was RH. Internet sleuthing by MNers yesterday found no evidence that it is an official NHS poster. It sounded from what SC said today that it was taken down by management.

I agree, whilst it may seem threatening to put in a letter you may instigate a disciplinary investigation, or it may lead to dismissal etc. the reality is it is a standard practice in many policies and procedures. The point is you are not threatening ,you are pointing out the potential consequences so no one can claim they didn’t know the consequences.

Obviously the rest of the language used in a formal letter can make it threatening or conciliatory etc.

Has it actually been confirmed that Rose will not be giving evidence in person?

Rmour is he won't. SC had a verbal slip that suggested he wouldn't. But it would not help their case, although might be better for them attempting media spin.

The problem with going to the media as whistleblowing is PIDA (Protected Interest Disclosure Act). This Act, and supporting documentation, sets out who you can whistleblow to. The aim is to make the media the last option after you have exhausted the routes in PIDA etc.

Is this the case where the hospital refused to do an op on one of the nurses unless Rose was part of the team? And if so has this been raised yet?

i don't think so, but I think SC thought he would at the beginning. He said yesterday 'RH will say...', and did it again today but then seemed to correct himself and refer to RH's written statement instead. If he knew all along that RH wasnt coming, I can't see him getting it wrong yesterday, because it would have been in his head that they were relying on the statement. And you'd think someone would have corrected him then

Yes.

He is a man in the women's changing room. What on earth can the defence be?

I mean, the sunlight for us is great, but what the hell are the NHS hoping to achieve here?

That's what I read.

What's Rose's original name?

If Rose is a “no show”, I fully expect plenty of “Well we would have asked Rose, but Rose isn’t here!”

I’ve finally managed to catch up so thank you for all the pasting and helpful commentary. I hope Myrtle manages to get discharged soon and heals well. (Wonders aloud whether any of the staff enquired what she was diligently pasting).

Sad to have missed the dog (or was it a cat) yesterday!

As far as I know something that might be that was mentioned in passing once. A reference to "theatre".

i think there was a real and reasonable fear that they were going to be disciplined and their jobs were at risk, which gives rise to exceptional circumstances.