"Darlington Nurses" vs County Durham and Darlington NHS Trust Tribunal Thread 3

[AuthorisedCat]

Link to Thread 1, 7-Oct to 23-Oct; pre-hearing discussion, evidence from KD (Day 1) and BH (Day 2).

Link to Thread 2
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5432103-darlington-nurses-vs-county-durham-and-darlington-nhs-trust-tribunal-thread-2

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. 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 and at Christian Concern who are supporting the nurses via the CLC.
The hearing started on October 20th, with evidence starting on October 22nd and is scheduled to last 3 weeks. To view the hearing online, requests for access had to be made by October 17th. The hearing is being live tweeted by Tribunal Tweets who have background to this case on their substack. An alternative to X is to use Nitter: nitter.net/tribunaltweets or nitter.poast.org/tribunaltweets
The Judge made clear at the start of the public hearing on Day 1 that only TT or press have permission to tweet. If online observers see/hear something in the court that isn’t reported by TT, we don’t mention it until the next time there’s a break. This is a very cautious approach to avoid any accusations of “live reporting” on MN. Commentary on the content of TT tweets is fine as soon as they’re posted on X.
Key people:
C/Ns - Claimants, the Darlington nurses
R/T/Trust - Respondent, County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust
J/EJ – Judge/Employment Judge
NF - Niazi Fetto KC, barrister for claimants
SC - Simon Cheetham, KC, barrister for respondents
RH - Rose Henderson, trans identifying nurse
CG – Clare Gregory, ward manager
KD – Karen Danson, first claimant to give evidence.
BH – Bethany Hutchison, second claimant to give evidence
AH – Alistair Hutchison, husband of Bethany
Other abbreviations:
WFTCHTJ – Waiting For The Conference Host To Join
ET - Employment Tribunal
DMH/H – Hospital, Darlington Memorial Hospital
CR/CF - changing room or facilities
IX - internal investigation
XX – cross examination

Probably. Her LinkedIn profile pronouns are ‘she/her’.

The knots they will tie themselves in...

there is no risk in having a man in the women's changing rooms

embarrassment/privacy etc is irrelevant

so why do they think they go on bothering to have women and men's changing rooms at all? What's that all about? Why is that a required thing?

I can understand why the nurses feel uncomfortable, but it also involves balancing the rights of a trans-identifying colleague. It’s good the tribunal is looking at it carefully hopefully the outcome respects everyone’s safety, dignity, and privacy.

From TT

NF - Bottom of 272 [reads " this has not been addressed. Mentioned as an education talk"] I read that as those ppl came and gave an education talk to those complaining?
TA - No, not awareness, more about the matter they're discussing.

TA - that was about what the concerns were and balance the concerns... to try and understand
NF - Its more than that. It says education
TA - possibly. I wasnt sure what the concern was. I said to go and ask what was needed re support and advice.

As to why AT is still in the room - I think he may be the 'client' for the Rs from the perspective of the solicitors & the barrister. He needs to be available (not necessarily in the room though) in case instructions are needed.

How can this HR person, who seems relatively senior in the organisation, claim with a straight face that she didn't understand what the problem was and it needed clarification by the managers of the people complaining:

Oi, Tracy, there's a bloke in the ladies and our staff are complaining and we need HR help in dealing with it.

What is difficult about that?

Ooh, not touching this with a barge pole. Far too scary. Gillian - you're EDI - get on it.

Everyone unfortunately for the man involved will have to include women who do not want to be props for him, or to undress for him.

I'm very 'uncomfortable' with women not wishing to undress for a man being framed as 'uncomfortable', and something that they may need to learn to get over.

Particularly when the man is being required to get over or be uncomfortable in any way at all.

Odd this sex based disadvantage/benefit and framing of access to women as some kind of reasonable right men have.

Well, when they have been reported for perving, I'm not sure anyone would be concerned with their rights!

Funny isn't it how none of the Trust witnesses seem to be aware of the sex offences of voyeurism and indecent exposure that they appear to be promoting?

It shouldn't be this difficult. If groups of nurses are raising complaints to HR and the solution being proposed is to respond to the nurses from "an EDI perspective" then it's bleeding obvious that that's the "education talk".

Not to mention if he is 'unsafe' in the staff men's facilities then it cannot reasonably be argued that women are safe with a man in their facilities.

From TT

NF - Did you know by then what concerns were?
TA - No we hadn't had anything formal. Hadn't seen Ulyses. Not saying there wasnt one. Just hadn't seen it.
[Judge clarifying. ]
J - you say you cant remember if Rose specifically. Were u aware if any other TG colleagues?
TA - No
[Missed]
TA - there were concerns about TG accessing facilities and about Supreme Court ruling. What were the concerns and whether Jillian could assist.
J - appreciate its not your email
TA - I assume shes referring to theatre managers

I like your use of the word 'balancing' - as many as 45 employees state that their safety, dignity and privacy are being compromised by one employee.
I'm visualising the balancing scales, and the safety, dignity and privacy of the 45 in the single sex space designated for them tips the scales.

The safety, dignity, and privacy of the one single trans-identifying individual can be respected elsewhere.

The idea that the scales are balanced by sending the women elsewhere, so the one single TG individual can enjoy the women's CR in 'safety, dignity, and privacy' is not only irrational, it is clearly anti-women.

But unfortunately , by law, the rights of a trans identifying colleague, in this case a male colleague, do not trump the rights of women to a single sex space. His rights exist, but their rights are not nullified by his demands to share their space.

I wasn't expecting this senior HR person with responsibility to deal with the nurses complaints will have set subordinates on it while keeping herself in ignorance about the subject matter of the complaints.

It's the Mafia model isn't it?

Rose Henderson has no right to be in the women's changing rooms or toilets.

Again: we didn't know what the concerns were, but I sent the EDI person to educate those mean nurses...

Does she not realise how stupid that sounds? The very first thing to do is find out what on earth is going on

Well if she takes her steer from her boss, the ever pucer AT, it's not surprising.

From TT

NF - maybe an obvious Q but did u know who the ppl complaining were? Was it obvious they were F users?
TA- I didnt know no.
NF - How did u gauge its seriousness?
TA - I would have expected formal complaint. Sorry I'm going to fast. I would be assessing that risk and concerns
NF - As early as 2023 Smedley is saying this is a growing problem?
TA - Which is why Ms Laidler is copied in. I dont tend to get involved in those type of situs
NF - You didnt think it was serious enough for u to get involved in?
TA - No I just thought Jillian best placed because we didn't know the level or the risk etc
NF - Right to say the way you saw it as simply noise in the system?
TA - No. NhS is a huge org and I need to make sure my teams support concerns. We are not here to manage concerns just support them.

She is bullshitting.

There is no way she didn’t know what the issue was.

NFs Noise in the system is right - TA chose to not engage.

From this afternoon's tweets I assume that AT's evidence has concluded? Did the judge ask any questions? (I don't have access to Twitter so am just following on here)

Even this explanation presupposes that TA had no 1:1s or team meetings with her subordinates where progress on complaints would be discussed/reviewed.

At the 'upper' end of this scale we have women like Ghilaine Maxwell who did precisely this.

I spelt Maxwell's name wrong but you know who I mean.