"Darlington Nurses" vs County Durham and Darlington NHS Trust Tribunal Thread 4

[ThreeWordHarpy]

Thread 1, 7-Oct to 23-Oct; pre-hearing discussion, KD (day 1 of evidence) and BH (day 2).
Thread 2, 23-Oct to 28-Oct; BH (day 2), CH, JP, MG (day 3&4), TH, SS, ST, LL (day 4), JS, AT (day 5)
Thread 3, 28-Oct to 29-Oct, AT (day 5&6), TA (day 6)

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 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 Seamus Sweeney
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
SW - Sue Williams, NHS Trust HR
KD – Karen Danson, first claimant to give evidence.
BH – Bethany Hutchison, claimant
AH – Alistair Hutchison, husband of Bethany
CH – Carly Hoy, claimant
JP – Jane Peveller, claimant
MG – Mary Anne (aka Annice) Grundy, claimant
TH – Tracy Hooper, claimant
SS – Siobhan Sinclair, witness for the claimants, retired from Trust
ST – Sharron Trevarrow, witness for the claimants, retired from Trust, former housekeeper and wellbeing officer
LL – Lisa Lockey, claimant
JP – Professor Jo Phoenix, expert witness
JS – Jane Shields, witness for the claimants
AT - Andrew Thacker, witness for the respondents, NHS trust Head of HR
TA – Tracy Atkinson, witness for the respondents, NHS trust HR.

I can easily imagine women gritting their teeth, overcoming their annoyance and disgust at the erosion of their boundaries and invasion of their spaces by this entitled, creepy man but putting up with it because they felt they had no other option (and God knows so many have been gaslit into thinking just that) but then finding that said man was not only sexually active but intending to procreate…it would certainly have been the final straw for me.
If that’s what happened, of course, I’m speculating.

TT

NF Not this point. LS was there to support both sides.
TA LS would support from welfare, sickness aspect etc.
NF Transcript accurate?
TA Can't confirm.
NF Have you listened to mtg recording
TA yes
NF did you read along to recording?
TA y

NF Identify any errors?
TA That's difficult. Wouldn't have recording of my own. Wouldn't secretly record mtg. Some areas sound different from my recollection- can't confirm accuracy or not.

So, because she “wouldn’t record a meeting secretly” she can’t listen to an actual recording and say if the transcript is accurate. Wtf?

TT
NC This appears now. What does it mean. Did someone say it to you. T

TA Management mtg, not formal/typed. I've never met RH. They didn't appear it was accurate, they said RH private person.

NF Have you deduced from that that you didn't think it was therefore accurate.

It’s what I imagine too.

Damn. Time to start the process again then..,

Now comparing the transcript of the meeting with TA's meeting notes. Oh dear!

TT
c stopping med to get partner pregnant and this was trigger for concern. TA I was repeating the concern. That was concern that was raised. NF What did it mean theatre management staff didn't think this to be accurate. J Not the witness' notes

TA Notes not verbatim. Management mtg I make quick notes. When asked to reflect that was my recollection of the meeting.

NF [to docs] July 24 You talk c 15/4 mtg. [reads] Andrew couldn't attend. Concern c impact of petition on RH. Balancing needs of staff. RH had advised...

I find lack of note-taking very strange. In my limited experience, HR bods were meticulous in recording meetings once the stirring of a complaint materialised.

If I was listening to the recording of a meeting and reading a transcript at the same I would be able to identify errors. But then I am not a senior HR bod.

I would like to point out, by the way, that TA has never met RH but at the same time feels entirely confident to comment on his family planning wishes based on what 'a theater team' has said they didn't hear him talk about, that he is a very private person who keeps to himself and that he's been using the female CR for years nae problem at all.

And for this she has sold the (300?) women with a right to and need of single sex CR wholesale down the river.

Apologies - this isn't easy for me.

TT
NF I have found the handwritten notes, misattributed re SG statement. [to SG statement] Can you confirm this is your handwritten note.
TA Yes
NF Back to mtg. You identified BH
TA SG identified. Collective resolution.
TA I was trying to bring it into process. Stage one usually
with managers. Stage 2 would be independent ix officer.
NF Who would take it in stage 2. Has already got to M Smith.
TA Stage 2 independent ix.
NF Who
TA Care would appoint.
NF Who has custody of process. Raised. MS forwarded to you. You are to give advice.

TT
TA Helen ? - dir nursing would be for leadership to do.
NF For you to decide
TA No, for me to feed back into process. Find spokesperson and pass to care group leadership team.
NF That is what you passed on.
TA yes
J Please keep answers short. You passed it on.
TA Yes

NF BH should be aware as spokesperson
TA No, cos formal complaint hadn't been started. Team referred in evidence that they didn't know procedure or how to raise concern. Process hadn't been followed.
J Who did you think needed that awareness
TA Signatories and management team

NF [reads] I was aware LSmedley ... Her role
TA HR advisor and supports colleagues
NF Were you aware Smedley had reached a view
TA No. no concerns raised to me and she was there to support
J No awareness of views?
TA No

For those not watching, and I hope it's ok to comment on this, the witness was briefly clasping her hands together and I would suggest exhibiting self-soothing behaviour of stroking thumbs on to opposite hands.

TA’s role is to justify and uphold the Trust’s policy. The outcome of any IX is not in doubt, it’s only a question of the route she takes to justify it. Sounds like BH was right to secretly record that meeting btw…

For all of the outrage exhibited by counsel for the Trust over the covert recording of the meeting, this section of TA's evidence makes crystal clear exactly why having such a recording was essential for the nurses.

God. I had to step away for an hour, and she is still going on.

More concerns!

Great minds and all that @maltravers.

TT

NF [to docs] Email from Lesley Smedley (LS) you had received in Feb. [reads c some exaggeration of RH parading about in her underwear.
TA She had put it in an email. Her words.
NF But betrays something about her approach to what these f employees are saying
J Did you put that...

...yesterday
NF Not this point. LS was there to support both sides.
TA LS would support from welfare, sickness aspect etc.
NF Transcript accurate?
TA Can't confirm.
NF Have you listened to mtg recording T
A yes
NF did you read along to recording?
TA y

TT

NF Identify any errors?
TA That's difficult. Wouldn't have recording of my own. Wouldn't secretly record mtg. Some areas sound different from my recollection- can't confirm accuracy or not.
NF [ to notes made after mtg] Handwritten note
TA Not on this occasion
NF Not full or

accurate.
TA Absolutely. Not verbatim.
NF Would you agree it contains material not said within mtg all
TA What do you mean
NF Reads c BH abused as child
TA Can't correlate between transcript. That was what I recall was said.
NF Your position is that was said.

There's a lot of chair spinning going on now.

It's concerning

Ooo, she had staff uncomfortable about being approached about the petition. More uncomfortable than the 30-odd staff who were uncomfortable being forced to use a CR with a MAN? More uncomfortable than that?

“In our organisation we try to address concerns” - she’s got a hide.

TT

TA position is that I recall
NF Reads c
BH saying should RH change in disabled toilet.
TA Nobody should be forced to change in disabled.
NF But you recall this. And BH using male pronouns for RH. But if you hear recording see BH minimising using pronouns. This portrays BH

as dominating meeting and characterises her as unreasonable and even transphobic
TA I haven't said BH transphobic. This is my account of mtg. Never met BH, hadn't formed views of her.
NF [ to letter of 9/5]
[TA reads] This is response to your email of 8/5.
NF So ahead of mtg

What do these people do? Talk about Dept of circumlocution, she and AT must have Not My Job Descriptions.