"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.

Rose was supported by his union, the nurses had to start their own union. Rose was probably supported to make an official complaint.

Did none of the nurses make a formal complaint? Even the ones directly impacted?

See above re complaints.

Marking place and cheering the nurses on.

Oh hang on Rose could not be a member of the RCN because he is not a nurse.

So the RCN declined to represent them for ideological reasons.

I look forward to seeing Sandies litigation and hope Darlington adjoin to it.

I saw your post and today's TT and I disagree. But I just wanted to check I hadn't missed anything.

All workplaces including the NHS have policies about complaints and problems at work.

The first step is to try to resolve informally with management.

If that doesn't work or it's extremely serious then there's a formal complaint / grievance process.

If they went straight from informal resolution to legal proceedings/telling the press that's not a good look.

Utter nonsense argument if you can call it that.

I don't think it's clear at this point, but AT and TA as the HR witnesses have both said the role of HR is to support local management to do their job. So they would say we'd have to ask the nurses' line management as to why an official complaint wasn't made.

Interestingly, I once had a situation where my manager and I looked up and followed an HR policy to the letter. Only to have HR complain at us that we hadn't talked to them first - and they had no answer when we told them that we'd followed their own policy exactly, and at no point did it say "consult your local HR contact". That situation dragged on for months and months because they obviously disagreed with their own policy but had no good reason to deny my request.

Maybe the OHAS 18001?
I know its a bit of an overkill (no pun intended) but it really is taken this seriously both onshore and offshore. Im not expecting the NHS to have the same level of risk assessment but I do expect them to have some professional managerial standards and comply with UK law. And have accountability.

@ThreeWordHarpy Thanks, I saw the HR rep today indirectly imply there hasn't been a formal complaint. But I figure it could have been before her time or something.

That isn’t feasible resource wise. ETs do not set precedent and judgements are not always published. EAT judgements do set precedents and are published.

HR will sign up to services like Croner or XPERTHR who publish a round up of cases. ETs and EATs will be read and action taken as appropriate.

@ThisHeartyJadeBird I don't have the exact timeline nailed down butthey raised concerns informally for quite some time (starting in autumn 2023). This was passed up to the senior people we have heard from today but dismissed as noise/ no definitive action was taken except the "education" from DEI lead and kindness training. They would have been aware they were being dismissed as TERFY/ transphobes.

They then raised a formal complaint but moved swiftly on to external publicity/ employment tribunal as they perceived that no action was being taken/ what was being done was inadequate cf. 26 signatories on a letter of complaint and provision of ONE changing cubicle outside the main female changing room.

All power to these nurses. I work in a trust with a trans at work policy that still says staff can ID into the changing room of their choice. And makes it explicit that no transitioning of any kind needs to take place before they move.

I'm a coward and am waiting for one of these two tribunals to conclude before I write to our director of people expressing my concerns. I have raised the issue anonymously on the staff survey but I'm sure the will be dismissed as transphobic noise.

The board are totally and utterly fucking captured. They APOLOGISED the day after the supreme court ruling to the LGBTQ++ community for the distress and upset the ruling caused them. At no point has there even been a hint of an apology for the staff and patients whose right to single sex spaces they have ridden roughshod over for the past decade. I am FURIOUS about it. But I need my job and none of the trade unions will actually support anyone who hasn't drunk the cool aid and isn't willing to flash their tits to any man who says they are a woman.

@Harassedevictee
see Bumba at Peggie / Fife - pretended to have never heard of Forstater
EAT is binding ...
ETs lead into EATs
only an utter numpty is not staying up to date

It just is not working is it.lol

Yes, that's absolutely drummed into us. We have do do exams to be allowed to enter any port and the pass mark is 100%

We are primarily responsible for ourselves, but also our colleagues.

@Talkinpeace I agree that one needs to stay on top of legal matters.

I was under the impression (which may very well be wrong!) that you couldn't take a case to ET unless the formal complaint process had been followed? I'm not sure if that's even accurate, or if it only applies in certain cases though.

At the tail end of the last thread there was discussion about the legislation. I do not accept that someone who works in an HR function is not aware of the law. I work in a legislative field (not HR), and with no legal training I am expected to work on a daily basis within the framework of multiple different Acts, regulations, policies, etc, with the potential of legal appeals and judicial reviews.

@BeaTwix Ah okay. It was certainly effective going to the media and starting a tribunal claim at the time they do.

To be fair to HR they do usually stay out at the informal /discussions stage between staff and management.

Good luck with your situation. Hopefully things will start to change as and when the ECHR guidance is finalised.

My take from the last 2 days is that any old thing will do, as far as HR is concerned. Everyone thinks that someone else is responsible and that everything should be done by someone, somewhere; just not by "me."

The buck stops with no one, it's on a merry go round.

Another thing is the parallel with Fife, re confidentiality. Sandie Peggie was ordered to stay silent, whilst the minions of Betheodore went round looking for scurrilous gossip about her.

Here, the nurses were ordered to stay silent, yet Tyler Henderson seems to have been given the names of the complainants. GDPR means nothing, nor confidentiality, as far as trans zealots are concerned.

2 years of faffing for the nurses' complaints, but shit of a shovel for Mr. Henderson.

It's a fucking outrage.

(Edited for autocarrot...)

I absolutely agree HR professionals need to keep up to date but they don’t need to “Watch every ET and EAT”. Reading the EAT judgements and getting legal advice is sufficient.

I agree Isla Bumba not knowing about Forstater is shocking.

Apparently Isla Bumba used google and incorrectly applied the regulations for services, so it's not always straightforward.

However, members of professional bodies that require CPD are supposed to be able to keep up with relevant legislation, or at least understand when there are gaps in their knowledge.

@OnAShooglyPeg IANAL, but there no absolute legal requirement to complete internal grievance processes before going to Employment Tribunals. In some claims ACAS Early Reconciliation is needed.

Looking into this a bit further, the NHS internal grievance was still going, however the Tribunal allowed the case to move forward.

The main liability question — whether harassment or discrimination occurred — is assessed on the facts, not on whether the grievance procedure was completed. It could impact compensation slightly.

It's most relevant, imho however to the nurses' going to the press. Employers do often see employer's going to the press as undermining the grievance process / premature escalation.

@ThisHeartyJadeBird Thanks, I think it was the ACAS step that I was remembering. It's been a long time since I had to properly look at employment law regs and internal procedures!

Luckily my current employer is good. I'm amazed at how non-captured a Scottish local authority can be, especially since I moved from another part of the public sector which was all rainbows and mindfulness. As I told my manager upon leaving, my wellbeing would be significantly improved if the people who banged on about mindfulness, unicorns and rainbows did the job they were being employed to do, rather than wasting hours putting up posters and stickers and arranged forced fun. Aaaah, none of that nowadays!

I think it's usual to go through formal complaints first, whilst trying to look like someone who would definitely go to Tribunal if needed.

Oh yes @OnAShooglyPeg "Wellbeing" is such as pain in the arse...I did how ever enjoy the (slightly creepy) Mindfulness Room as a way to "mindfully work" without distractions 😜

I've finally caught up the last couple of days, and being terrible with names, have spent the last few hours mentally calling AT "Arsey Twat" and TA "Teflon Arsehole". So much buck passing and failure to appreciate the gravity of the situation.