"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.

JB sometimes Alex will update policies, sometimes update one sometimes I would but I would oversee if Alex updated, I would check updates he was doing

It sounds so casual, doesn't it? These are policies which will impact on hundreds of people, but they make them sound like it's an occasional hobby.

Yes. And very nervous.

From TT:

NF - if raised there is harm or is having impact on group of emp with protected chara
JB possibly
NH or H&S leg
JB yes
You are CIPD
JB not a qualification, but a prof body

JB there are diff levels of membership could be based on experience, that would be decision made by them
NF but your training and qual? Do you have one?
JB I have a post grad dip in HR Mgt
NF - health and safety law?
JB - no

But she is speaking nice and clearly at a good volume level.

Small mercies!

NF is continuing to draw out the structures/processes/qualifications and lack thereof.eg
JB I have a post grad dip in HR Mgt
NF - health and safety law?
JB - no

From TT:

NF - mandatory training every 3 years in house, internal NHS training?
JB not in house always to the trust itself a lot is national
NF different modules, do you do health and safety module
JB yes
NF every 3 years

JB which ones?
NF you will have to tell me, what training do you do?
JB quite complicated lots of modules, skills for health, skills for training, diff modules will have renewal date,

some 3 years some 1 year.
NF which are you required to do
JB - all of them under Core Skills
NF includes EDI
JB yes

From TT

NF - you drafted transitioning policy in 2016
JB - yes
NF did you correspond with LGBT group?
Jb yes

From TT

NF when through diff drafts
JB yes normal for policy
NF that was never implemented?
JB yes

From TT:

NF - you drafted transitioning policy in 2016
JB - yes
NF did you correspond with LGBT group?
Jb yes

NF when through diff drafts
JB yes normal for policy
NF that was never implemented?
JB yes

NF PW was the author of the one ratified in 2021
JB yes
NF did you have any knowledge of this
JB no.

NF - so far as your prep of earlier - was any involv of legal experts
JB no

If you want to take over pasting, let me know. No point two of us doing it.

So sorry @WandaSiri Didn't mean to barge in and cross streams posts.

spirit! LOL

Same here. I was eating a Tunnocks caramel bar and have had to put it to one side for a while.

Halloween ET Special: we are invoking the Spirit of the EqIA in instances where it has not been formally done.

From TT

NF at what stage is impact assessment done?
JB done and updated as diff versions as diff drafts as done. Initial draft would be done if shared for network group, unions input into policy review

NF - policy might be reviews what about the impact ass or equality analysis when a complaint or worry comes up?

JB the impact?

NF yes when it comes to you, the impact may be harmful/unlawful, is it possible, ever done to review in isolation, just that bit.
JB possible
NF ever done?
JB think perhaps the spirit be done but not formally recorded.

No worries. Do you want to do this afternoon, or the second half of the morning, maybe?

JB think perhaps the spirit be done but not formally recorded
Not formally recorded? what a surprise.....

Oooh this is good - NF is reading from the impact assessment - presumably of Rose using the women's CR?
Under sex/gender - no diff impact, no. Religion no impact - no

From TT

NF - page 103 bundle 2. Not your wording, it became a policy you were overseeing in your role 2022. Nature of doc need to understand 'impact assessment' looks as thought proforma?
JB yes
NF various questions first page - benefits, barriers etc, question of links to conflicts

NF - Step 3 what is impact, various diff characteristics on matrix to be filled. Under sex/gender - no diff impact, no. Religion no impact - no.

You see where my q is going. When it came up that there were exclusively women saying this is having adverse impact it cuts right across this section the impact on one sex. Was there ever a thought to revisiting given women raising

And thanks to your post I'm now singing:

Peggie sues, Peggie sues
Well I love you gal, I love you. Peggie sues

Remember not to anticipate TT.

From TT

JB the assessment wasn't updated formally.
NF if policy failed then not implemented
JB not sure if fail or pass approach, it is there to doc what the impact may be

if under any of these categorise if there was a significant impact on group, surely that would be a back to drawing board moment?
JB YEs think the impact would be looked at on individ basis on the facts they are presenting

If that's re my post, I'm reading TT, not observing, I just copied a bit before the full exchange appeared here.
Totes respect the reminder Wanda

Haha it is a bit like that. This wiki entry references fork 'andles by the 2 ronnies, and some real baseball games where similar names came up, but it fails to mention the obvious cricket one - the batsman's holding the bowler's willey. Anyway, off topic, as you were.