"Darlington Nurses" vs County Durham and Darlington NHS Trust Tribunal Thread 5

[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&7)
Thread 4, 29-Oct to 31-Oct, TA, AM (day 7) JB (day 8)

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, NHS trust Head of HR
TA – Tracy Atkinson, NHS trust HR.
AM – Andrew Moore, NHS Head of Workforce Experience
JB – Jillian Bailey, NHS Workforce Experience Manager

Quantities of Rose-supporting "lesbians" could be described in terms of 'a stake' 'a pergola' or 'a trellis'.

Well I hope these lesbian legions are scheduled as witnesses to pledge their allegiance to the cause of inclusivity. But somehow I doubt it.

Yes; the judgement concludes that she is not that articulate or good on personnel management; perhaps more important is the view that the theatre nurses are 'cliquey'.

Looks like it. And what's interesting is that she was pretty much exonerated of any wrongdoing - the judgement noted that the claimants intimidated her. I wonder if that case has informed her approach to this one - "oh here we go, another lot of horrible hostile disruptive nurses making up spurious claims about me and my department," - and she feels confident the judge will give these claimants short shrift too. It'll be interesting to see the judge's comments on her evidence this time round!

It’s actually odd to see that Tracy Whitaker has previous with our Darling EJ Seamus Sweeney. Surprising she seemed to get on ok compared to her batshit performance 🎭 yesterday.

Is Mrs Trellis of North Wales a "lesbian", I wonder? 😁

Is there no one sensible on the Board of governors at Darlington Memorial Hospital who could have cut through all this crap and sorted this out? What on earth is going on in that department …the theatre manager seems to be the common denominator in a toxic environment. Time for her to retire I think and the Trust appoint someone with people skills and some common sense; someone who can stop the Trust having to appear at ETs. Any one of the RGN claimants come across as being able to fulfil those duties and more importantly, they have integrity and have kept it, despite the utmost provocation.

That earlier tribunal judgement is a fascinating read. I recognise so many things in there. The person who comes back, after retire and return, to a lesser banding but who in their own head is still in the old role. The grievance and counter grievance, the long periods of sick leave generally just less than the point at which sick pay would be halved!

It also paints TW as another very strong personality, just like the two claimants, but who lacks the softer personality skills to be a good people person or with insight into her own weaker areas. Important meeting including two people who I find hard to manage? Shall I have a run through, read the notes “no I’ll wing it” what could go wrong 🤔🤦🏼‍♀️

Theatres are renowned for having some ..er strong characters, but 2 ETs in one department is, shall we say, a bit unfortunate!

I once had to keep a patient entertained for ages in an anaesthetic room whilst a theatre sister (scrubbed up) was forcibly removed by senior managers. She had been previously sacked but refused to leave, turned up that morning and scrubbed up for the first case anyway.

Has she ever expressed a preference for Samantha or Sven? 🤔

I once had to keep a patient entertained for ages in an anaesthetic room

That must have been an interesting challenge.

That case is very interesting reading. No flies on Judge Sweeney whose Mastermind subject would be relationships. I wonder if the witness due to appear on Monday is another one for whom it will be a second time before him. Same surname and position and I think I've heard different first names for her during the hearing but it might be two different people.

Apologies if somebody has posted a link many threads back, but somebody did an FOI for Darlington's Rainbow Badge accreditation (presumably just before this all kicked off):
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/rainbow_badge_accreditation_repo_9?utm_campaign=alaveteli-experiments-87&utm_content=sidebar_similar_requests&utm_medium=link&utm_source=whatdotheyknow

Two ETs in one department should have alarm bells ringing further up the line. It's too outlandish to think there may also be some self-reflection from those involved.

In my experience of general anaesthetic, the team were always some of the most personable, which is strange considering you normally only see them for about ten mins beforehand and then about two mins whilst they hook you up. I've had one of them come and see me after as well, which was unusual, but maybe I caused them more issues than they expected!

Where’s your source? Trying to work out if he will appear but witness list suggests not.

Grok. But that is taken from TT afaik.

As I heard the fragments of the schedule that came up at the end of Friday's afternooon session, my impression was that I couldn't see a slot where RH would appear.

I will be happy to be proved wrong.

I hope you are wrong, nauticant. I'm really expecting him to be the highlight of the case.

Much as RH would make for riveting viewing, I don't think he is needed to make the nurses' case. The Trust's witnesses have amply demonstrated their uselessness, bias and hostile climate. (And ultimately it's not about how RH presents, he could be the loveliest, prettiest, pass-iest laydee in the universe - the point is that he's male.)

If RH produced a witness statement, possibly commenting on the behaviours he’s been accused of, would he not have to appear in order to give opportunity to be X examined on it?

😁

Completely agree, Kucinghitam. There shouldn't ever be the need for any of these cases and it makes me so angry that women have to be put through this.

I do like the ridiculousness to be highlighted for all to see, though, when women are forced to fight back.

As I understand things, each side decides which witnesses it wants to appear in the ET hearing to give evidence to support its own case. So whether or not RH appears is up to the Trust.

Thanks so much for this. Would I be right to say that anyone who has a rainbow badge has one of these assessments? If so, then I feel an FOI request coming on.

I’m with @nauticant - no suggestion RH will be a witness from the discussion around who will be appearing next week.

He won’t help the defence as he’s a manly man (despite his recent wedding photos of him in a big black dress).

And he’s not a respondent so can’t be compelled in that regard (which is likely why Upton had no choice but to appear).

I am also happy to be proved wrong. But I also like the idea that Rose is irrelevant. The idea that men are allowed in changed rooms on their own word is just absolute bonkers. So those making policies need to be called to account and start fearing for their jobs. It’s not his fault he was enabled by these incompetents.