"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

Exactly. That's why this one is so important imho. They can't say 'oh they hated them and were nasty.' It's just a simple matter of 'he's male. he's there. he got special treatment. he shouldn't have done.' It's like aiming the guns squarely at the management.

It was Mrs Trellis in the Changing Room with the laminator the king of stationery

Should've taken the patient to the theatre

I've been musing on this. Yes, RH is a man and shouldn't have been in the CR, whether he was the most shy and/or 'passing' of men or not. But isn't his conduct as well as his presence in the CR an issue in this case?

Surely the nurses have suffered a worse detriment if the Trust have allowed a man they've been told was lingering/parading around in holey boxers to continue. The Trust took the view this allegation was not true/exaggeration. How reasonable was this stance?

It seems the tribunal will have to decide on the basis of RH's untested witness statement and the evidence given to them by the nurses who witnessed it. Which is unsatisfactory but the Trust seems to have decided the odds are better stacked in their favour if RH doesn't give evidence on his conduct. Something I am sure will not be lost on the very astute Judge Sweeney.

Edited for clarity.

I’ve just read through most of it, and the claimants sound like absolute nightmares to work with and manage.

EJ Sweeney is spot on that they’re both formidable and striking characters; and Tracy Wainwright may have been somewhat intimidated by them.

Judge Sweeney's judgement was well penned; I reckon he'd write a good memoir in due course.

The thing that strikes me with Darlington and Fife is that staff disappear for weeks on end, seemingly at the drop of a hat.

From the earlier case:
MC 7/10/20 - 18/2/21

CB 26/11/20 - 14/4/21 and 20/9/21 - 8/12/21
This would have been right in the middle of Covid, wouldn't it?

It can also indicate high stress levels and negative emotional feelings, or being overwhelmed by thoughts.

While TW does look a lot better in the previous tribunal, there are a lot of red flags that she's a poor manager.

A senior manager not being able to do a powerpoint?
Gets 2 staff back, who she must know are bolshy, back on retire and return at a lower band and has failed to remind them that being a lower band comes with being reorganised and not having any say in it.
Completely fucks up telling staff how they are being reorganized.

OK, for the rest of it she is fine and the 2 complainants sound like a nightmare but TW essentially laid the foundations of their complaint.

Sorry I keep messing up link. Carole Bailey v Darlington ET 2022

I wonder if TW felt emboldened to call out KD's witness statement as being 'full of untruths' because the same Judge found TW to be basically truthful (if out of her depth and largely inarticulate) in the 2022 ET.

I look forward to reading the decision on this, whichever way it goes! For someone who is impatient for brief answers in court, he is quite the storyteller in his tribunal decisions.😂

I do feel they made a mistake not making RH a co respondent as that would highlight the sexual harassment element further and shine sunlight on this batshittery, especially if photographed entering/leaving the tribunal like DU was.

I had no idea there was a tribunal in 2022, was it about the same case? The submissions/evidence given by TW and other witnesses has been an absolute omnishambles.

@DeanElderberry 0 is also a number 😀but we know Rose identifies as a lesbian, she has a female partner. So I suspect a "lesbian" did put up the poster.

I see your point, but there's also the factor of putting the blame squarely on the enablers, which in this case are the NHS trusts. All they'd have needed to say was 'Look, RH, we've had a complaint. Tone it down or change elsewhere.' It doesn't look to me as if anyone ever asked him what had been happening. If anything it looks as if they were very careful not to ask. (Happy to be corrected.)

😁

Different case, but same department, same judge, and some of the same managers including Tracy Wainwright.

I found it when looking up next week's witnesses. Sue Williams possibly had a tangential role in 2022. I this case I believe she is an HR Lead and dealt with compliance on disclosures to the tribunal.

Presented by Tracy Wainwright if I am reading correctly

Although the ET in this case appears to accept most of TW's evidence

I disagree.

According to the claimants, he asked whether KD was going to get changed and he walked around unnecessarily in holey underpants.
The Trust had an unfair and unlawful policy, but if we accept the nurses' evidence, RH has not just been quietly using the CR. His behaviour is on him and he should be called to account for it.

Edited for clarity

Thank you so much for mentioning the earlier tribunal. It is fascinating, especially with the some of the same people in both.

I’m trying to read it properly and am only on p44 so far, but I was interested to see J Sweeney - see screenshot - give the tribunal’s opinions on the reliability of the witnesses. I appreciate that reliability is a very important aspect, but am not used to seeing it written down like this.

Apologies for the very amateur attempts to black out the witnesses’ names.

From that earlier ET, the Claimants sound like royal pains in the arse.

Yes, he should have been called to account by the Trust but they enabled him and I'd even go so far to say encouraged him by making it clear to him that he could do what he liked. Focusing on him lets the NHS use the 'wrong bad apple but we mustn't ban all the delicate fragile transgender laydees' excuse rather than ramming it home that NHS policy was, is and I suspect will remain wrong.

IANAL but I think the tribunal are charged with whether the Trust did the right things in response to the concerns/complaints raised, not whether his behaviour was acceptable because he's not been named in the case? Wiser people than me have said that's why Dr Upton was named in the Sandie Peggie case. Again, I'm happy to be corrected.

They do but generally in the NHS, if people are pains in the arse, it's because they have been allowed to be for the last 20 years.

Also nursing management culture often appears to an outsider to be 'we're all great mates and go to the pub/on holiday together' until something goes wrong and then responses from management can vary from sacking and referral to the NMC to a pat on the head. All the more painful if a month ago you were on a girls' holiday with your manager.

The talk in the earlier ET of how close they were reminded me of the Benidorm Whatsapp group in the Sandie Peggie ET. We're all great mates until an opportunity to shaft each other arises.

I am often the only non-nurse in a team and the discussions about each other/their managers/who is or isn't getting disciplined and why can be eye-openers.

Don’t they just!

So many grievances and porky pies told; which were all obviously stalling tactics cos they didn’t want to be moved from their ‘home’.

I was exhausted just reading about them.