"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

Oddly enough I think you're right!

This nonsense reminded me of a time fifty years ago,

1975

, dark ages, when a teacher in our small-town Irish convent school told a funny story about a reviewer of her am dram group's production of Borstal Boy (I think) because a homosexual character 'didn't look the part' so they put up a fake job ad with 'homosexual who looks the part' as one of the requirements.

How we all chortled.

(and bear in mind that male homosexual acts were still illegal because we had not repealed the British 19th c legislation)

But here we are, half a century on, and some people seem to expect same-sex attracted people to conform to a particular style or shape. How? Why? What has happened?

This is where the FWS ruling is helpful to them.
It's the law rather than a personal decision, so they need a policy that they can act on every single time. What they have to do is find an appropriate solution for the man in question that is also within the law.

Rather than delaying and obfuscating, they should be getting behind it.

I don't believe that the last witness with the air quotes is captured, I think the air quotes and the dropped voice betrays an earlier time when being a lesbian or gay man was not something to be talked about openly. I think it's a failure to get to grips with understanding what LGB is and what pretending to be the opposite sex is, while wanting to be seen to be progressive, kind, inclusive etc.

As someone up thread said, it's incredibly homophobic to force team lesbian and trans. To take it further, does she think that changing rooms should be shared on a sexual attraction basis? Women and gay men in one, including cross dressing gay men, and men and lesbians in the other.

I can't help wondering what would have happened if all 26 had Man Friday'd into the men's.

Worth linking this too to the issues experienced by many large bodies including the LAs, where a massive amount of time, funding, staff and will to live is endlessly sucked up by a very small number of vexious complainants. Often with multiple complaints in at one time in various stages, often bombarding very long emails several times a day, often with a trail of staff left behind them who they've driven off sick when the pressure of their behaviours got too much. Most often people with PDs who meet their needs by the constant conflict, attention and engagement, and a vent to pour anger and aggression out. They don't look for solutions, there's no end point, the process meets the need.

Often no process for the body or LA however to be able to identify this behaviour and put down boundaries to say no, complaints process now closed to you, no further engagement.

There's a lot of similarities. The next step of training needs to be identifying, setting boundaries with and effectively responding to difficult adults who will punish heavily with their behaviours when displeased and can therefore often make a whole group of people run around for them.

Or reported him to the Police

@ContentedAlpaca I think the air quotes and the dropped voice betrays an earlier time when being a lesbian or gay man was not something to be talked about openly.

well yes, but that's harking back at least 30 years, surely?

That describes almost exactly the experience of an acquaintance when working on (what was then) LGBT issues for a government body. TRA bombarded her with endless emails, letters and threats of escalation. Any refusal to meet demands eg TWAW for all purposes resulted in another torrent of the same and it went on and on. She gave in because it was easier.

Tbh, probably nothing if they were lucky. More likely they'd have been arrested and/or NCHI'd. Isn't this the area covered by the force Linzi Smith took action against?

Many people are yet to catch up. .

Yes, to around the time that queer theory really started to take hold in academia and then started to infect our institutions and organisations - as a generation of thoroughly 'queered' graduates started to enter the profesions and civil service and so on.

This is an interesting viewpoint for me because I've been described as a vexatious complainant by a LA. The Ombudsman didn't agree with them and pointed out that all my complaints should have been upheld and that I wouldn't have had to keep complaining if they hadn't kept doing things wrong. My evil doing was because I knew the law while the staff only knew their policy and it feels as if the same is happening in the NHS.

I'm not saying they don't exist. I am saying that sometimes people may use this label to shut down inconvenient people in the same way that they did with Sandie Peggie and the Darlington Nurses.

I think it's the latter, personally.

TW was giving the impression that the Theatre nurses were fully behind RH and they all changed together happily. Had been for years.

The 'lesbians' comment indicated to me that some members of staff openly spoke about sexual orientation and/or gossiped about their colleagues.

Rose was supposed to be a shy creature and didn't talk about his personal life on one report. Then openly discussing matters on another.

It was the Theatre Managers who were scathing about the nurses complaint at one meeting.

Management and HR were faced with 2 opposing views from women. One where supposedly he was accepted and had one demeanor. Another where he wasn't.

HR didn't have the courage to stand up to the Theatre Managers.

Given the patchy coverage of the case (apart from your good selves) it's a good tactic. No photographers outside as standard, so if you keep quiet you might be able to sneak him in and avoid another set of Upton-style pictures.

To take it further, does she think that changing rooms should be shared on a sexual attraction basis? Women and gay men in one, including cross dressing gay men, and men and lesbians in the other.

I’m fairly sure we’ve had “visitors” proposing this on here, or something very like it.

Have you ever been to Darlington?

Is the local paper still covering it? In the old days they would jump at the chance of exclusive photos.

It's getting decent coverage but not quite the all-in that we saw in Fife.

https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/search/?search=nurse

I agree. I do think Man Friday had the best strategy for all of this - it's a shame they ceased Fridaying.

Catching up this a.m., transfixed by the earlier ET. It seems to offer an explanation For TW’s behaviour other than being a True Believer, i.e. that she feels herself to be on thin ice with the Trust after the spotlight on her competence in that case. She might think siding with Rose against the nasty phobes is politically advisable, so shielded him like mad for ages. Doesn’t need him going off to complain about her to HR.
Totally agree with Syed’s article and the comments about it here. Another area where managerialism means hitting targets by crossing people off a list so that you don’t have to deal with them, regardless of outcome, is the criminal justice system, and we are now seeing the fruits of that.

It's funny that men who say they're women are at the same time as being seen as the most vulnerable, also seen as the most likely to be litigious in a workplace scenario.

Very true, but I wonder whether the balance will shift over the next few months as cases are judged? Some nice exemplary damages might remind certain captured employers that the law is not made by Stonewall and that, to quote Akua Reindorf, other people have rights as well.

Had a look at the position on damages. Aggravated damages would be appropriate if employer's behaviour is worse than negligent, eg they knew what they were doing was unlawful but did it anyway (Leonardo?) Not available as a separate category in Scotland, they just add a pot to the damages for injured feelings etc. Exemplary damages almost unheard of, would need to show live malice. If that is found in Fife's case, presumably the pot to add would grow quite a bit.

Yeah, I have never yet been ogled by a lesbian (as far as I'm aware!), certainly not groped or assaulted, never had lewd comments from lesbians, never heard of lesbians filming others in changing rooms or toilets... has anyone on here experienced this?