"Darlington Nurses" vs County Durham and Darlington NHS Trust Tribunal Thread 8

[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)
Thread 5, 31-Oct to 04-Nov; JB (day 8), SW, CG, JR (day 9)
Thread 6, 04-Nov to 05-Nov; RH (day 10), SW (day 11)
Thread 7, 05-Nov to 11-Nov; SW (day 11), closing submissions

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 now complete. Submissions are being made on November 11th. 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, NHS 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
AT – Anna Telfer, NHS Deputy Director of Nursing
SW – Sandra Watson, Matron for General and Elective Surgery
JR – Jodie Robinson, manager of Rose

Same, my eyebrows went up at that.

maybe because he was given permission by his employers? À la Upton?

No mention on the Graun's front page.

Funny, that.

Sad times.

Can we book this judge for future gigs?

Perhaps the Good Laugh Project may reconsider their action against Virgin Active..although I doubt it.

https://x.com/DarlingtonUnion/status/2012127505948516816

It may be that it's a bit more of a mixed judgement than Christian concern are suggesting. Certainly we've won on the main point against the hospital, but I'm looking forward to reading the actual judgement. Also hoping it's a short one after the Peggie case 😂

Am getting snacks in for Jolyon’s inevitable BlueSky rant.

From the BBC finally:
The Judgment of the Tribunal is:
1. The complaints of harassment related to sex and/or gender reassignment are well founded in part and succeed to the extent set out in paragraph 1.1 and 1.2 of this judgment:
1.1 By requiring the Claimants to share a changing room with a biological male trans woman as pleaded in paragraph 23(a) of the Amended Particulars of Claim, the Respondent engaged in unwanted conduct related to sex and gender reassignment which had the effect of violating the dignity of the Claimants and creating for the Claimants a hostile, humiliating and degrading environment.
1.2 By not taking seriously and declining to address the Claimants’ concerns of August and September 2023 and of 04 April 2024, Case Number: 2501192/2024 & others 2 regarding that part of the Transition in the Workplace Policy that afforded biological males access to the female changing room, the Respondent engaged in unwanted conduct related to sex and gender reassignment which had the effect of creating for the Claimants a hostile and intimidating environment.
2. The complaints of indirect sex discrimination are well founded and succeed.
3. The complaints of harassment in so far as they relate to the use of the female changing room by and the conduct of Rose Henderson whilst so using the changing room as pleaded in paragraph 23(b) of the Amended Particulars of Claim, are not well founded and are dismissed.
4. The complaints of harassment in so far as they relate to the conduct of Rose Henderson outside the changing room as pleaded in paragraph 23(e) of the Amended Particulars of Claim are not well founded and are dismissed.
5. The complaints of harassment in so far as they relate to the conduct of the Respondent pleaded in paragraph 23(d), (f), (h, (i), (j) and (k) are not well founded and are dismissed.
6. The complaints of victimisation are not well founded and are dismissed.
7. This judgment is in respect of all claimants with the exception of Joanne Bradbury, whose claim is currently stayed.

happy days

Aye, let's hope no suspicious citations this time.

Congratulations, wholeheartedly!

no analysis from the beeb, just a copy paste of the summary. No sign of the judgment on the tribunals site yet either.

BBC News website has just posted tribunal's summary. It took them over 20 mins to do so, on their 'live' updating, as far as I can see!

So we still need to read the judgement and hear what lawyers say about it, but it sounds as though it may be a case of the Trust having done wrong things but not RH himself?

I wonder if they thought it would follow the Peggie result.

I wonder if any NHS trusts who still have unlawful policies will change them as a result of this ruling?

They found the bits that exonerated Rose and the Trust from bullying, harassment and victimisation.

There we go BBC, it's up now. They obviously had to go through the complaints they could report were "not well founded and dismissed", to make sure they had a good old mention!!

From the summary, I think they have succeeded in the main. It is disappointing to lose in respect of Rose's conduct, but we want to keep men out of female spaces, however those men choose to behave once they have been granted access. So better this way round.

11:20Breaking
The tribunal judgement into the case brought by eight nurses against the Darlington and County Durham NHS Trust has just landed.
Our colleagues are currently working their way through the judgement and will bring you all the key lines as they get them - stick with us.

11:50Breaking
NHS trust 'violated dignity' of nurses by allowing trans woman to use female changing room, tribunal rules.

I stand corrected - it took them 30 minutes...😒

So not a clean sweep, but on the key point that it sex discrimination for women to be forced to share a changing room with a biological man, we win. That's what I care about most. It'll do.

I think that’s generally the case, it’s quite a high bar for him, as another employee, to be found to have harassed them. It’s the hospital/trust who are the employer.

Discriminatory, but not harassment?

Indeed, much better than finding Rose's conduct harrasment but not being able to keep Rose out!

Times share token:

Darlington NHS nurses win harassment claim in trans ruling.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/j-029a-4fd0-adeb-bc76643821eb?shareToken=fd652bf951958c518265c4fef7262e19

That sounds right, and to be fair I think that's probably always going to be the determination in such cases. I think unless the person exhibited obviously outrageous behaviour it would be impossible to find that they harassed the women, if they were just using the changing room that their employer told them to.

Presumably the lawyers put these harassment claims in too as a catch-all, with everyone being 'happy' because there's a win on both sides (but fundamentally the behaviour of the NHS Trust is the crucial win because that is what will change policy).