"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

Paragraph 374:
There is nothing in the Act that we could see (or that we were taken to) that confers on a transgender employee the right to use the changing facilities that accords with their declared or affirmed gender. The Equality Act 2010 protects those with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment from discrimination, harassment and victimisation, in the same way that it providesb such protection to those of other protected characteristics. However, that does not translate into a positive ‘right’ on the part of a trans woman to use the female changing room (or for that matter of a trans man to use the male changing room).

My emphasis.

Finally.

I've said this all along. You can't harass a trans person by denying them a job or a hotel room but that doesn't mean they can use the Ladies.

Yes, and men often just don't realise it, so I'm glad the panel made this point.

I had to have a conversation with DP, as he was telling me that he'd sped up to pass a woman in a dark road near us, thinking he was doing the right thing so he wasn't behind her, and was shocked when I pointed out that the sound of a speeding up man would be terrifying, and that he should have crossed over. He does that now, but he genuinely thought he was doing the right thing. Whether she'd personally experienced anything or not, she would be on edge due to the fact that other women have. He gets it now, I was somewhat forthright.

It's always difficult to prove a man is misbehaving, even if he is. Shouldn't be a surprise given conviction rates are so low even for serious sexual assault cases. It's one way single sex spaces help, a man being in there is automatically a sign of ill intent. If he flashes you in the mixed sex changing village he "just had an accident adjusting his towel".

Exactly. It underlines and BOLDS the fact that the harassment etc is on the basis of his sex, not his actions, thoughts, desires, intentions.

His indelible maleness is the issue.

Not the holes in his underpants, his staring at women, his repeated requests that they get undressed.

And in fact, the issue here isn't any particular male, however creepy or well meaning he may appear to be.

It's the NHS, who should now concede that no man should be allowed into women's spaces. Who should support their female staff.

That goes for the Unions, too.

Women have the rights to privacy, dignity, and safety, and to single sex spaces, because anything else is obvious spurious bollocks.

363 ..... for each of them we accepted that there was a minimum level of distress caused by – at the very least - the distressful apprehension that they may be exposed in their underwear to a biological male whilst changing in and out of their uniform and that they may be observed and looked upon by Rose when in a state of partial undress.....

364 From the point they became aware that Rose was using the same changing room, the Claimants lived with this apprehension every working day. It is not an answer to Bethany Hutchison’s complaint, for example, to say that she had little experience of actually using the changing room at the same time as Rose. The impact on her, and of the other Claimants, was significant. That impact was on their personal dignity and privacy. For women to be required to change into and out of uniform in a communal setting probably exposes them to dents in their personal dignity, even when it is in the presence of other biological women; but it would, in our judgement fall short of ‘violating’ their dignity. It is something they are likely to get used to because of the absence of a perceived threat in a single-sex space. To require them, however, to then share that space with a biological male who identifies as a woman more than dented the inherent sense of worth and personal dignity of the Claimants. We can safely conclude from the facts that it violated their dignity not just by the presence of Rose in the space but because in permitting Rose to be there the Trust failed to respect their personal bodily privacy and sense of dignity. For each of the Claimants, this caused them distress. The degree of that distress varied from one to the other depending on their actual, separate experiences and their own resilience, with the high-water mark being the case of Karen Danson.

The person the BBC had commenting on this on the World at One (Health correspondent I think, don't remember the name) described Rose as a "biological transwoman". That's a new one on me! I hope it was just a slip. Glad they fixed the mangled quote though.

<she said, in a very heartfelt manner>

Feel like screaming in delight, so pleased for the nurses!
The BBC have updated quotes now too (however still going with partial victory)

Well, or we see Darren Merager in court and women and girls being forced to consider whether his penis was semi erect or flaccid.

Or the recent man masturbating in a Planet Fitness cubicle, and a woman being attacked for having filmed it.

Or discussions of whether a murderer is entitled to be placed in the female estate because, eh, he didn't murder a woman.

Scottish government, I hope you are watching. No men in women's spaces. None. Not in prison, not in changing rooms, not in toilets, not on public boards, not in the WI, not in Girl Guides.

Women need our stuff back and we will take it, one case at a time if need be. You bastards had best look to the May elections and consider how women feel about 'rapist gender' being something you are willing to defend.

This is fucking fantastic news. FANTASTIC. (Trying to ignore the fact the nurses, and us women generally, shouldn’t need to feel so pleased and indeed grateful, for common sense to finally prevail. I am concentrating on the happy vindicated feelings they, and we, must be feeling!)

Fucking A.

An honorary Mumsnetter!

Right! I’m getting sooo pissed tonight! Happy Friday everyone!

Fabulous news.
Sanity slowly slowly slowly being reasserted.

From what I've read so far, the judgement is an absolute slaying of the NHS's position.

I hope those at the top are indeed reading it thoroughly and digesting how badly they got this wrong.

Very good point
we do need to explain it don’t we
I’ll be making sure my 3ds get it now, I’ve already been ‘ forthright’ with dh.

This is brilliant. So clear and definite - how can anyone argue against this judge?! I really hope the NHS sorts out single sex spaces now (and maybe even the government in Scotland will obey the law at some point).

I am really annoyed that the tribunal has mentioned Rose's "gender identity" because that is not a protected characteristic. They should have said gender reassignment.

Also I'm annoyed that they didn't find that Rose harassed the nurses. A heterosexual man wanting to get his wife pregnant knows exactly what he's doing. I would argue he is an autogynaephile and loved their discomfort.

But this is a Big Win.

Aannndddd back to reporting what's really important for the BBC 🤔 🙄

Bang on.
I walk alone a lot, in the countryside. If I see anything untoward I start memorising number plates, and have been known to text DH ('At the bend by the footbridge now, expect me home about 4pm').

Are there any women on these threads who have never been sexually assaulted?

And then we're expected to accept men into spaces where we're vulnerable. I can't believe that there are so many people who just don't get this.

100% of the sexual assaults I have listed in non-domestic toilets are by men. Mostly on women and children. Mostly where men and women are allowed to use the same space.

I felt there was some sort of alternative universe thing going on with the Kelly judgement and Peggie judgement.

Single sex changing rooms and toilets are safer.

Interesting comment from Colin Wynter KC on X

'If, as I hope, the NHS numpties choose to appeal this obviously correct decision, the inevitable dismissal of the appeal will create precedent binding on all Employment Tribunal's hearing factually similar cases.

Moreover, insurance claims re things "unlawful" are unenforceable as a matter of public policy.
Whilst this is only a 1st tier tribunal judgment, it will be noted by insurers & by brokers who will be obliged, if not to risk own negligence, to advise their policyholder clients accordingly.
Excellent.
Appellate confirmation will concretise it.'

Which makes me wonder whether the Brighton School's lawyers might not be advising the school the same thing now. I hope so.

Ooh! Good point!

Is "a biological transwoman" the new meaningless phrase people are expected to use? What a load of rubbish

Shades of Upton, if not quite as bad.