Darlington nurses win their employment tribunal

[Lovelyview]

https://christianconcern.com/ccpressreleases/victory-for-darlington-nurses-as-judge-rules-policy-that-allows-men-into-womens-changing-rooms-is-unlawful-harassment-and-discrimination/

Brilliant news!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c62nwl7j44gt

This thread summarises the judgement.

Unbelievable that we're celebrating a ruling that women must not be compelled by their employer to undress in front of a male colleague.

What a world the "be kind" brigade have foisted on girls and women.

Thank goodness! Finally common sense has been reinstated in a judgment regarding NHS provisions for women.

Congratulations to the nurses involved.

Looks like the nurses were harassed by the trust but not by 'Rose'.

• The NHS trust was found to have violated the dignity of the nurses and harassed them "by requiring [them] to share a changing room with a biological male trans woman", and "not taking seriously" their concerns
• However, it dismissed several other claims, finding that Rose Henderson, who is a biological male who identifies as a woman, had not harassed or victimised the claimants

Well done Darlington Women, and to all who supported you!

Courage calls to courage everywhere.

There's also discussion in this thread.https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5442434-darlington-nurses-vs-county-durham-and-darlington-nhs-trust-tribunal-thread-8?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

I guess they were never going to put it in one person, and to be honest, I think it's more important to state that the trust behaved illegally. Even though I totally believe the nurses re Rose's behaviour.

Rose asked a nurse whom he'd only just met if she had 'those big pregnancy breasts'.

It's unbelievable that they didn't think he harassed anyone. I guess things like that are incredibly difficult to prove though.

I agree.

It'll be interesting to hear Nuala McGovern's tone of voice if any of the nurses go back onto Woman's Hour. Or will her day off be scheduled for that day 🙄

Brilliant news, and hopefully the Unions take it on board ( not holding my breath) they have been a disgrace.

Yes, it is quite unbelievable - and utterly disgraceful - that this would be needed in 2025. If you'd told me this 10 years ago I would have thought you were insane. Yet here we are.

It's great - and just - that the ruling went as it did, but it should never have had to go to court. The nurses are so brave, but they shouldn't have had to be.

Bravo.

How times have changed. 2 or 3 years ago the BBC would have tried to bury this. Now its breaking live blog news.

All eyes on phillipson and streeting.

from BBC - judgement summary

1. The Judgment of the Tribunal is:
2. 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:
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 2. The complaints of indirect sex discrimination are well founded and succeed.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 6. The complaints of victimisation are not well founded and are dismissed.
10. 7. This judgment is in respect of all claimants with the exception of Joanne Bradbury, whose claim is currently stayed.
11. Share
12. Judgement in Darlington nurses case landspublished at 11:20
13. 11:20Breaking
14. The tribunal judgement into the case brought by eight nurses against the Darlington and County Durham NHS Trust has just landed.
15. 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.

1.

Thank God. The basic line so far seems to be that women must have consideration and legal rights that equal those of men with trans identities. Obviously. Although at this point we have unions, establishment and most politicians passionately wishing to undo women's rights in law where they are inconvenient to men who want to use them without consent.

Am quite enjoying the ranting on Reddit that women who do not want to change with men identifying as women should have a separate toilet facility of their own...

halleluia, at last they get it. That would be the women's single sex space, and everyone else will be happy in the mixed sex gender neutral provision, and all the problems end. And frankly women who need a single sex space really won't give a damn if that space is labelled the transphobic rancid bitch space with added spiders so long as there's no men in there.

I wonder if anyone at Darlington will take early retirement as a result of this?

Meaningless and dishonest burble downloading in 3....2....

"The Tribunal’s judgment concludes: “We were unclear what was meant by the submission that the policy was ‘lawful’ and deeper consideration of the argument led us to conclude that the policy of permitting biological males who identify as women to use a female changing room was not ‘lawful’.” The judgment then points out that the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 requires an employer to provide changing facilities which “include separate facilities for, or separate use of facilities by, men and women where necessary or reasons of propriety”."

This is great news.

And then Rose would try to get into that space for validation and round and round and round we go. Consenting women, however few or many of them there may be, aren't what Rose wants.

Just saw this.

Thank God. History will look back on this as possibly the stupidest period of our existence.

"Jessica" Yaniv vibes with this one.

Absolutely. But I suspect we need to have a few rounds of that for it to possibly, eventually, sink into the brains of the establishment how clear and tough the boundaries for these activists need to be to avoid these constant bad PR cases and heavy costs and being told they're unlawful. But I found it quite entertaining to see activists briefly agreeing with us about third spaces!

I do like that the tribunal has agreed this is sex discrimination - favouring men over women - and that requiring women to participate is unlawful. And that the policy was not lawful. And that the pushing of perceived law and rights over gender were unwanted conduct that caused harassment and discrimination.

Wonder how Kemp's day is going?

Just out of curiosity, which changing room do trans men need to use? Would any females mind a male presenting 'woman' using their changing room and WC?

I thought this bit from the press release was interesting:

"In contrast to the recent decision in a similar case in Scotland, Sandie Peggie v Fife NHS Trust, the Tribunal clearly declared that the law leaves no scope for permitting men to use a female changing room based on their ‘gender identity’ or under any other pretext.
The Tribunal disbelieved the HR manager, Ms Atkinson, who denied telling the nurses who raised concerns that they needed to be ‘educated’, ‘broaden their mindset’, ‘compromise’ and be ‘inclusive.’"

Not relevant to this case, answers clear in the SCJ which is easy reading.