Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread (follow on from Chair of SEEN is being sued)

[myladydisdainisyetliving]

Previous thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5031904-the-chair-of-seen-is-being-sued
TT substack: https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/tempest-vs-defra-and-rural-payments

Tempest (a TW) is claiming discrimination, harassment and/or victimisation on grounds of gender reassignment. Central to the claim is the Sex Equality and Equity Network in the Civil Service (SEEN or IP). SEEN has been granted right to intervene. Parts of the original claim against the co-chair of SEEN (Elspeth Duemmer-Wrigley) and another party (Andreas Mueller) were struck out or narrowed. Another claimant, PQ, is no longer part of the case.

The hearing is in Leeds; the number of online observers has been limited by the court due to "capacity" and posters are reporting that requests for links are being declined on those grounds.

Also to note that Elspeth still has a garden in need of seeds and water to support the ability of SEEN to be an intervenor in this case.

Yes this is it - Corbett was a full time employee of the Union for 20 years until his retirement. He was Deputy Head of Legal and then a senior national figure. He reached the top and had major influence.

There is lots of trans rights activism in the PCS in those days and he would have been part of the team leading on that.

If all he knows is be kind and stonewall training - and the Judge wasn’t over all the latest updates to the ETBB - they could have fallen into error.

He’s also been a lay tribunal member for 20 years. He won’t have seen a case like this - and we know from other cases so many of the panel are captured.

Nor saying that this what happened - but who knows?

Is that really the one, I know he's nuts but what about that comment was sooooo bad that it gets mentioned in an ET. 🤯

Thanks Boiled, I can't bring myself to read his statement.
Certainly puts a different complextion on his complaint about not being able to achieve promotion if he has been in the CS that long.

Long service award likely a certificate or a £50 gift voucher and only based on time served - not quality of that time.

No, the judge does not make all the decisions. See my post. Decisions are made by majority. Unanimous decisions are preferred, but the lay members can overrule the judge. This is true across the UK. The judge advises on case law and points of law, ensures proper procedure and, when required, makes rulings on points of law, but the decisions are made by the panel where all three members have an equal vote.

The judge writes the judgement, but that has to support the majority decision even if the judge disagrees with it. It is rare for the lay members to overrule the judge, but it does happen sometimes. The judge is then in the position of having to make statements in the judgement with which they disagree about witnesses or the facts of the case (e.g. saying that X was not a credible witness, when the judge thinks they were the most credible witness they saw), and/or arguing that the law applies to the case in a way with which they disagree (e.g. trying to find a way to argue that FWS does not apply in a case where it clearly does).

Thanks i agree i got that bit wrong

Interesting - I'd missed the long service award, that's para 129. But he also says "I went from AO to EO in 2 years and from EO to HEO in another 2. I’ve flatlined for the last 5." that's number 130. I make that 9 years (at the time he made the statement). So where did the other 16 go?

Thanks all, prh47bridge posted while I was typing my post and I was relieved to see that I had remembered correctly!

But the contradictions and manner of his replies in the dock confirm he was actively hunting material for ‘grievance bucket‘ or whatever he called it while OH were felling him not to. (He could have asked for help in gathering material but he chose to look for it himself instead, of course. As mentioned by various posts already, we can safely assume he was accessing private SEEN postings too and which exorcised him further).

So he gets permission to work from home so he doesn’t have to encounter any SEEN folk IRL.

Grievance process during this time, found against, then found for, then recommendations found would contradict EQ law so not acted upon.

Now on sick leave for stress.

Told to not look at Yammer and stay off triggering sites.

Return to work scheduled after 5 months on full pay.

4 adjustments recommended,

3 are put in place and the 4th, remove him from all comms, can’t be fully enacted because he needs to be enrolled in the Internal HR system (I think that’s what it is) and they can’t, therefore, prevent all notifications from it. Some of which notifications might include messages about things he finds upsetting.

He thinks because the 4th was not fully implemented he is eligible for special leave. Open ended. Full pay.

He’s not but they give him a few days anyway.

It seems to me that he has been using process as a threat to HR so he can earn whilst on extended holiday.

I’ve no doubt the stress of all this was real to a degree but wholly self-generated. This wasn’t stress caused by the actions of others but by his own sense of entitlement and anger that the world isn’t being laid out exactly as he wants it to be laid out, with his needs at the centre.

The main trouble is, in my opinion, that having been so previously Stonewalled DEFRA delivered strong foundations for egomaniacs like ST and actually created a hostile environment for feminism. I feel they should be held responsible for that, not this ego party.

I think it is so the ideas of SEEN are not misrepresented since that is the key pivot, neither of the Rs, or legal reps, could be seen to be sufficiently expert.

Ah, interesting, might that explain some of Kemp‘s flawed reasoning in the SP judgment? Not the AI shit but the idea that there is a simple answer to the issue if only folk were more kind.

It is simpler than that. SEEN clearly have a direct interest in the outcome, which means they can participate as an intervenor. This allows them to defend themselves against allegations and ensure their legal rights are represented.

It is also possible for a non-party to become an intervenor if the case raises a major public issue and they are able to provide expert context that may not be covered by the parties. But in this case, the fact that the outcome has the potential to be extremely damaging to SEEN is enough to mean they should be allowed to intervene.

@prh47bridge The judge seemed to take his decision on pronouns without really listening to Naomi. Can he backtrack on that?

Yes, a judge can reverse any decision they make unless it has been enshrined in a sealed order.

The lowest grade is AA Admin Assistant, an office junior role that is being phased out. Either he stayed at that for 16 years or no other explanation that fits with AO it EO in 2 years part...

And when he says he's thinking about leaving the CS, where on earth does he imagine he's going to find a MORE accommodating employer? Anywhere in the private sector would come as the most enormous shock to him.

Obviously what he is after is either retirement on medical grounds or a constructive dismissal claim with more taxpayers money for doing nothing.

prh47bridge · Today 10:25

Thanks for the info about the lay members being able to over-rule the judge. I was already wondering if the union man lag member ought to have refused himself? He may well be an activist and could know Stinkerbell.

I just hope this case forces the CS to finally act on the SC ruling from last year. Welsh Gov and other CS departments are currently updating their trans snd NB guidance. SEEN are trying to ensure they are consulted. One would hope that if Naomi et al. win the case, then that may also help people see sense with regards to this guidance.

Being in a devolved area, we seem to see progress a while after the main CS. For instance, Weksh Gov and Scottish Gov still are listed as being Stonewall supporters, despite lots of CS departments withdrawing their "allegiance". Again, I hope that SEEN can help with equality across the entire UK civil service.

Presumably for the first decade and a half he was just plain old 'Dave' (No clue what he was actually called) so no doubt has no wish to dwell on what Dave did at work.

Or he was in a different CS department in the north east?

From the WS he transitioned in early 2015 then started with the RPA in early 2017. Moved along from somewhere.

He should have recused himself if he is a close friend of, or has had a significant prior relationship with the claimant. He should also have recused himself if he has publicly stated views about the issues in the case. There are a number of other situations in which he should have recused himself. However, he does not have to recuse himself because he previously worked for the claimant's union (even if that is true - I don't think we know which union the claimant is in, if any).

The central question is whether there is an actual conflict of interest, or a fair minded and informed observer would conclude that his participation means there is a real possibility of bias. In that situation, he should recuse himself. Failing that, it is open to either party to apply for a panel member to be recused. That application would be ruled on by the judge alone - this is not a matter where the lay members can overrule the judge.

I haven't followed this whole saga - could somebody please explain why S. Tempest is known as Tinkerbel?

More likely is a case that can be appealed, possibly all the way to ECHR.

In his witness statement IIRC there is a statement that he is the most senior transwoman he knows in the civil service - perhaps he feels a sense of duty?

Exactly this. I went from the private sector to the CS fairly recently. There are people in the CS and in the ALBs who have worked there for years, sometimes their whole adult lives, and they have no idea how good they have it. They moan about the most inconsequential things. Last it was about there not being a big enough fuss for pride month, despite the fact there were lots of events on, mainly hosted by the LGBT network. And outrage at pride month being appropriated because there was an article on the intranet about taking pride in our work 🙄

I also want to say that there are lots and lots of people in the CS and in the ALBs that are really hard working and mostly ignore all this because they are busy getting on with their jobs. But there is a vocal minority that are pandered to, and you are right, they wouldn't last five minutes in the private sector.

I really hope that if ST loses this tribunal, a consequence is that a lot of this nonsense will be reigned in. There have been some changes across the CS recently regarding staff networks. No more LGBT book clubs or similar events in staff time, for example.