Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread 2

[myladydisdainisyetliving]

Previous thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5546841-tempest-v-rural-payments-agency-tribunal-thread-follow-on-from-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 existence of the Sex Equality and Equity Network in the Civil Service (SEEN). 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.

I will also 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. The claim originated because she said "only women menstruate" and a search with her name and those terms at the usual gardening website should point you to her plot.

He just had to brag about accessing the menopause and breastfeeding groups. Couldn’t help himself. Had an “excuse” all ready.

NC: Do you agree the principle that ppl in workplace should be able to associate and assmemble to discuss their collective rights?
ST: Re unions yes
NC: But not women?
ST: Have been clear how objections to work policy should be handled.

The point flying high above the claimants head there is the ability of women to discuss.

ST is breaking Beth Upton’s records of incredible and unbelievable statements. And whereas BU was smarmy and patronising in manner, ST is just plain stubborn. Definitely stuck in broadcast and not receive mode.

If accurate its a very helpful statement. For us.

Exactly, people have always talked about it casually in the workplace as a social environment.

BOAK YOUR HONOUR BOAK

Analogies are helpful for observers (in the case the panel). If ST could argue himself out of his position with the aid of a simple analogy then he would have done so a long time ago.

Those of you watching/listening live, is he as odious as he's coming across in the tweets?

Yeah, but for how much longer, 'cause Naomi is going to whip out the very dangerous My Body Is Me book soon, putting Mr Centre Of The Entire Fucking Universe in danger of evaporating from existence just like Marty McFly's siblings did in that photo😱.

I was expecting Naomi to go on and ask whether, given his excuse for TW being in women's groups was that they might have loved ones going through these biological experiences, it would be equally fine for any other man, of whom exactly the same might be said, to be in them. I guess she felt she didn't need to press the point.

I may be wrong but I think one of the panel is a woman. It’s a fortunate woman that has sailed through life with light, regular and pain free periods and no gynae/fertility issues. Let’s hope the panel member is not one of those rare creatures.

Of course this springs to mind:

https://images-r2-1.thebrag.com/td/uploads/2020/09/David-Bowie-The-Man-Who-Sold-The-World-768x435.jpg

@murasaki
@Hedgehogforshort
I was wondering whether the start of all this might have had some TU support. Probably unlikely - as yes, why would you leave if so - but he is so slippery careful with his answers that if it's not pinned down it's possible.

I predict the Judge won't let her use the book.

“ when you have gender surgery and stop taking hormones you get hot flushes and brain fog, so yes TW belong”

Ha! Truth. Women do menopause better than TW because women just do it, to coin a phrase.

We also do breastfeeding better too, though ST knows better.

I agree that ignoring an intervenor isn't a normal bundle issue, but it isn't that different from the employer excluding documents the claimant wants included. And, in the absence of any evidence, that argument came across as a bit he said, she said. I'm not surprised the judge wanted to get on with the case rather than waste time figuring out what had happened and whether to sanction anyone.

Has anyone seen a report of this case in the media yet?

I have absolutely no evidence for this of course, but it would not surprise me if he has rehearsed many of his answers with the help of Emma “I can’t work out how to stop my phone flashing” Dunn. There’s a definite difference in confidence with some replies and large pauses before answering, and those tend to be the answers that are … less helpful.

Agreed. But R’s behaviour in excluding the intervenor does rather give a lie to the “…but they love SEEN more than me, SEEN is treated much better” claim.

I'm surprised ED hasn't started strategically coughing now her texting and gurning have been noticed.

He's allowed to do that. Not once he's sworn, but he's had three years to work out what he's going to say, and anyone can help him in that process.

Kinda supports the idea that his case might be an attempt to bring down Forstater, and backed by people who share that goal? He mentions Forstater in his WS as creating a societal shift that led to him being "challenged in bathrooms" and other evil happenings.

From TT:

[We resume]

J: We do now have the book, thank you.
J: NC could you possibly moderate your speed a little - I hate to ask, but we were struggling to keep up - wd be much appreciated.

NC: Of course, and do remind me if I forget

NC: A little before the break you said the LGBTQ network included GC staff. Cd you look at p771 (int)

Like Who Wants to be a Millionaire!

That went well....

Oh I absolutely accept that, it’s just I think it’s noticeable when there’s a question where the claimant can’t insert a pre-prepared answer. That’s when the claimant tends to sound more hesitant and sullen.

my own personal opinion only.

From TT:

NC: The post about half way down, Tanya Iglesias 8.57am - says that attendees must share the LGBT network and allies belief that TWAW, TWAM etc
ST: That's nothing to do with DEFRA - Environment Agency one.

NC: This is posted cross-CS though?
ST: Yes
NC: And it's v clear that ppl only welcome to join if share GI belief?
ST: It's EA not DEFRA
NC: But you do agree that network excludes GC?

ST: Doesn't say you can't join - just that you understand the network view.

NC: p160 (int)
NC: You were a member of the EA LGBT network?
ST: Yes I was