Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread 3

[myladydisdainisyetliving]

Previous thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5548369-tempest-v-rural-payments-agency-tribunal-thread-2

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.

Well, he's talking about himself, his fav subject

HH: Did you know her before these events?
ST: No, I think it was because of these events, not just this claim but the department in general.
HH: Did she assist you at meetings?
ST: I think yes came to one

Let's see, I may have bumped into - what's her name again - Emily? Amanda? Emma! that's it, before, and yeah I think maybe she did assist me at oooh I don't know, at a guess - one meeting? but I hardly noticed here there, I'm not sure I'd recognise her

I'm exaggerating unfairly for comic effect [did it work??😧] but it is amazing how sketchy he is about some things, and forensic about others.

Part of his martyr complex, falling on his sword to take one for the team (mixing my metaphors there, I think)

So unbalanced he needed 6 months maybe more off work.

Christ.

And Elspeth was threatening action for discrimination except one of the emails was not from her and was only a threat because I say it was, whoever said it didnt actually say they were going to do it. And I cant even find the other email but it was definitely a threat and from Elspeth.

Thank fuck that's over. Usually I enjoy these crosses, but this has been awful.

for Elspeth

ST: And, you are not going to say to business that it is discrimination, if you're not going to do anything about it.

Eh?? What is he taking? You tell a business they are discriminating so that the business can do something about it. If they don't then you start talking about taking things further.

I'm sure that's not going unnoticed, Marie. It runs through this tribunal like a stick of rock.

Saying something is direct discrimination is not someone saying they are making a claim. And what if she was? Does yer man think it is ok for women to be directly discriminated against?

No need to answer as we can all come to a conclusion on the way he views groups which are formed to protect sex based rights, especially those mostly comprised of women.

HH: FInally - you were told no SEEN member had ever referred to you with sexed pronouns - look at page [missed] - she says "him" here?
ST: Yes
HH: What effect does that have on you, in the workplace
ST: Unnecessary, unhelpful, unbalances my whole day and more. [my bold]

He likes portraying himself as desperately fragile, doesn't he? I wonder what he sees when he looks in the mirror - delicate pink anime character?

J: ST that concludes your evidence so you are released from not talking about things now.

Bet ST is already searching the internet for things to be outraged at.

<Waves>

Someone not pretending 'unbalances his whole day'.

I wonder how it affects the woman forced to lie for his benefit and enable the harm to her own equality and rights?

DrSpartacularsMagnificentOctopus · Today 16:42

Thank fuck that's over. Usually I enjoy these crosses, but this has been awful.

I've only been following it here, but I've been enjoying it. Tempest has pretty well destroyed himself, from what I can tell. Unless the judges is a raging TRA, of course...

From the Equal Treatment Bench Book
19 Witnesses should never be compelled to use the trans person’s preferred pronouns. It should always be permitted for them to refer to a person how they presently understand or previously knew them (as in any case, eg a fraud where a defendant has used multiple identities). A victim of domestic abuse, sexual violence or assault by a trans person is particularly likely to describe the perpetrator in accordance with the victim’s experience and perception of events. To do otherwise, and place additional or artificial barriers on a witness, is likely to detract from their ability to give best evidence.

Does the ETBB apply to tribunals as well as courts?
If so, witnesses should be able to refer to ST as 'he/him' if they want to.

It does apply, and the Judge's letter claims this is the very document he has "had regard to".

This business of EDW threatening court cases is utter nonsense. She said some of Defra actions amounted to direct discrimination and they may want to adjust their approach (she is a co-chair of a staff network). This is what SEEN is for, to make clear what the law actually is and get the employer to comply with it. Tinkerbell’s assertion that nobody would mention discrimination without planning to action it in court is bonkers.

I think ST's comment says more about him and his fellow TRAs than anything else.

I found one of the more extraordinary exchanges today the following, about the One EDI Policy To Rule Them All:

"ST: Yes I say there is already clear policy in place that should restrict GC expression.
J: And the effect is?
ST: That GC expression is already restricted in the Civil Service."

He thinks this is the situation and still it's not enough for him.

J: One last point - you were referred p141 re EDW threatening claims. This is not from her, it's someone else saying so. Do you know anywhere she actually does?
ST: Am sure there are two emails in bundle, but don't have refs

[so that would be a no? a yes?]

ST: And, you are not going to say to business that it is discrimination, if you're not going to do anything about it.

[or maybe you're hoping that the employer might deal with it? That's quite a leap to say that mentioning something means definitely actioning something]

Of course tinkers will be legging home to get on this thread, his mate in the court and the wife are all probably lurking. <two fingers up> as it is not being reported elsewhere.

Anyway @SinnerBoy my understanding is you are in fact intersex😂

Oh, no. They have to be punished as well!

Oh, and another thing. The line of questioning was had anyone from SEEN ever used correct sex pronouns for him at work, and NC said it hadn’t happened. His lawyer took him to EDW’s statement (I’m guessing witness statement) where she refers to him as ‘him’, but that’s not at work, that’s a WS in a court case. Poor Elspeth, that was grim.

At some point I will finish his statement. It's hard to wade through.

I think the j will figure that out.

What this tribunal, more than any of the others has said to me is how fucked up and utterly under the control of genderloons the CS is.