Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread 7

[myladydisdainisyetliving]

Previous thread: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5551375-tempest-v-rural-payments-agency-tribunal-thread-6

TT substack: 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.

Please 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.

Unprovable - the attribution of malicious motive is part of purity spiral that exacerbates toxicity of workplace.

Been putting washing out.

Just came back to

J Not sure why we are doing this

Neither are we judge. Neither are we.

Points made in a more measured way would have been acceptable

the Bananarama tactic working for us for a change!

Who's being interviewed after lunch? Is it stiill CA.

I think it was mentioned yesterday that CA would take up at least all of today.

CA I did that on one occasion cos EDI had errors delivered in our name in training that she had attended

I wonder did EDI base that training on Stonewall Law rather than THE Law??

I instantly thought Banarama when I heard that!

From TT:

CA We were not trying to stifle debate.
HH [to CA WS] para 76 You say both sides of debate have alleged dept actions lean too far to opponents view. Fallacy that if both sides complain must be doing something right. Could be doing something wrong.

CA Constantly being told going too far other way is v draining. May be false logic - remember thinking everyone hates me so I must be getting something right. Not a happy place to be.
HH changes to POC. Indication from R that existing POC as they were were inadequate

Advocates who play word games with witnesses are being advocates. Advocates who play word games with the judge might find themselves in contempt.

CA Constantly being told going too far other way is v draining. May be false logic - remember thinking everyone hates me so I must be getting something right. Not a happy place to be.

Just a reminder of how far the (real) stress caused by this can travel. I bet Elspeth will say something similar.

Yes, but hopefully we'll get on to NC doing the questioning soon. She did say yesterday that she anticipated needing a day.

From TT:

CA Indication that we were listening to people and making changes as a result. Don't accept POC were inadequate- it was an iteration.
HH Was reaction to events rather than anticipatory role you had to prevent discrimination.
CA Reacting to what had happened but also looking

ahead. Listened, reviewed and developed and in my view that was a sensible way of proceeding.
HH At time of MW post, you were aware C had raised formal grievance
CA Don't think I was aware of g process

And this was how she spent the last bit of her working life for about 18 months? What a nightmare to finish your career on.

A question for the observers, when they are able to do so, but does CA have the patience of a saint or is she beginning to sound a little impatient?

"And this was how she spent the last bit of her working life for about 18 months? What a nightmare to finish your career on".
And even worse for you to discover that you are being dragged back to be cross examined by HH for hours and hours and hours

A bloke on X has just referred to HH as "the Traniban". I might have to nick that.

I can only hope that the judge loses patience first.

From TT:

HH Not interviewed by JH?
CA No - Karl Hardman
HH You were not aware of recommendations c consistent moderation
CA Not aware of recommendations but I think there was consistent moderation
HH [to doc]

[they read]
HH You have no reason to doubt truth stated of effect on C as result of seeing post
CA No
HH And harm caused to her and t colleagues is foreseeable.

So, DB saying everyone talking about MW is a big, old, anti t, dirty bigot. (My paraphrasing/take). As he talks about MW.

Gosh, the bros really do find all this a terribly exciting cover from where they can lambast women especially.

I think CA is pretty fed up with HH. The judge has used the term ‘getting into the weeds’ about various things NC wanted to examine on, and thought this was a bad thing. But he allows HH to go on and on and on. CA is clipped and measured, but forthright. And sounding occasionally as though she would rather scream.

.

Madcats · Today 12:35
A question for the observers, when they are able to do so, but does CA have the patience of a saint or is she beginning to sound a little impatient?

I hope not - as they say to batters in cricket - 'if you're hit by a ball from a fast bowler, don't rub it - it only encourages them'😄

I hope HH doesn't get to her, and she maintains her sangfroid, it would be the best response to HH's questioning.

From TT:

CA Harm seems to be from watching doc which anyone can choose whether or not they watch
HH Comment c labelling TRAs as bullies. Lauren Davies posted in response to Philip Benson. Posted 27/6. Please go to mod logs, using same process. row 205

J Sorry, I have the circle of death. Just going round and round. It's frozen on DB - no good to anyone.
HH Content of post. Then reason for concern - post made c post by ST. ST explains g reassignment not an ideology. Personal attack on individuals and groups not acceptable

My note: someone get the Judge a new computer...

I've just noticed the show all seems to have disappeared today. Did mnhq see sense?

J Sorry, I have the circle of death. Just going round and round.

I genuinely thought he was referring to the questioning.

Jesus! This is so tedious. I wonder if HH will look back on this as three wasted weeks of her life submerged in total nonsense.

Character witnesses at end of tribunal include the ex wife of ST:

" Complete tool"; " Me, Me, Me"; "Glad to be shot of him"; " Best of luck everyone else"