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.

Also notable that HH was going over and over different sets of meaningless statistics and at no point did the J try and stop her...

Don't tell android.

Thank you all copy and pasters today. Sorry I had to dip out. Let's just say my tomato plants won't be thirsty for the next 10 months.

After a lot of trial and error I think the hole in the pool has been successfully patched.

I know how to do that thanks. Unfortunately MN and my laptop don't agree which means watching and book marking doesn't work and therefore I have to post. Right now MN are borking things behind the scenes as I've never known it to be this slow before. It's fecking painful.

Edit
I'm that annoyed about it I forgot my manners. Thank you to everyone c/p and commenting!

Is there anything that can be done mid-tribunal about bias from the judge in how much latitude he is giving HH to make her arguments compared to NC? As in, can NC formally raise this now? Or would it have to wait for an appeal?

😁

@BiologicalRobot ah I did wonder. I only use an ipad because the laptop/website version seems to be a struugle for me.
IT is not my strength and I was feeling good at actually knowing something 😎. Others have helped me.

catching up - notice the judge said both trans and SEEN had a network - so one each, implying fair. Maybe agender were a big secret then as that makes 2 by my count and both in existence long before SEEN,

Its like the Sandie Peggy case all over again. Jane Russel (?) was allowed to get away with all sorts of rambling and irrelevant nonsense yet the blessed NC got snippy remarks and thwarted repeatedly. Uppity wimin are still not allowed to say the truth.

Could it be a ploy of HH? To get EW delayed by some weeks so the panel will have made up their minds pretty firmly already before hearing her side of things? It would make sense of her pointlessly endlessly repeating questions.

HH represents the Claimant, who brought the case, so I reckon on that basis they're going to be given every chance to make it. Irritating though she was

Submissions are based on written evidence (witness statements) as well as verbal, so there's plenty. (Expect this to be written, now, though, given timing, despite judge prefering verbal)

It may be that the Sandie Peggie case in particular, including the level of attention and the fallout about the writing of the judgment, has contributed to judges perhaps having a particular view en avant regarding NC.

No. Just because some perceive the judges interventions indicate a bias until you get the judgement you can’t know if that is reflected in the outcome.

The judge has indicated GC and GI beliefs in law are equal. That is correct.

Based on this I think he is trying to cut out rehashing Forstater and explanations of what GC and GI beliefs are.

If he starts from the premise that GC and GI beliefs are both pc then the questions he has to determine are:

• is STs belief they were harassed evidenced
• did DEFRA/RPA have a fair G process,
• did they follow their G process
• were the actions DEFR/RPA took to resolve the matter lawful, fair and proportionate.

The judge has likely given NC sufficient grounds to appeal. I didn’t think ST has been given grounds for appeal. Remember an appeal is about points of law not a rehearing of the evidence.

I don't think so. From her WS, she supported SEEN's right to exist and the right to express gc views from the start, and the trans hostility she witnessed and had to endure began already in 2022.
The mail with those quotes about hurtfulness towards trans is from 2023, and she refers to it in her WS as "being firm" - she also put up rules against 'misgendering'. She still stands by those limitations as reasonable.

I think the corporate culture at the time was so anti-gc and trans-indulgent that any deviation from that felt more pro-gc than it actually was, and putting asymmetrical pressure on SEEN to 'behave' themselves much more than on the TAs seemed balanced in that context.
It just shows how much crybullies can shift the impression of what constitutes a 'balanced' response...

Possibly there was a certain attitude towards SEEN of 'I've supported you so much, don't make it more complicated than it has to be' that led her to demand more restraint from them than from the TAs?

A big issue for DEFRA/RPA is they still haven’t withdrawn or replaced the Intersex/transgender guidance regarding using toilets of their chosen gender.

I know they are waiting for central guidance but the SC clarified the law over a year ago. Gmt depts should have implemented it asap possibly with interim measures. Again it indicates a GI bias - wait for central gmt to issue guidance so we can blame them.

Marking my place for tomorrow

Same

various emails and posts by Dominic Berry (at pages 905, 924-925; 942-943), referring to the moderation approach as “infantile” and the moderation panel showing “wilful ignorance”

I looked up DB to see where his hostile comments were metaphorically 'coming from'.

Young, bearded guy doing digital stuff (surprise, surprise) with his 'professional' profile pic on the gov.co.uk website imposed on a trans flag.

Wouldn't it be a good start to put a stop to this practice of incorporating flags into work personas? No wonder some employees behave as if they're on Twitter when emailing work colleagues.

The judge has indicated GC and GI beliefs in law are equal. That is correct.

If belief in GI has never been tested in court is it clear that it is protected by the PC of belief? (I'm not challenging whether it meets the standard - some very odd beliefs are protected - just wondering whether it needs to be tested first.)

Also, while I know the belief that sex matters has been characterised as a belief in discrimination cases, a SEEN network might just be explaining the Supreme Court judgement. In these circumstances does the law carry the same weight as a belief?

There are statistics about harms to women mostly occurring in mixed sex toilets and changing rooms. Men who place cameras etc.

If we really talking increased harm (and not just disappointing some lad who wants to be in women’s spaces for some reason), then I’m sure they could be produced.

Not a heap of men and their enablers, saying ‘Johnny/joanna is harmed to a degree that he is a shadow of himself as someone won’t agree he is now a woman.’ And ED helpfully co ordinating and funnelling it all along.

So, CS are breaking the law now, in a way that can be proven to increase the potential for harm to women. By men.

Sorry, been out all day and have the last thread to work through, so apologies in the almost certainly event that his has been noted:

NC let me try again, do you agree that this g/x was an attempt to silence an entire category of employees with a shared belief

NB it sought very tight controls over specific speech

NC it was an attempt to silence an entire section of the workforce about their shared belief

NB yes, I agree

Well, its as plain as day, isn't it? Tempest and chums conspired to silence GC people, illegally, in breach of their right to express sex realist views.

How he can win is a mystery.

Basically bloke, unable to hear no or behave professionally. And yes digital stuff - also no surprise.

That is an excellent witness statement.

It shows that Defra bent over backwards to ensure the trans community within Defra were protected as much as possible from reality. It shows SEEN were under an extraordinary high level of CS oversight regarding just about every post they wrote.

I think ED was insidious in her role, and indeed I’d be surprised if the revelation that she was actively seeking out and doxxing AM (for nothing illegal, and outside the CS) hasn’t shown she is unsuitable to remain in her role.

I actually don’t think anything AM said was really wrong. Men don’t become women, they can never be lesbians, and I think ‘clown’ if related to ED was overly kind. She came across as a lot more suspect than a clown.

Edited to change CS to AM.

I agree. I think NC did a great job pounding the law today.

Essentially, I think ST (et al) feels harassed by the law allowing colleagues to do what they're legally entitled to do. CAs evidence today underlined this. The CS is between a rock and a hard place (of their own making imho), but ultimately they will have to fulfil their legal obligations.