Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread 8

[myladydisdainisyetliving]

Previous thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5551959-tempest-v-rural-payments-agency-tribunal-thread-7

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.

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.

Well that's a whole week none of us are ever going to get back.

My fury at the ludicrous line of questioning and the delay and its effect on CA but particularly EDW has been soothed by a trip to crowd justice. Can recommend.

Was he supposed to be representing Tink or PQ (?) who settled?

Poor Elspeth. At least it gives me longer to plant more seeds in her garden without breaking my monthly seed ration .

I don't think HH is incompetent. I think she has played a poor hand very well. It's not her fault if none of it adds up and her client is stroppy and deluded.

I haven't read Invisible Women but if it didn't mention women of colour or non-binary women or transwomen then it erased them from existence. Being ignored is erasure.

Musing... There are a lot of very literal minded people in this world. At least there are a lot of people who slide seamlessly between metaphor and physical reality and treat them as if they are the same. Transwomen are women. Some people are born in the wrong body. One book that doesn't mention you has threatened your existence. Do rhetoricians have a word for that?

😄

Agree.

Huge thanks to TT and the copiers, you must be fed up and exhausted so I am sending virtual mojitos to everyone.

If I'm right then Elspeth is autistic and gender critical (which go together imho because auties have low bullshit tolerance.) Does anyone know if 2 protected characteristics automatically trump one, please?

(From previous thread)

PrettyDamnCosmic · Today 10:50

Madcats · Today 10:35

On other bits of Twitter, somebody has spotted that Murray Blackburn MacKenzie is also listed on Amnesty's glorious spreadsheet of "anti-rights organisations" & FWS & LGB Alliance & Legal Feminist etc etc
It's utterly bonkers.

Anyone else getting this vibe?

I humbly contribute

I see:

EdithStourton · Today 11:31

Has beaten me to it. Apols, daily life intervened and I rushed to post! Still working through this one...

I have the PC of deafness, should I have objected to my workplace having outings to plays, musicals etc without closed captioning or should the mere suggestion of a workplace choir have triggered thoughts of they are excluding me, outing me and erasing my existence as a deaf person temper tantrum?

Ah, interesting. The implied analogy is that ST and co’s approach was like the US military don’t ask, don’t tell. The truth of the matter is that they are the illiberal authoritarians. Why is that so hard for people to recognise? Surely the #nodebate was the first giveaway?!

That's a very, very useful analogy.

Yes, quite. And here we are again.

CA has retired - so an older civil servant trained in the tradition of seeing both sides of an argument and looking for compromise and consensus. I know we tend to assume that once you actually listen to the bullshit you cant not see it but she will have had the Stonewall training too.

No debate started off with racism, once you accept that you've accepted that bigotry is OK.

Sorry but no they don't. I'm afraid it's Matt Walsh but still the best explanation of how Victim Points add up:

Might be many candidates willing to fund. There are many who’d love the uppity women to be put back in their place and to STFU about their rights.

I have guests next week (so it will take me a while to confirm my suspicions), but one thing that struck me when I was scanning through ST’s witness statement earlier in the week was just how many DEFRA staff involved in the grievances/moderations/investigations had since retired/transferred/gone on sabbatical.

I suppose it could be that they were deemed to be “less busy”, but it did strike me as odd.

Shame about the tennis.

Im not totally sure if the DEFRA managers were all in the same Region or if they were also London based.

It is not unusual to have more mature people in senior roles for posts based in the regions. It’s the hierarchical structure that means promotion is often dead man’s shoes. So several retiring etc is not usual plus they are also seen as a safe pair of hands.

London is very different as the number of senior posts is much higher and it’s a lot easier to get promotion.

Marking my place again

It's now a murder inquiry!

And the TRA are having a very normal one about it #BeKindBrigade

Musing on the idea that going part heard with CA’s calm and balanced views heard last is maybe going to be worse for his case than EW’s.

I’ve no idea about the J but I’m now tempted to go back and review ST’s evidence in light of what CA said. And if that’s followed by interposing EW then I think ST’s case starts to look seriously ropey.

HH’s endless evidence will surely have done more harm than good - all it’s done for me is reveal the details of how badly ST behaved and how unreasonable the demands were. again and again and again and again. Prior to that the J could imagine ST being called a clown or someone prancing amd feel sympathetic. Not so much now i think… A series of endless own goals. If this was ST’s instruction then HH should have advised against this.

It’s harassment by process. Why is this not a disciplinary?

BettyBooper · Today 13:51

J: Before break we were discussing - has anyone more to say?

NC: Yes - on reflection I do not think I will finish today.
[subtext because she's blathered on endlessly with twelvty billion variations on a bloody theme!]