Thread by @tribunaltweets

Good afternoon - this is the afternoon of day 2 (the first day of public hearings) in the case of Maria Kelly vs Leonardo UK at employment tribunal.

Our substack page on the case, with links to the morning's evidence and our abbreviations list and other information is here tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/kelly-vs-leo…

We expect the hearing to begin in a few minutes. Maria Kelly is still giving her main evidence, questioned by her barrister Naomi Cunningham.

[we begin]

NC: page 31.
NC: paras b to g of the claim - series of generalisations about men and women. So first - says women in general more fearful of men than vice versa. Why do you believe this?

MK: Statistically men commit more violence than women [cites gov crime stats] Men are taller stronger - we all know this. And the statistics show this.

NC: [asks re second para - missed]
NC: Also you say men much more likely to commit sexual crime including voyeurism etc. Anything to add re sexual crime particularly?
MK: [cites figures from Rape Crisis and others]

NC: And re women's use of toilets?
MK: We have to undress much more - need more space especially if we have children with us. Deal with menstruation.

NC [inaudible]
MK: It's not just 'a toilet'. Menstruation - issues with breast milk post partum. It's just a question of bodies
NC: And why do you say women are more modest than men about this?

MK: Well - just the way men talk about what they do in the toilet - very open. Whereas women try to be as silent as possible always. It's just very different hearin gmen discuss it from hearing women talk.

NC: And how much comfort men compared to women about exposing their bodies?
MK: I think out hiking behind a bush is about the only time women would feel OK disrobing when cd be seen - [is emotional]

NC: So the grievance process - can you tell tribunal
MK: Well first meeting, was me and three men - having to discuss all the things I've said here. One of the men was my supporter I took - have known him 2 years, we'd *never* discussed any of this.

MK: Company had been running all 'menopause awareness' posters so I couldn't believe I was having to discuss all this so personally and in such detail.
MK: Took a whole year just to get confirmation of policy.

MK: I just hadn't wanted to have to talk about all this sort of thing *at all*, having to do it made me feel ashamed.
MK: Walking through an office of men, maybe blood on my chair, on my trousers, it should not be shame but it is shame.

MK: To get to a toilet that won't have men in - I have to walk a good way, through very public area. And meanwhile the company is all 'menopause awareness'. It's ridiculous.

NC: [page] is this the correspondence with colleague after that meeting?
MK: Yes this is it. I mention it taking a year to get to the point of even getting told, and then having to go through why women should have single sex toilets.

NC: This is quite a long email.
MK: I think I was in work - it says 3pm. I don't think I was home. I remember crying a lot. Annoyed I had to explain it all AGAIN. I've been an engineer 20 years - have never had to lay out personal things like this. A degree of shame too.

NC [ref] What did you expect to happen after that?
MK: We discussed modifying some of the toilets, the secret squirrel toilets, I'd expected that to happen by about August, because it had taken a year to get that far.

MK: So my understanding was, policy would not change, company didn't think we needed single sex loos, but they would sort out a loo or two to work differently, to be single occupancy. Expected that by August / September
NC: When was it done?
MK January basically before usable.

NC: [ref] this is response from [sound very poor]
J: [is asking a Q - can't hear well]

NC: This paragraph and the next couple - remind yourself what they say. How did they make you feel?
MK: There was a sentence in my grievance that I "must not misgender" and then I got this letter - I was crying for about a week. I had been there 17 odd years and then this.

MK: I felt threatened. Being told I couldn't crowdfund for any action bcs wd bring company into disrepute. Told I was likely to breach personal confidentiality. I felt I would lose my job. I felt very threatened. Was stunned.
MK So after that I went to take legal advice.

NC: One final Q that may be upsetting. Can you tell tribunal on how R stance on who could use women's toilets changed between when you first because aware, up to now?

MK: Have always wanted to get more women into engineering - in theory Leonardo wanted this too. But all this undermines that, and for the sake of a few men that want to be called women. This removes safety and dignity from women.

MK: In my grievance - I asked them not call me 'cis' but then I get this letter. Company was *saying* it was supporting women, menopause work - but then this. I had been asking to set up a women's network for some time but got nowhere. Company was not supporting me - hypocritical. I considered leaving.

NC: The judgment in FWS in April 2025 confirmed that for the EA2010 men who identify as women still count as men. Did you expect anything from R then?

MK: I thought they would acknowledge it, communicate with staff, revert to having some women only toilet. A few weeks after a colleague of mine had a couple of 'trans' staff (one male one female) ask her about what loo to use. There was still no policy.

MK: We said the trans staff should consult HR for reassurance. The only response was 'we are consulting the Pride network and the union', was all.

MK: And then at some point there was a questionnaire to all staff about how they felt about the ruling. I've never heard of staff being consulted on a legal matter like this. Felt as if there was a bias - pride network trying to stir up opposition.

MK: And about the same time there was stuff from Unite complaining about the SC ruling. This was about 3 months after it. Felt as if the official attitude was, we are going to ignore it. I felt very undermined.

NC: [ref]
MK: Yes that's the questionnaire.

NC: [ref]
MK Yes that's the communication from Unite.

NC: [ref] bottom para - says 'difficult time for some colleagues, if you need support -' who do you think that is intended for?
MK: I assume, staff who had been using toilets of the opposite sex.

NC: How did you feel
MK: I felt frustrated if I'm honest - excluded.

NC: [ref] tell us what this is?

[pause to mop up a water spill and open a window]

MK: So we take summer students every June, and we had had one from a female student, whose CV indicated trans and a male name. Student very good, but we had no policy still post Supreme Court - and this tribunal was pending - so I talked to my lawyer

MK: Wanted to know whether we should advise the student which toilets to use, situation very sensitive. Was told that there wd be no problem for me if I passed the Q to HR - I wanted the student to have a positive experience with us. Needed to know I would not get into trouble for raising this.

NC: Can you tell tribunal about legal advice - not its details, but the topics.
MK: It had taken a year to get confirmation that R was letting men use the women's toilets and were not telling the women, so I wanted to take advice about whether I had understood the law.

MK: So that was when I decided to raise a grievance, so that costs item I have there is for the legal advice I took to make sure I was on the right track.

NC: Tell us about diversity training
MK: New one came out 2018 and everyone had to take it - not just new starters.
NC: Is it still mandatory?
MK: It is for new starters. But the 2018 diversity has not 'come round' again for me.

NC: How do you know it has not come round?
MK: We use a system by Workday that manages the training requirements we each have. And when I changed jobs, a human reviews where you are just to check.

NC: [missed]
MK: When I started grievance I looked back over the training, was not aware of any changes, though was told there might be a review bcs of new legal requirements re sexual harassment. But have not seen new version yet.

NC [missed - includes ref to Forstater]
MK: I raised a couple of points about the definnitions and things but was told no, no change post Supreme Court or anything else - only the new rules re sexual harassment.

NC: That's all my Qs.

[they discuss taking a short break at this point and decide to do so]

@threadreaderapp please unroll