Thread by @tribunaltweets

Good morning. We are tweeting from the employment tribunal of Maria Kelly v Leonardo UK.

Maria Kelly is employed by Leonardo UK. She alleges harassment, and direct and indirect discrimination. Leonardo, a leading aerospace company, has a policy permitting employees to use toilets in accord with their gender identity.

Previous coverage and further information are available on our Substack:
tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/kelly-vs-leo…

Abbreviations

C or MK – Maria Kelly, claimant
NC – Naomi Cunningham, barrister for C / MK
KW – Katy Wedderburn, solicitor for C / MK
R or L – Leonardo UK, respondent
ST – Susanne Tanner KC, barrister for R / L
J – Employment Judge Michelle Sutherland
P – panel member
GC – gender critical
GI – gender identity
SST – single sex toilets
SSS – single sex spaces
EA or EQA – Equality Act 2010
SC – Supreme Court
JCC – joint consultative committee at Leonardo

J Any comments. re instructions overnight?
[difficult to hear sound]
[they are talking about floors on the Edinburgh site. We have all the data we have, says ST, re site and who would be on site when]
J Re percentage of workers on site
J Parties able to agree if figs given

J yesterday representative?
NC Phase 1 more dominated than phase 2
J Est numbers of ppl on phase 2 first floor?
ST No
ST [to MK] JCC meeting June 24 - second meeting. You took view to start grievance process, started in June with email to Jill Nairn copied to Robin Collins

ST your LM and to his LM Ian {?] Higginbottom [and one other]
ST [to bundle] Email to Jill Nairn JN - your formal grievance. In line with policy you have unsuccessfully raised matter with LM already. In line with policy?
MK yes
ST Then bullet points. Starts with you asking RC

re company policy re use of toilets colleagues and visitors. You say on 27 May 24 following emails to JN and Rachel R you got last email (you assumed) from RR. You felt you'd reached the end of enquiry re use of toilets based on self id.
ST You said 14 months to establish policy.

Is that from RC to RR. And this bullet ;point?
MK yes, these are qs I was asking over months.
ST Grievance was conducted by Andrew Litton. Ian Pawley also present [names spelling may not be accurate]
ST Andrew Letton, grievance hearing manager, IP note taker - taking notes and providing HR guidance?
ML Y
And you choose to take [another man] into meeting.
MK y

MK [missed]
ST those conducting grievance procedure. AL conducting, Would you have thought to ask for f employee.
ML Hadn't;'t occurred to me. First time I had done this.
ST It was acknowledged by L that men involved in first stage and a senior woman involved at later stage?

MK Yes
ST Minutes were circulated and agreed until you content with them.
MK Yes
ST You tracked changes and made comments on minutes
MK Y
ST back and forth with Ian Pawley? and your comments inc on final minutes and they reflected your consent?
MK yes

ST [reads] AL read your grievance and minutes and would be person to due process and provide decision on grievance. And Al provided comment on later stage of grievance and you were told had right to appeal?
MK Yes to all
ST that was done and grievance ultimately not upheld
MK yes

ST [to meeting] you were asked to expand on your concerns. Highlighted cos of employee from Luton visiting Edinburgh. Employee was TW and you were approached by concerned f colleagues. Sometime in 2019?
MK yes to all, but I didn't check the date
ST You said you put forward idea of unisex cubicles to inc basin. Fully enclosed.
MK yes

ST you said these were different from Luton toilets which had communal handbasin areas.
MK Yes
ST You ended by saying policy re toilets is harassment under regs and also length of time L took to answer qs and no consultation. Minutes accurate, that policy amounts to harassment.
MK yes

ST You had suggested fully enc unisex toilets
MK We discussed various options.
ST Correspondence following mtg but before outcome. Email from Ian Pawley who had taken minutes, July 24. He attaches final draft.
MK yes
ST He inc the points you were making between unisex and other toilets

MK agrees
ST IP says have spoken to {?} UK and taken advice. Did you know who they were
MK [missed]
ST IP says still investigating toilet provision in Edinburgh, for Phases 1 and 2. Companies advice from ?Make UK? and the discussion you had with IP etc. Did you understand L was considering various solutions, including changes in Edin site?

MK Yes.
ST Grievance outcome letter. Concludes not upheld but will offer employee outcome solution. Did you think that was re toilet facilities.
MK agrees
ST was that inc in grievance outcome. [reads c toilet facilities could be amended to single occupancy/universal. Agreed is poss, and toilets now available for any employee - privacy, etc provided]

ST That is what you were told in grievance outcome?
MK yes
ST were your expectations based on this
MK [difficult to hear but generally yes]
ST A Letton summarised toilets in 2 locations in Edinburgh and 3 would be converted to single us?
MK Y
ST Timescales are discussed. Amending 3 toilets should be done asap, probably by end Sept - says AL.

MK Yes
ST And AL etc will assist as much as ca.
MK yes
ST re your original toilet used before promotion. You called it a secret squirrel toilet. Is that the toilet you understood them to be talking about on each level?
MK ST
ST Second floor toilet was amended at least by Oct 24
MK y

ST and other one done by Jan
MK [c dates] but yes
ST Ian Pawley email Sept 24 - to you - he said email is linked in part to grievance but also in context of your role in JCC. and progressing plans.
MK yes
ST Did you understand this was re facilities and info for changes and future plans.

MK yes
ST and IP was sending this to you in advance of others, as matter of courtesy.
MK yes
ST And provided you with a presentation that would form information for groups.
MK yes
ST Does it record that presentation would cover toilets and shower rooms. And lists changes in Phases 1 and 2. And changes to second floor toilet

ST Email was sent to you in advance of communication to staff
MK I'm not sure if those changes had been made by that date. S Sq toilet - not sure what changes made by that date.
J [asks c different floors / ST confirms which floors changes apply to]
ST Around time of your grievance appeal hearing. Heard by Mark S, another employee of L

ST Sept minutes of appeal hearing. Again you accompanied by Mark Jackson. And a f employee of L
MK Mark wanted to check his possible bias
ST Generally re appeal. Was understood what appeal was. Given chance to further explain your concerns ?
MK yes
ST c March 23, when you realised might be sharing toilets with bio m employees you spoke to your LM

MK Yes
ST Re grievance process - in its entirety - mtgs, minutes. Minutes of grievance appeal. You didn't mention meeting employee B in toilets at any time.
MK Not personal. I know I shared a toilet with B. Wording says she may have shared, I wasn't explicit. Didn't want to mention name.

ST Mentioning name is different from mentioning an individual. You never mentioned this.
MK Would be suprised if I never mention incident, even if not mentioned in minutes. the males id as w was established.
ST Principal issue of your complaint is you consider are issues with L. But you didn't mention encounter through formal grievance process.

MK My point wasn't about a specific person. It was about the company policy.
ST You took q c co policy to your LM
MK [cannot hear]
ST re letter from L and your response. But the letter referred to yesterday was from general counsel to your solicitor. Was it sent to gen counsel of L
MK Think so

ST you thought letter was threatening and you were v angry and upset. Low point in process. [to bundle] Letter from Gunner Cook to L's counsel in London.
MK yes
ST attaching copy of claim to Edin ET
MK yes
ST claim already made to tribunal
MK yes
ST letter says issue is that L shouldn't let men use toilet facilities for w. re L policy
MK y

ST [reads from letter] Client funded by insurance, if that comes to an end, client would need to crowdfund which would inevitably use social media to draw attention. Not names TiM involved and will try not to attract attention but this may become part of story. Also attention re L

MK yes
ST you may have to id t id colleagues
NC Not fair. Saying that if she crowdfunds they may become part of story.
ST
MK No q that I would id individuals. Ppl may look up individual as result of crowdfund
ST Concern over identities become part of story.
MK May be but not through me.

MK I have never mentioned t ppl involved, not even in my grievance
ST Your letter says you were gobsmacked. One interpretation of letter is that your crowdfund might necessitate or result in id of t ppl
NC Necessitate not fair. She will not name, but crowdfund might result in id-ing them.

ST Would id of t employee be a concern for L. Accept that that might explain the response you received re id of staff.
MK Response implied that I would intentionally leak things so not far. Not acceptable to me, I would not do that.
ST Letter talks c implied threat of reputational damage to L and risk of id employees if your client crowdfunds

ST That was your objection.
MK One part. [missed rest - sound v bad]
ST [from Make UK legal services, L legal advisers]
Says taken instruction from client. They would like to deal with matters in amicable constructive manner. Letter has been misunderstood. L accepts that client doesn't agree with approach to toilet facility and wished to test that.
MK yes

ST [to MK evidence re w and m very different] Not just workplace
MK and society
ST Mention re children. Nothing to do with workplacer
MK no
ST W need to undress more than men. Man sitting in cubicle would have to take off same amount of clothing.
MK Generally. Not always.
ST re questionnaire. You formed view questionnaire was ideological on part of employer.

MK Yes
ST email from L cascaded re equality. Re EHRC. Wendy Allen - following FWS SC, EHRC has released consultation. L will contribute to response. There is a feedback anon page for employees. Internal feedback via Make UK . Any employee could provide views and views would be shared.
MK yes

ST So communication by W Allen not ideological.
MK [agrees] [describes a variety of communications]
ST I'm representing L not Unite. Only network mentioned on communications was Pride. A concern to you.
MK First sentence was c difficult time for colleges and mentions Pride.
ST You could talk c confidential counselling etc
MK But context I read this in was [ missed]

ST Difficult time could be both for GI and GC colleagues
MK Ppl I spoke to felt they were not part of group of colleagues for whom this was difficult time.
ST Yesterday you mentioned you thought would be put on naughty step. During process you were promoted to lead
MK Not sure c timing, Not sure was during process

ST No further qs. Thank you very much.
J May need your assistance re some matters. We've heard in evidence re moving desks [missed - sound v bad] [asking c stairwells]

J In terms of f toilets [?[ , when did you stop using those toilets?
MK Would depend who was in office at time and what I was experiencing or not.

J Is your position that you used them Was there any change to that.
MK After the day I walked into the TiM yes.
J You said a number of people in office - it depended
J Accessible use toilet. Would you expect to use
MK Only recently accessible. It's about wheelchairs.

J / ST are discussing layout and logistics of which toilets used, desk move, etc. Sound comes and goes.
MK I relied on it for quite a long time, and probably a couple of years beforehand when menstrual symptoms required. I was using that anyway. [discusses use and need over time]

J Is there any change
MK March 23 I met a male colleague in the toilets. Absolute confirmation.
J In terms of increase of use
MK General use of toilets over 18 years - place of refuge, used S Sq toilets, worked in Phase 2.
J About changes. Looking re ladies toilets. 2019 what badge

MK F changed. Male didn't.
J Stylised image
MK yes
J In terms of accessible toilets. What badging change
MK Sign changed - end Oct - noticed it as i walked past, 2024 - Says accessible toilet, think it was a wheelchair, possible something else.
J So there was a change at some point.
MK yes

MK I think so.
J Before we move to secret toilet, suggestion change in physical structure. No change?
J Re secret toilet first floor.
ST Reads c signs and additional lock added
J In terms of what is agreed. Two cubicles in one space and basins - changed - came through shared space.

J Change to single use happened first?
ST Second floor changed by October 24. Claimant's floor change happened by Jan 25
J I was confused as said it was identified by a poster. A poster change or also became completely enclosed? Did it become completely enclosed by Jan 25
ST Yes
MK I think it changed badge

J Want to understand what has been agreed. On first floor poster went up and enclosed?
MK At that time it was lock on outer door.
J So cleaner couldn't access?
MK yes
J Sentence doesn't mention badging.
{ST?]Jan 24 poster went out. Single use.
MK Not for first floor

[Ppl discussing]
J What do you remember about badging on single toilet and when? To Oct 24?
MKWithin a month or two of grievance it was changed.
J You said was badged to Oct 24..
MK We agreed changes to be made by end Sept but that didn't happen

J Badge changed to WC in Oct 20. In terms of change to badging, did it happen at same time. [missed] Poster going up changed in Jan 25
MK yes
J This says now fully enc. A physical change? At end of grievance process was any discussion about changing to two singles?
MK [explains what she thought]

J You understood from grievance process that it would become single?
MK y
J Signage put up indication change. When did you change use
MK When sign went up it blocked access to cleaner's cupboard. [misssed]
ST Judge, if assists is all recorded in facts paragraphs.

[no more from Judge or ST]
NC You were asked yesterday re your route on first floor from old desk to secret toilet. You said could go out but not come in.
MK Used route sometimes. [expounds but missed]
NC Would you be able to see from your desk how full the atrium area would be

MK No. Can't see from desk.
NC You were asked re suggestion in email c SC judgment. You said you didn't think it was directed to you. How in immediate aftermath of SC felt to GC women on site.
MK [sound - missed]
NC To make completely clear, when secret toilet changed to single occupancy

J [asking c time] 15 minute break.
[ends]

@threadreaderapp

@threadreaderapp Please unroll