Thread by @tribunaltweets

Good afternoon. This is our reporting from the afternoon of day 3 of the hearing of Bethany Hutchison and others vs County Durham & Darlington NHS Foundation Trust - "the Darlington Nurses" case

Abbreviations: C/Ns - Claimants - the Darlington nurses NF - Niazi Fetto KC, barrister for Claimants MP - Michael Phillips, solicitor for claimants

PS - Pavel Stroilov, C’s solicitor, preliminary hearing R/T/Trust - Respondent, County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust SC - Simon Cheetham, KC, barrister for respondents J/REJ - Regional Employment Judge Robertson

EJ - Employment Judge ET - Employment Tribunal RH - Rose Henderson, trans identifying nurse DMH/H/Hospital - Darlington Memorial Hospital SH - sexual harassment SD - sex discrim SA - sexual abuse

PA - panic attack HM - hospital management
TG - transgender CR/CF - changing room or facilities

We hope to resume at 2pm

We resume.
Next witness MG
Some discussion about documents and numbers of copies

MG sworn in.

J - confirms she has witness bundle.
NF - looking at p48 that's you? If you go through to last statement, your signature? Correction para 22. So that says '15 July...received letter', what is should say 'I was shown'
MG - I didn't receive, but I was one of the ones who went to

..media'
NF - are the contents true
MG - yes
NG - bundle 3

NF - page 363 - 365. Sent to resolution process?
MG - yes
NF para 25 of witness statement bundle. p53 last page para 25 you say '...wellbeing meetings...someone I knew' There has been a doc added to witness bundle. Is that a health and wellbeing note with you?
MG yes

NF who was that with?
MG - I've had a few diff meetings have had with Claire and Sharon.Sharon would have signed this def with Sharon.
NF is this how process works
MG - yes. Meeting with Sharon, Claire would sign it off

MG - every now and then Sharon would check in on you to see if you want a wellbeing meeting.
NF is this meeting August
would you have seen at time
MG yes
NF shown at meeting?
MG yes

NF -see at end of meeting and sign it
MG yes
NF - going in to it, the entry most relevant on 2nd page, about the 3rd box, q about it, what's on your mind about work, you said Trust not taking concerns
NF what is referring to?
MG the RH situation, in the CR and how we felt

NF - no further questions
SC - you are a full time nurse band 5 and you worked at the Trust since summer 2021
MG yes day surgery

SC - in para 2 of your statement you set out shift patterns what you did and what you now do. Let's go to encounters with RH in CR, 'one morning summer 2023...turning round seeing RH' before we get to what you say there, this is the first time you have met ?
MG yes

SC why not met before, shift patterns?
MG - yes
SC - so we understand, so a long shift, you go and get changed before 7 to get change? 5 to?
MG yes
SC would you have any reason to go to CR during day
MG sometimes to get something from locker

SC - 'one morning in CR' 7 in the morning?
MG can't remember
SC in bundle, can you go to p307. The map of CR. Helpful to see where your locker is. You are next to CH next to SH, see where RH locker is marked
MG correct

SC - on day you saw RH refer to plan, where was RH standing
MG in front of his locker facing locker.
SC - at the end of para 'he was gone' did RH walk anywhere else apart from locker to door
MG not on that occasion

SC - was RH in the process of getting changed
MG - when I got to my locker I can see bench behind locker, put back down, hear RH voice, raised voice, dark pair of boxer shorts.
SC getting changed
MG - assume so. Looked away
SC - noticed RH going out after?

SC was RH wearing scrubs
MG yes
SC did RH say anything to you, look at you
MG no
was RH on phone
MG not I'm aware of
MG assume he was talking to someone

SC prob someone else there as you heard RH talking
MG yes [missed a sentence]
SC you say para 7 of statement, after that encountered in CR several times, experienced anxiety. You dont say any way inappropriate - staring..

MG when I entered always look out to see RH there, when RH there. Walk in second doorway, if I see him at his locker, I walk in toilet area, look in bag, kill time for him to leave

SC - I want to be clear exactly what allegations you are making. To help us I need you to find Vol 1. Page 117. Can I be sure what allegations you are making against RH.
The first one, use of CR
MG man using CR

SC - not suggesting he's spending longer than nec
MG not on the occasions I 've seen him
SC not initiated conversation or staring at you?
MG - no

SC - p49-50 witness statement para 8. 'soon after encountered summer 23 spoke to BH who took to AQ...BH the one I most trusted.' What you are describing to tribunal is a serious concern
MG very
SC why not take to manager?

MG at that time a few of us on ward talking about it, it was better coming from one person, not all of us bombarding AQ, Beth happy to do that.
SC when BH raising with AQ was it formal?
MG thought it was formal

SC what did you expect AQ to do?
MG to escalate it
SC doesn't appear she did that
MG I thought she had raised with matrons

SC - what happened as a result
MG - it was ongoing and because of the trust's inclusivity they would take it higher.
SC - document added, 54a. No dispute just looking at date signed of August 24 by CG.

SC - [makes error on dates and corrects]
P 50 your statement about AQ, and Mrs H. Let's move to para 11 and the letter on 27 March, you signed?
MG yes

SC - do you remember this letter and what is says
MG yes
SC first para - the allegations about RH, second para, had anyone told you personally about RH stopping hormones getting partner pregnant

MG - with one of the healthcares in the eyeroom.
Not in my statement but I have heard
SC when are you talking about?
MG - about the time of letter
SC before or after
MG can't remember, maybe after
SC don't sound sure
MG not 100%

SC who are you with, can you tell me
MG I'd rather not
Heard there were concerns about Rose in CR, and it had been discussed quite a lot.
SC what was discussed?
MG Rose in CR.

MG she said there had been discussion about Rose using CR and that she had complained to manager but told she wasn't allowed to say that. That he was trying to get his girlfriend pregnant.
SC who had this person heard it from was it a rumour
MG - not sure

SC no idea if it's correct
MG when people ask not to be identified, they are frightened, how they are treated by the Trust.
SC how?
MG how our feelings aren't taken into account, the letters from the trust, girls frightened to talk

SC not frightened of media?
MG this is other members of staff frightened to say anything.

SC - you are prepared to put signature to letter that asserted this
MG yes
SC did anyone go to RH and say is it right?
MG - I don't think anyone had done that
SC isn't that fair
MG that's between his colleagues and himself, I dont know him to speak to

MG - I have never spoken to RH
SC - in your statement, go to p51, para 13, you tell us about CG ward manager and her meeting and about her and that she wrote quick notes. Volume 2 part 1. P346.

SC - is that what you were shown, the bullet points [quotes]
MG yes
SC you didn't have conv with Claire
MG Yes I did
SC when was this
MG Claire told me that she was coming on to the ward one of the matrons LW asked her to come into room

when she got into room there was a theatre mgr and some of the sisters from theatres. I think SW was there, not 100% but Claire felt she had been ambushed that was her words. She was shaken up and felt ambushed. Did Claire show you her own note

MG, not that she was shocked and only written a few words
SC meeting 20 May did you attend
MG yes
SC you were alright [secret recording]
MG yes

SC - she didn't say she was recording it
MG - I thought she'd mentioned in the kitchen and I knew it was being recorded.
J - how was it recorded
MG - On her phone I think
J where was phone
MG I don't know

..I can't remember
SC - you found meeting disappointing?
MG yes I did
SC at meeting 2 seniors from HR, up until the point of

letter 27 March concerns had been raised with managers, was this the first opp you had had to sit in room with HR and explain concerns.
MG I thought they were aware earlier but first time I had opp

MG - when TA said 'what is your problem' I felt she didn't realise having a man in a female only space was a problem and that concerned me. At one point she said 'I was in the forces and we didn't have the luxury of male and female, and i wouldn't have an issue.

I found that concerning.
I had a feeling there was no sense of urgency I would have wanted Rose removed immediately not in weeks. It had been 2 years
SC not 2 years
MG it had been for me

MG six weeks is a long time if you are using that changing room
SC - page 52, Trust's response.

You refer to alt locker room, you refer to it as makeshift alternative. But if that is correct, doesn't that show the Trust trying to address
MG - no, they moved us, that's not addressing problem. Addressing problem should be finding somewhere for Rose

SC - wasn't it the case that the Trust was trying to do something?
MG that depends on how you look at it, it was the easiest thing to do was to remove us, and that's what they did

SC - you complain about the lack of response in immediately after May meeting, why do you say this harassment?
MG what do you mean?
SC - go to Vol 1 p119. Bundle 1, part 1.

SC - the list of allegations, 'inadequate alternative CR June July 24' let us say that you are right and it's inadequate. But what I don't understand why this is related to harrssment related to sex

MG - us being moved of our CRs where we should feel comfortable by putting a man in the is harassment

J - you did ask before that, why is a lack of response harassment?
SC looking at the specific allegation, yes I put that to you broadly.

SC - it was too broad. I want to move on to specific matters. Looking at Para 22, the para you corrected. And this is letter from AM that you were shown, Vol 2 part 1.

SC - p541. Do you want a moment to remind yourself of this letter
MG yes please

SC - what's wrong with that letter?
MG to me, it comes across as threatening tone, not used to legal process, I'm a nurse, to receive something like this, it's very heavy handed thats how it feels. I'm a nurse not used to this. I was very upset.
SC you were upset
MG yes

SC - but first para, do you accept serious allegations have been made against RH in media
MG yes it's a serious issue. We didn't name Rose at this point, never used his name
SC but by June 24 the name Rose was in The Sun.
MG that wasn't by us though, we didn't give name

SC someone did
MG we didn't, he was anon. The Trust wanted it to be anon. The judge said it can't be.
SC from June 24, the press referring to Rose at this Trust, in articles which followed meeting with you that's correct
MG I don't know I didn't give the name Rose

SC - serious allegations by media
MG just facts
SC you don't know getting pregnant was a fact
MG that's what I believed was happening
SC what if Rose had gone to Mail, you'd expect Trust to say something to Rose
MG I thought what we said to press was fine

J - what about the reference to trying to have a baby, was that given to press
MG I didn't
J - do you know who did, any idea how got to press?
MG no

[some confusion about what docs J and SC looking at]
SC - thin file, the media file, page 5 please. This is Daily Mail 22 June and para 1234 'the nurses say their colleague had told fellow workers....sexually active biological male'
MG - you've answered your own q then.

SC - take this quickly, why don't you accept in an internal process need confidentiality
MG - it was affecting a lot of women and a way of shutting us down, affecting our lives for a year or so now, I don't think that's acceptable.

People thought they couldn't talk about it at all. That was the culture on the ward.
SC 'you should not discuss complaint.. with any other member of staff' that's what confidential refers to
MG people thought they couldn't talk about it at all. This was heavily worded

SC - even if this is what you thought, you didn't stop talking about it
MG no because I wanted the truth to be out there

SC - letter para Trust procedure, why did you view as threatening?
MG the wording, 'trust disciplinary' heavy wording of the letter.
SC - very last line 'please do not hesitate to contact me'
MG - at this point I found it all quite stressful and no couldn't do that (contact SW

SC - asked about solicitor's letter, informed of outcome. What you didn't do was participate in any interview?
MG yes
SC - were you aware of the fact that Trust has a res procedure?
MG no not really

SC does it surprise you?
MG I thought escalating by line mgr was correct thing to do
SC when you saw res procedure you can't have been surprised?
MG no
SC have you used?
MG no

SC did you become aware you could be accompanied by a TU rep or a colleague?
MG yes I became aware
SC but your position that it should be a lawyer
MG yes because we had gone down legal route

SC - one moment please just checking against issues that we have covered everything we need to

J have you finished
SC yes
J thank you very much

J going to have short break.

Ten minutes break

@threadreaderapp unroll