Stonewall is lecturing firms on trans issues, tribunal told
A BARRISTER has accused Stonewall of “proselytising” on transgender issues and “moving away from the law”, an employment tribunal heard.
Allison Bailey, 52, is suing the LGBT rights charity as well as Garden Court Chambers after alleging that she lost work and income following a row over Stonewall’s Diversity Champions scheme and its assertion that “trans women are women”.
She also claims that she was targeted by Stonewall after establishing an alternative group called the LGB Alliance.
Giving evidence for the first time at the Central London Employment Tribunal yesterday, Ms Bailey accused Stonewall of “proselytising”, as part of a concerted effort to convert and change people’s views on transgender issues.
According to court documents, Ms Bailey had raised concerns about Stonewall’s diversity programme, claiming that “it involves lecturing and training... this includes gender theory”.
She added: “They were spreading a particular view of gender theory that was telling people what to think and do. That’s what I meant by lecturing.”
Ijeoma Omambala QC, Stonewall’s barrister, responded: “I don’t want to waste time here. When you use ‘lecturing’... are you using it the same as ‘proselytising’?” to which Ms Bailey responded: “Yes.”
Ms Bailey told the hearing: “I’m objecting to gender identity, and we are moving away from the law. Gender reassignment is a protected characteristic, [but the Stonewall scheme] says gender identity.”
Ms Bailey also claims that Stonewall collaborated with her chambers, which was a fee-paying member of the Diversity Champions scheme, to place her under investigation.
Stonewall says Diversity Champions only aims to help firms “become more inclusive of LGBT people”. However, a number of organisations have quit the scheme after questions were raised about whether it could be impartial on certain issues.
Asked by Ms Omambala whether her objection was to any association on behalf of her chambers with Stonewall – not simply its membership programme, Ms Bailey responded: “Yes... What I wanted was a discussion in chambers to ensure that this was a decision that had been carefully taken on the weighing of the balance of pros and cons of any association with Stonewall.”
The tribunal, in front of Employment Judge Sarah Goodman, continues.