Transgender Nurse Accused of Intimidating Female Colleagues Amid Legal Dispute

[Social Media]

 

A transgender nurse has been accused of intimidating female colleagues who launched a sexual harassment case against their employer after being required to share a changing room with her. The allegations were brought to light during a preliminary hearing at Newcastle Employment Tribunal.

 

 

The nurse, known as Rose, was assigned male at birth but now lives as a woman. Despite this, it was noted during the hearing that Rose does not possess a gender recognition certificate, which legally defines her as male under current UK law. Female nurses working for the County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust have claimed they felt "intimidated" and "stared at" by Rose following the commencement of their legal action.  

 

Bruno Quintavalle, representing the nurses, argued that Rose had engaged in deliberate and confrontational behavior at the hospital since the legal proceedings began. He stated: “It is the claimants’ position … that far from being reduced to a state of fear and concern about his psychological or physical integrity, Rose has responded to the initiation of proceedings by trying to intimidate the nurses. By engaging in confrontational behavior in the hospital in situations where he would not usually be expected to be. This suggests that far from being in a state of shock, Rose is fully on top of things.”  

 

Bethany Hutchison, president of the Darlington Nurses Union, supported these claims in a witness statement, saying that Rose’s actions had made the nurses feel increasingly uncomfortable. Hutchison noted that Rose, who works as a theatre nurse, had begun frequenting the day surgery ward, where the complainants worked, much more often than before. “Rose’s frequent visits show there is no hostility or intimidation against Rose,” Hutchison stated. “Rather, it is Rose who is apparently seeking to intimidate us with those unnecessary visits.”  

 

Another nurse, Karen Danson, provided a statement detailing her own experiences upon returning to work after a period of medical leave. “Since I returned to work, I have only seen Rose a couple times in the canteen,” Danson said. “On those occasions, Rose is always staring and trying to intimidate us all.”  

 

 

Simon Cheetham KC, representing the NHS trust, sought an order to prevent Rose’s surname from being reported, citing privacy rights under the European Convention on Human Rights and potential risks of harm. Cheetham did not challenge the nurses’ allegations of intimidation during the hearing. However, Mr. Quintavalle opposed the application, arguing that granting anonymity would hinder the claimants’ ability to share their experiences.  

 

Sharon Langridge, the employment judge presiding over the preliminary hearing, has reserved her decision on the application for anonymity. She confirmed that her written ruling would be issued within the next couple of weeks.  

 

The tribunal is set to begin on June 16 and conclude on July 4, during which the claims of sexual discrimination and harassment against the NHS trust will be fully examined.  

 

Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2025-01-22

 

 

[Postmaster]

Sack the troubled transgender.

[alien365]

I think that the printed sign twice states 'Do not remove this sign' speaks volumes.

[JonnyF]

11 hours ago, Social Media said:

The nurse, known as Rose, was assigned male at birth but now lives as a woman

 

In other words, born biologically male and now wears a dress.

 

A nasty bully by the sounds of it. 

 

Sack him. 

[digger70]

11 hours ago, Social Media said:

A transgender nurse has been accused of intimidating female colleagues who launched a sexual harassment case against their employer after being required to share a changing room with her. The allegations were brought to light during a preliminary hearing at Newcastle Employment Tribunal.

Let the nurses stand up for their Rights against their Employer.

Drastic Measurements need to be taken, Strike until the Wannabe has His own Bathroom or Sack Him.

[Keep Right]

Good thing Trump is putting an end to this transgender madness.

[blaze master]

The person sounds like an entitled a hole. 

 

[Justanotherone]

see, not thailand, they dare to say the business name, this case a hospital

 

defamation laws here, man dies because of no CC, and guess which one it was situation...

 

no politicians dare to change these joke laws?

[Rampant Rabbit]

2 hours ago, Postmaster said:

Sack the troubled transgender.

cut his  balls  off..........problem solved, those other nurses could do it, i bet theyd volunteer!!

[Rampant Rabbit]

1 hour ago, alien365 said:

I think that the printed sign twice states 'Do not remove this sign' speaks volumes.

red  rag to a bull for me!!

[Baht Simpson]

It would've been nice to have heard Rose's side of the story for balance. I'm sure it was discussed at the hearing but for some reason The Telegraph omitted to mention it. I wonder why? 

 

I cannot comment on the veracity of the accusations, nor can anyone here as we don't know the full facts. That won't stop the usual transphobic comments as we've seen.

 

The usual procedure if intimidation is used in the workplace is to give the person a written warning. Was that done? Has the defendant been subject to bullying or intimidation and is responding? 

 

The defendant was given the ok to use the changing room. Regardless of anyone's views on transgender, Rose has done nothing wrong by using it. 

 

The case is not being brought against her but against the NHS who authorized her use of the changing room. Yet this article sets out to demonize her as the villain, as do the posters here. 

 

If intimidation has occurred from either side then there are workplace mechanisms for dealing with this. But that has nothing to do with with the supposed sexual harassment case. 

 

 

[Baht Simpson]

16 minutes ago, Rampant Rabbit said:

cut his  balls  off..........problem solved, those other nurses could do it, i bet theyd volunteer!!

Well, aren't you a lovely human being? Advocating violence eh?

[chippendale]

11 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

It would've been nice to have heard Rose's side of the story for balance. I'm sure it was discussed at the hearing but for some reason The Telegraph omitted to mention it. I wonder why? 

 

I cannot comment on the veracity of the accusations, nor can anyone here as we don't know the full facts. That won't stop the usual transphobic comments as we've seen.

 

The usual procedure if intimidation is used in the workplace is to give the person a written warning. Was that done? Has the defendant been subject to bullying or intimidation and is responding? 

 

The defendant was given the ok to use the changing room. Regardless of anyone's views on transgender, Rose has done nothing wrong by using it. 

 

The case is not being brought against her but against the NHS who authorized her use of the changing room. Yet this article sets out to demonize her as the villain, as do the posters here. 

 

If intimidation has occurred from either side then there are workplace mechanisms for dealing with this. But that has nothing to do with with the supposed sexual harassment case. 

 

 

 

Women should not be forced to share bathrooms and changing rooms with men or with sexual predators. There are procedures for dealing with sociopathic predators and the mentally ill; the NHS should adhere to them and protect women and infants.

[Baht Simpson]

7 minutes ago, chippendale said:

 

Women should not be forced to share bathrooms and changing rooms with men or with sexual predators. There are procedures for dealing with sociopathic predators and the mentally ill; the NHS should adhere to them and protect women and infants.

That's not what I was talking about. I wasn't justifying or condemning the actions by the NHS. My post was about fairness in reporting the issue and people's knee-jerk reactions without full knowledge of the circumstances of what happened. I would have thought that was clear. 

[LukKrueng]

13 hours ago, Social Media said:

was assigned male

Wtf does that mean? When I was born no doctor\nurse assigned me male. When my children were born no doctor\nurse\administrator assigned them male\female. Does that mean we are not legally males\female? Who do I have to see to get assigned? Can those in charge of assignments assign me as 25 years old?

[Nick Carter icp]

12 minutes ago, LukKrueng said:

Wtf does that mean? When I was born no doctor\nurse assigned me male. When my children were born no doctor\nurse\administrator assigned them male\female. Does that mean we are not legally males\female? Who do I have to see to get assigned? Can those in charge of assignments assign me as 25 years old?

 

    Isn't being assigned M or F when they tick either box on the birth certificate ?

[OneMoreFarang]

Again, a headline from events far away with no indication that this is about the UK.

 

Please put the country in the headline if it is not Thailand!

 

Many of us, me included, see new headlines coming up on the right side of the forum. And at that place it is not obvious if that is Thai news or from somewhere else.

I would be interested about what happened if this would be in Thailand.

But I don't care too much if that happens anywhere else in the world.

[BusyB]

59 minutes ago, LukKrueng said:

Wtf does that mean? When I was born no doctor\nurse assigned me male. When my children were born no doctor\nurse\administrator assigned them male\female. Does that mean we are not legally males\female? Who do I have to see to get assigned? Can those in charge of assignments assign me as 25 years old?

 

I think you know what it means ...

[Baht Simpson]

55 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

    Isn't being assigned M or F when they tick either box on the birth certificate ?

Precisely.