Sandie Peggie: Employment Tribunal, associated legal claims, and related matters - thread #63

She is i believe no longer under suspension. So likely on sick pay or special leave

I understand she’s currently off sick, not suspended. I understand she will be going into half pay any minute now, then no pay (except SSP) when that is exhausted.

That's good to know then.

Can you please tell me where I’ve conducted vicious bullying. Im autistic and sometimes get things wrong, and I try very very hard not to bully anyone so I’m asking for my learning. Thank you.

Don't worry, @Taztoy , you didn't. Let's move on.

I wasn't referring to your posts Taztoy, - that I've seen anyway - I was referring to posts hurling personal insults (pig, narcissist, etc) at DU because of his identity ("man/ male who claims to be a woman/ female").

But his behaviour is sexist, and if he isn’t a man who claims to be a woman what is he? He calls himself a trans woman?

@Lacksie ’ there was never any legal question about whether DU was trans or not.’

Well, for a start, he didn’t have the protected characteristic of ‘gender reassignment’, I seem to remember. So, no legal question or answer required.

Also, on foot of the SC judgement, we know (as far as equality act is concerned) a man is someone who is biologically male. So, he is a man on that count, too. Even if he did have (which he hadn’t) his very special certificate saying in ink that he really, pinkie promise, wasn’t.

Nobody is 'hurling personal insults' at Upton's so called 'identity'.

They are describing his behaviour, which has shown all the hallmarks of being an old fashioned sexist pig ('male chauvinist pig' has long been used to describe the men who exhibit certain behaviours.)

He certainly exhibits narcissistic behaviour; seems to think the whole world should bend to his belief that he is a woman, even vulnerable patients.

if he isn’t a man who claims to be a woman what is he? He calls himself a trans woman?

People have asked this to be a discussion for a different thread.

I tried to have this discussion on a different thread. I even started one. Feel free to search my posts. Im more than happy to discuss with you on a thread if you start one.

Why do you say that DU didn't have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment?

In the EQ the word "man" has been clarified to refer to persons male at birth. However the EQ still provides protection against discrimination on the grounds of gender reassignment.

He certainly did have that PC! "A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex." You may be thinking of the fact that he didn't, at the time of these events, have a GRC (we know that, because we know he wasn't "living as a woman", less than two years before, so he wouldn't have been eligible).

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/7

BUT LET'S MOVE ON PLEASE if only for nauticant's sake.

This thread will cover that case as well. Sadly, the volume of cases means it takes a long time for each one to come to court.

You may find it helpful to read the links on the Tribunal Tweets Substack

https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr-bd6
https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-the-royal-college-of-nursing

It is unusual for individuals to be named as respondents.

Personally there is a part of me that hopes the EAT decide to have the whole ET reheard as I would like to get further clarity on the formal accusations of professional medical failings made by DrU against Sandie. Based on the evidence provided at the time I believe DrU made them up.

However, for both Sandie and DrU as well as the other witnesses I hope the EAT don’t do this as the stress on everyone would be significant.

On reflection, you’re probably right on that.

It does say ‘transsexual’ doesn’t it. Too late for me to edit now.

It is more (on foot of Lady Haldene), he could not be classed as a woman on paper as he didn’t have the certificate where it said so in ink. And, also on foot of SC judgement, he is a biological male, so for EA purposes, is not and cannot be a woman. Because he is a man, just like all other men.

So, I’m just wondering what is a ‘transexual’ man? He is not a woman. So, a man who claims not to be a man. Yet, he is (feeling a bit Galileo, without the genius).

Edited rather than adding another post to fritter away this thread:

Sorry for unthinkingly frittering away the thread by posting about tangents. I will be congnisant of Nauticant’s thread load, and stay on topic as much as possible.

Thanks. I see that Tribunal tweets have also used "claims to be a transwoman", so I suppose it is conventional legal speak. My apologies.

Speaking of the future cases also under the umbrella of these threads - I'm very interested to hear Dr Kate Searle explain things in her own words while having a nice little chat with Naomi Cunningham and/or Charlotte Elves.

That ET is going to be epic. I hope NC has managed via disclosure to get all the response emails to the email setting up the cabal of 5. Shocking behaviour when an investigation is going on.

NC will have the transcript of the evidence given by the respondents as the second part of the ET was captured. That means she can pick up any rewriting of history. I also think there will be misalignment of evidence which creates doubt.