Sandie Peggie: Employment Tribunal, associated legal claims, and related matters - thread #68

Yes, it does - at its best one or two days after baking- freezes very well.

You remember correctly it was Stuart F, her first contact union rep.

Like you said the fact that he changed he to she is far more damming than gender neutral terms that he could have used, but that would also be damming.

I don't think it was in a letter that a change from 'he' to 'she' was made. It was in SF's report typed into his case management system during the initial phone call with SP.

You may be mixing this up with a letter sent to NHS Fife by GT (I think) on SP's behalf, in which (NC argued) the text changes had the effect of misrepresenting Sandie's requests as relating solely to her own case, rather than to conditions for all staff.

Sorry for initials. Speed typing

Was that supposed to be another claim of ‘contemporaneous’, or nearly, notes of the call with SP. He put in ‘trans female’ as well. This language all seems designed to give a false narrative, and hornswoggle people.

There is a man who lurks in the women’s changing room. He undresses there, and is present when women are undressing. He got the go ahead, from people who were not even impacted, to take his clothes off, and be there when the women took their clothes off. None of the women were consulted, or even warned about this. A woman who had had enough of this, stated it was not right that he was in there. She said that they were putting men in spaces men had no business being in as it badly impacted women, like recently in the news where men were being sent to women’s prisons. She was suspended.

I am always agog at those who seek to minimise this and the Darlington nurses case.

Sandi related talk! I'll join the thread at last hurray!

The badge is wonderful, although the RCN may prefer the top banner to be blue, to match their colouring? I'm sure they could get them produced quickly.

I cannot see how the RCN will get out of the badge challenge 😂

i think we should all be on standby to order one.

They have a contact email so we can make requests...and I hadn't spotted that their pride badge is from 2021 and they've still got stock.
https://shop.rcn.org.uk/

I think it was said they were giving the badges away free at one stage. Also, on the RCN merch/tat website (on card holding the badge), they have this;

‘When you wear this badge, please share your pledge to support LGBTQ+ inclusion, by posting your image or video on social media using #RCNProud #Allyactions .
rcn.org.uk/proud’

So, that clears up one of the questions NC was asking one of the RCN people. This wasn’t something suggested by someone else. The RCN were actively encouraging people to post on social media with the flag badge. Using RCN hashtags.

why is it "damming" though? I still don't get it. Unhelpful for understanding what was actually said- the context , maybe, but damming? Why? RNC is allowed to respect DU's pronouns, they don't have to be gender critical, and they are allowed to be trans inclusive! None of these things are remotely unlawful, and none of them show discriminatory treatment of SP because of her protected belief.

It shows that SF didn't find her words, which convey her sex-realist/GC protected beliefs, acceptable to the extent that he had to sanitise them in his recording of their conversation.

I wonder how many they ordered and how many are left. Do they have a special stockroom for the unwanted badges? Or a warehouse? What a waste of members money.

You have a typo in the temperature. Gas 3/325F is 160C, not 180.

Did the judge say she would be quick? I thought she only said she'd be as quick as possible...

I'm going to guess Jan 26 2027.

Someone asked about the NHS Fife appeal date - I looked quite hard recently but couldn't find anything more precise than "first half of 2027" (which I think is on TT's substack among other places).

By changing any word it was not verbatim . SP was criticised for not identifying her protected beliefs in her exchanges with RCN. She used ‘He’ because this was what she believed and as a protected belief was entitled to do so. SF changed this for whatever reason in his reporting. It was not what SP believed so it ‘muddied the waters’ which can happen when using preferred pronouns. Years from now the written word will be so confusing. That’s why when posting I mainly use the individual’s initials to identify what I’m trying to convey, it’s fair and not disrespectful. It was how I was instructed for accurate report writing, N.B. JM’s predicament.
As an aside I received an email from the practice manager of my GP surgery (not medical issue) the sender stating their pronouns in bold rainbow (little biggly) colour. No explanation as to the significance and linked to a organisation, neither explained why the colours and preferred pronouns a sort of fait accompli corporate smugness. Not clear or appropriate without explanation in my view

Yes, you're right FanofBen - it was 'quick as possible'.

While I love the badge and letter, it might have been prudent to wait until the case has concluded.

Why? It is already true that nobody in RCN raised any objection, when asked, to the idea of stocking merchandise in support of people with sex realist views.

The one thing I wondered is whether it was a wrong note for the badge to say it was supporting "staff" with sex realist views (rather than, say, "people" i.e. including patients). I don't think any of the pp merch says similar - closest I could find was "celebrate diversity, equality, and inclusion within nursing" which certainly sounds as though the point is to support the staff.

Because if they do stock it, it backs the 'happy to, if only someone had asked' rather than 'we don't sell badges for bigots' argument.

Appeals leading to a re-hearing are rare, but we know they happen so I'd not be handing them a defence.

Or it just shows that the RCN take a different approach - one which involves respecting individuals' pronouns. That's perfectly fine.
The RCN aren't required to adopt SP's beliefs or approach, they are just required to provide the same advocacy services/ support for her in relation to the disciplinary proceedings as they would any other nurse.

It’s the same argument as to why it’s offensive to rewrite someone’s complaint of rape or sexual assault to refer to the attacker as “she”. It undercuts the understanding of the experience of the complainant by misrepresentation their words.

SF could have put her remarks in quotations to show that it was her words. Or he could have changed it and put a statement to say that her complaint had been modified to represent preferred pronouns of DU. By changing it without such a statement, he didn't make an accurate record of her complaint.

Because to explain in simple words to Lacksie, Sandie Peggie was complaining about a man, any man, in the women's changing room. Not a person identifying as trans, which was the stance that Upton took and you take.

But sorry to the rest of the posters: I shouldn't react to a timewaster on a thread.

The only way for TRAs to avoid confronting this issue is to be disingenuous about what the objection is. Hence Upton “I don’t understand what you mean, biological sex is a nebulous dogwhistle.”

Definitions matter. This was no longer a single sex space. It was a space defined as universal or unisex. It wasn’t even a gender neutral space. There is no such definition for gender neutral in any regulations or legislation. It’s a nonsense term.