NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board - thread #2

[nauticant]

Sandie Peggie, a nurse at Victoria Hospital in Kirkcaldy (VH), has brought claims in the employment tribunal against her employer; Fife Health Board (the Board) and another employee, Dr B Upton. Ms Peggie’s claims are of sexual harassment, harassment related to a protected belief, indirect discrimination and victimisation. Dr Upton claims to be a transwoman, that is observed as male at birth but asserting a female gender identity.

The Employment Tribunal hearing started on Monday 3 January 2025 and is expected to continue for 2 weeks.

First thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5186317-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse

It's being live tweeted by https://x.com/tribunaltweets and there's additional information here: https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr

It's weird isn't it. I think the defence are trying to use it as a way to undermine SP's credibility and make out she was the aggressor. It seems like such a minor point though and it would be easy to get wrong the exact series of events. Also it hardly seems to matter in the grander scheme of things.

Goodness this is painful. I understand completely why no one else came forward with a complaint. This is a witch hunt.

I would rather quit my job and live under a bridge, thanks.

(only slight exaggeration)

SP states she hadn't moved at all just turned her body so she wasnt looking at Dr Upton. Still nearer to locker area than bench area.

I'm surprised that they haven't made SP act out a live action replay at this point.

Judge asking when it was that she decided to say something. Judge asks where she was looking When she started talking, what was the first thing she said...

Is the judge trying to get SP to demonstrate that DU had walked past her and she couldn't have been blocking the doorway?

This is nuts, it's not a murder investigation.

It's all a bit 'if there's no physical contact it's not abuse' that we got from JR yesterday, apparently missing the past 100 years of humanity and the coercive control and indecent exposure laws.

Unless it's the bloke, in that case not looking in his eyes is abusive.

I agree with pp that the judge wants to be 100% sure he understands exactly where SP says everyone was and that she wasn’t blocking the door.

The cross questioning was trying to trip SP up about where DU was standing trying to make out SP was the aggressor and blocking DUs exit.

Judge misgendered DU

I see. Thanks @ickky what a pathetic argument. "Her words said please leave and don't come back, but her body made it impossible to because she was closer to the door"

Judge doesn't need to go into full detail of conversation but asks length and asks if she looked at dr Upton in any way.

The judge will have to decide who he believe up or sp re the incident if he believes sp then uptons contemporary notes will be deemed unreliable. Flowing from that he might deem NHS as unreasonable in their findings.

Judge wants to know when she turned round what did she see, what was Dr Upton wearing...

Asking about DR Upton coat, colour type judge asks certainly not scrubs?

We are on to different types of coat now.

Judge now on to sequence of meetings to make sure he understands it correctly

Is the Judge asking about colour/type of coat to establish SP's recall/memory? I can't see the relevance of this line of question.

They are now doing a Q and A discussing purpose and attendees of the various meetings, if any notes being made was noticed by SP etc. If she remembers seeing certain letters.

He's being VERY thorough.

I thought it was perhaps to establish how long SP had looked (or 'stared') at BU.

Presumably, feeling quite intimidated she didn't want to look at him so didn't analyse his clothing. Is the Judge entirely unaware of the basic fact that women don't look at men who might be aggressive / threaten them? It's survival 101.

I'm really surprised they didn't just create a new special gender based changing room for Upton. It would have cost less than this witch hunt.

Oh, yes, I forgot. The using unconsenting women is the point.

Or why he was in there if he was not in scrubs?

Oh yes, good point.

I think it's good that the judge wen't though the changing room sequence of events. The defence did such a poor job of it and tried to use it as a way to undermine SP rather than establish what happened.

I think when she entered he was in scrubs, when he left he was dressed in civvy clothes and a coat