NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #3

[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.

Access to view the hearing remotely can be obtained by sending an email request to [email protected] headed Public Access Request (Peggie v Fife Health Board) 4104864/2024 and requesting access.

Thread 1: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5186317-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse

Thread 2: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5267591-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-thread-2

The hearing is 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. This also has threadreaderapp archives of live-tweeting of the sessions of the hearing for those who can't follow on Twitter, for example: archive.is/xkSxy.

Even if we're purer than the driven snow with our comments on here, that will definitely not apply to reddit so I don't honestly see the point? I've seen no personal attacks which are not entirely relevant to the conduct of the NHS with regard to women and several other protected characteristics.

As noted, MN is pretty hot on deleting personal attacks in any case.

There was a different way to approach accomodating trans people in society. The TRAs demanded full capitulation. That we must all believe that TW are in all respects women and should be treated as such, and anyone who suggests in any way that they are not should be castigated and shunned as bigots.

We now have a population of trans people, in particular young trans people, who are utterly unequipped for the reality of attempting to live as a woman, when the rest of the world do not see them as such and never will. That is a hard road to travel, and had they been told the truth may have disuaded many.

There are some of course who will get off on this dissonance and the distress they cause. But I suspect there will be many who did think they would be welcomed as a women with open arms, or that the utter subjugation of women would mean they would never be confronted in the way SP has confronted Dr U.

Men like Dr Upton are now learning the hard way. And now, in a court setting, the sunlight will be shining directly on him. Making it utterly apparent just how much he is not a woman.

If this a genuine allegation then surely it would be for NHS Fife to show that this allegation was included, in writing, as a reason for suspension and that it's been properly investigated. Or it's outside of this situation and tribunal?

Or, it actually puts more responsibility on NHS Fife for putting female nurses in the situation where they regrettably have to change their behaviour as a result of being forced to be viewed in a state of undress by male colleagues such that their patients are potentially put at risk.

NC's application from tribunaltweets:

NC email exchanges and advice from BMA. Order to 2nd respondent. Also to the BMA in case a record of inital tel conversation.
J What time period?
NC Any exchanges between R2 and BMA related to the IX by R1, consequences and his wording.
J We seek specificity in time period

It’s more how we do it.

This is a live case with real people at the centre of it.

Delaying posting of some comments until after the hearing has finished is not about being kind, it’s about respecting the process.

It is highly unusual to have 50 or 100+ people observing an ET, if the observers do not respect the process we may be denied the right to observe remotely. Open justice means attending in person, remote access is new and could be limited to TT and media.

Agreed. Even if Dr Upton wins this has been catastrophic for him in terms of seeing how the world really thinks of him.

Knowing the staff where you work are all backing Sandie? How could you ever go back to work?

I'm only going by TT, but is NC suggesting that there has been incomplete disclose from Dr U, who appears to have been asking for/receiving advice from the BMA?

In particular:

NC I used the wrong language, these are from January and include an email of p728 to KS and others. He says I'm still waiting from BMA re my WS wording.

Judge Tipton issued an order for correspondence between BMA and DU which has not been complied with, by BMA and DU so NC wants that evidence to see if it tests DU truthfulness. NC asked judge to get it. Hence the five minuets

JR objected but Judge not happy without it.

One issue is that the investigation was carried out by someone who cannot be cross examined. I think that reduces the weight of that evidence?

WS = witness statement

I believe Russell said a colleague who was involved would be giving testimony in their place.

Five minutes is ten. Drat, the way this is going I will miss BU in the witness chair today, I am out later.

The list of observers in the chat is like a star studded cast of feminists. I feel all fan girly.

Just getting myself on the thread. Thanks for the new one.

But they did not carry out the investigation so cannot testify to that.

Is the person who did the investigation the one who has moved to a new job? I'm assuming they were asked to give evidence but chose not to?

Just nipping in to say

TWO trip hazard cables now. Someone's going to come a cropper getting over those!

It's making me jittery!

I know, and I'm not even using my real name! It's a terrible distraction from writing the next Strike book, though...

(Only joking. 😁)

I did think for a moment at the start with the noises that Ben’s support wren had joined us.

It is quite amazing that the rest of the world is going about its business and a small group, of predominantly women, are watching an ET about a simple matter that the law makers and institutions have fucked up.

This is all reminding me of the Jo Phoenix case, and the ERCC case where people who had made key decisions were unwilling to attend, and the panel were free to make their own interpretation of that

I have joined but it says WFTCHTJ...is that normal??

It looks like someone has come in and tried to resolve the sound issues - which would be helpful.

I'm not blaming the clerks, I know this is a tough job

The panel will be interested in how comprehensively that witness can answer the questions. If the witness shows knowledge of the relevant facts, that might satisfy the panel. If there's load of "I don't knows" and "I wasn't there" then that might diminish their credibility.

Ooh JR has got email chain not disclosed.