NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #5

[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. The hearing commenced with Sandie Peggie giving evidence. Dr Beth Upton started giving evidence on 6 February.

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.

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.

An alternative to Twitter is to use Nitter: https://nitter.poast.org/tribunaltweets

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

Thread 3: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5268347-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-3

Thread 4: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5268942-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-4

Surely this will lead to an adjournment.

Who is who in the room
Please

'Crumbs from the bundle’ 😲😂

I wonder if DU is shocked to learn that early on there was disagreement about how to proceed, or whether he’d have been aware?

Like Columbo 😂
(one for the older members of MN)

'we got an admission from respondent that Esther Davidson was initial investigator.'

Louise Curran's statement to Esther Davidson, confirms that Esther was still in charge of investigation at that point (Feb 2024)

What have I missed? Any doozies?

NC: 'Respondent knew full well they had started and aborted an investigation. They did their best to conceal the existence of that investigation ... didn't produce docs related to it in obedience to judge's order'

NC Fife did their best to conceal the initial investigation.

I've got my laptop sound set to max and I can hear her fine.

Yes

"Deliberate defiance.....they did their best to conceal....did not admit to it candidly...did not disclose in obedience to judges orders..."

This. Is. Appalling

Fuck sake

If she's going to need a bunch more documents, she's then going to need time to digest them... This must lead to substantial delay surely. And yikes, NC is really saying the first respondent has been deliberately concealing relevant information.

NC: 'number of things still outstanding. 1st rspondent had a meeting with E Davidson and Mgt Currier - nothing in docs so far produced to indicate existence of that meeting'

What I imagine NC is after is the disclipinary process being ruled to be unfair - because FIFE refuse to show evidence of what the process was and therefore cant defend it.

I predict an adjournment whilst these documents are produced. How can they continue with the case until the claimant has all the documents?

SP deserves a lot from this. That letter below that ends with give females a CR is right

I'd like to see counter action on the people who have caused SP distress

This previous post of mine might help ickky:
MarieDeGournay
I've just been following this from posts - it appears that Fife did not disclose all the info they should have, which is a big no-no legally.
Nothing happened all morning and then bang! up steps NC with this huge claim which could really put the cat amongst the pigeons.
Sorry, that's the best I can do summarywise!

@ickky ee are mid doozy. Read these two pages and you’ll see it

The paper trail seems to be suggesting (inferred falsely) that the first few months of the investigation without interviewing the complainant

NC contends that there being no paper trail of all the decision making that led to her suspension is inconceivable

I'd have gone with laying the groundwork for a costs application later on, but maybe that too.

'it seemed Upton wasn't interviewed by investigation officer until ... 9th May, after a cluster of interviews in April. Still outstanding is correspondence setting up that meeting, any notes taken at that meeting'

'1st respondents say they've looked for and failed to find docs relating to decisions to remove Esther Davidson and replace'

'There must have been a flurry of comms to make that extraordinary serious decision'

'A nurse of 30 years was suspended, out of actoin, hadn't been interviewed, hadn't been told, proceeding estraordinarily slowly, someone decided it was necessary to tear up what had been done and start again. Inconceivable that was done without comms'

Totally! But I'm also totally unsurprised having tried myself to get investigation information out of the NHS from a complaint investigation.

Gosh, from the tweets this sounds like a blistering criticism of NHS Fife’s approach to the case and disclosure. Not a good look to be concealing parts of the investigation.