NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #6

[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

Thread 5: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5269149-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-5

Very much agree

Payout, apology, change in CR policy and id like something around acknowledging that's it's bullying women to force validation

UGH, I have a meeting now. Will try and keep one eye on here though.

Surely if they can't produce documents then Sandie wins on the procedural irregularity of the suspension and the judgement must be she was discriminated against. IANAL but if you can't produce the required evidence....

Just got on - I sent an email to
[email protected]

writing:

Good afternoon,
I am requesting Public Access to the Peggie v Fife Health Board Tribunal.
Thank you,
Alex

they got back to me with a log in within 5 mins

If it does @nauticant I'll do a new one, I'm here all afternoon.

I thought this to start with as also a GP! But from the context of what it says in TT it seems to refer to a person.

I don't think it would. But it does give them more time to mess NC & her team around with no guarantee they'd comply fully with any court order. It would take extraordinary measures - sending in court officers to search the NHS Fife system to ensure they get everything - to be certain.

I suspect it's a heavy stick to beat everyone else with because having to adjourn & then reschedule months away means all the costs of this failed hearing still need to get paid & more of the same again for next time. Plus it drags on for SP even longer.

They've screwed up the possibility of completing this case fairly/justly through incompetence or worse (from what NC has said), but it's still a heavy financial burden on SP & whoever is funding her case (I'd assume union backing or possibly house hold LE cover but not clear tbh - I might have missed that).

Fife are in the shit either way. They have to either produce the evidence they cocked up or not produce it and have the judge draw appropriate conclusions.

Maybe so far, emails have been disclosed by asking those who sent/received them to provide them, and this was the first time someone in IT was involved? At a guess the IT person consulted is used to dealing with all sorts of emails, including those containing patient data. If that person is asked to do a search, it's natural that they would anticipate that there might be patient data. But they can, presumably, go back to the named people and say "come now, try again at searching your email".

It wouldn't surprise me if they're trying to hide evidence of an incomplete or incompetent investigation, in other words, not hiding paperwork that does exist, but trying to hide the fact that paperwork that should exist does not.

Whoop whoop.
I've made it home, logged on, straight into the Tribunal room and it's all empty.

Hoping lunch break will be over soon and I'll see some action.

I had been debating going out for a walk to get my steps in and designated exercise but it's turned freezing cold with spots of icy rain near snow, so staying in and watching the action is a very attractive alternative.
Thinking when I've finished scoffing lunch I might sneak upstairs and take to my bed with the electric blanket on. It really is that sort if day!

I look away for two minutes do some work and suddenly two threads have filled up 😮. Juggling work, Tribunal Tweets and this is tough going but good news the appeal total is £6,835.31 you wonderful vipers you. I think the Scottish Society for Rheumatology isn't going to forget us in a hurry.

I've been sent access to the hearing but am terrified of choosing the wrong options for getting in. Can anyone help?!

Unless NC also want to see nursing and medical notes for the patient incidents re allegations of professional incompetence?

There appeared to have been one initial investigation started by Esther D, email headed 'hate incident', which was then dropped, along with Esther, and a new investigation, email headed 'formal complaint' was started, with new investigators. But there's a lot of documentation lacking.

JR says that the first wasn't an investigation, just Esther D taking Dr U's account down, and then they realised that Esther was involved in the incident, so couldn't be involved in the investigation (although it wasn't an investigation).

probably brought their own. In courts and tribunals in England & Wales the standard is one of those sturdy plastic water jugs you get in primary schools.

@CharlotteFlax just choose the Observer option and you should get straight in

I turned off my camera at the level of my laptop (Windows, Settings, Privacy and Security, Camera) and then chose the audio and video option to connect, because Observer didn't work for me. Or you can use blutac over the camera.

I guess that's a possibility

I went in through the Guest Page link.

@CharlotteFlax Use the chrome browser on a laptop
Put in your name or initials and choose the observe option. put in the pin.

The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 require that, where changing rooms are required, they must provide separate facilities for men and women (or separate use, i.e. men and women use the same facility but at different times of day) where necessary for reasons of propriety. The question is whether "women" in these regulations includes trans-women (and also, although less contentious, whether "men" includes trans-men).

Ah ok, bit behind with the thread. Just seen NC does not want any info with patient data

What was in Kate searles email to all the a and e consultants?

NC - content if respondent continues searches, find the 'teams invite' info for the investigation - both phases - any responses, in partic to Kate Searle's email of Dec 2023 - 17 individuals, seems unlikely such a striking email wouldn't have produced quite a bit of response - anything else they can find with new instructions to try harder, partic relating to the role of Esther Davidson. Wish for a direction they should be in touch with us this eve and over weekend as necessary to provide what they recover. as they recover it.