NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #7

[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: https://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

Thread 6: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5269635-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-6

Thank you for the link. I’ve been reading NCs examination of SP. SP was formally suspended on 5th January, without ever being told any details of the accusation made against her, or being given an opportunity to share her understanding of events. The first indication of the issues she got was at the end of February, 2 months after the discussion with DU in the changing room, when she was sent a copy of DUs complaint. He describes the incident in the changing room, and says it 'represents an escalation of prior behaviours in which nurse A refused to acknowledge DU in work situations'. I find that quite interesting, because the logical interpretation of that is that DU is referring to the 2 previous times SP came across him in the female changing room, but it may be that this will now be presented as being about the missing child and the delegated observations. Although it may be that the times SP left the changing room were also referenced in the complaint.
SP told NC that she didn’t know what that could mean as she had always worked with DU without incident. This must have been such a strange time for her. If she snagged on that and started worrying, I’m guessing her family would have thought she was being paranoid, and reminded her that she was a good nurse and she’d done nothing wrong, and all the time, Fife are not investigating, which involves a balanced and fair enquiry into what happened, instead they are, in DUs favourite word “escalating”.

The AI bit of google (Chrome) is suggesting that the Supreme Court were hoping to get their FWS judgment out this month (I thought somebody might have said that myself, but couldn't remember who would have said so).

Do you think the judges will be keeping an eye on this case? It does rather emphasise why the mess needs to be sorted out, doesn't it.

As it stands, the Haldane Nov '23 judgment is/was relevant to the key bit Dec 24/5 incident in this case; Upton has no GRC so the Scottish Govt considers him to be a man in legislation, regardless of feelings.

I'm not sure that the ET need Dr Upton to turn up tomorrow, should the paperwork we expect to see be found, but it will be pretty damning if he decides to stay away.

All of this has come about because his desire to use the female changing room was prioritised over everything else.

There is no clearer way to say that women are still second class citizens.

yep @Madcats

And when SP called him “a man” she was legally speaking correct even though she’d respected his feelings socially and referred to the Dr as Beth and she etc at other times.

JR’s questions resulted in evidence that SP did use pronouns in public and did something else in the private of the CR - IMO confirming that SP’s reference to “man” in the changing room was a not a general pattern of purposeful mis gendering.

I was struck from the TT records how SP refers to R2 as Beth while R2 refers to SP as “The Claimant”. Unusual behaviour for an average person?

Ah, thanks for clarifying. I thought I recalled a PP saying someone had given him a pass card so that he could access the women's changing room. Misunderstood.

Nope. Dr U began using the CR after starting employment without seeking any permission or clarification. The Dr later mentioned what they were doing to a supervisor (and made a note of that convo)

Yes, someone upthread said that he'd been given a swipe card to access the female changing rooms?

Re feeling sorry for DU, I've thought about it a lot and decided that I don't feel sorry for him at all. Any concern I might have had would be Misplaced Nurturing. As women, we are pretty well all taught to nurture from an early age and it comes all too easily to feel sorry for those who don't deserve it, which is partly why we're in this mess.

DU was happy to complain about SP and then to sit back and watch her being raked over the coals, all from behind the coattails of the NHS. Now it doesn't seem to be going the way he wanted and he may find himself in hot water. Too bad. It's the Raspberry Jam Principle in action - fling it about and some will stick to you too. Hopefully DU will learn from all this but that remains to be seen.

Absolutely. I can't recall if Dr U was asked to clarify exactly why he felt unsafe and what kind of violence he thought he was at risk of. I hope what he means by violence and by being or feeling unsafe, in comparison with what this would mean to the average person, is clarified, if it has not been already.

I still can't comprehend how any man would have the front to go into a women's changing room and undress or be present when women are undressing knowing that some of them will be made to feel uncomfortable by my presence. Even if you genuinely have "gender dysphoria" why would you do this? Don't these men feel completely idiotic and self-conscious. My DH would die before he would enter a place where strange women were undressing. I can't wrap my head around the lack of awareness. And then I can only deduce nefarious intent.

While we're correcting stuff upthread, I said on previous thread that SP was told to speak with DU. That was a misreading on my part of TT thread. I think the actual exchange was along the lines of:

ED (SP's manager) told her she hadn't got anywhere with Equality and Diversity. SP then said that if that situation happened again she would speak with DU. ED gave no reply

Do we know at which point DU asked for clarification on his use of the cr? Was it before or after the first time that SP left the changing room to wake for him to finish in there?

Dr said “I understand” and that TW were “at risk” from (sorry not sure of the exact word) males/men/misogyny. Dr U referred to unwanted physical contact and assuming SP was concerned about physical danger - SP’s dignity was not part of the thinking at that point (although their own dignity was)

Couple of things I have been wondering?

I think he may have said ‘woman with a trans history’? Wtf does that mean. A women with a trans history would surely be someone who for a while thought they were a man before realising it was all a crock of shit. (And hopefully have realised before they started taking testosterone or for top surgery).

but even if I was generous and assume he means he was going through transition but now he has got his face and appearance to a state that he wants no further treatment - but he only started saying he was a women in 2022 - and this incident happened the following year. No way will he have had all the possible treatment available to him (has he even had any?)

another thing I have been wondering about - it’s only ever about men who say they are women. Is that really because men don’t mind women who say they are men in their changing room. Or is it actually because women who say they are men are very unlikely to get changed in a communal changing room? If they do use male facilities it’s likely to be cubicles and they will be in and out as quick as possible. And I very much doubt there is a sexual aspect of it. If anything it’s probably not validating at all for them because they must be shit scared.

just some musings when I should be making the dinner 😂

Wonder what "unsafe" means in this context? Is Peggie likely to attack DU? Ogle DU's private parts? What exactly?

Dr U said by habit they’d face the Corner to make sure that no one got the impression that Dr U was looking at others. They said they “felt sad” they had to do this/be so careful. Even though that’s how average women behave in CRs

Annoying that when you quote a post with a screenshot it doesn't show the screenshot.

Really recommend reading the TT summaries

Ooo very good point harassed. I'd wondered why this was done on Friday rather than at the start and had vaguely assumed that this was one of the many things about ETs I do not know but this makes total sense. Hoist by his own petard. Well done NC.

Costs are rarely (but not never) awarded in first tier tribunals - which includes employment tribunals.

The cost increase for SP (not sure how she's funded) comes from the stopping and starting. The legal team downs tools until they get the disclosure they are seeking. Then they have to refresh their memories and pick everything up again. Of course, the disclosure might tell a damning tale for NHS & DU and they might then seek to settle.

Costs are awarded when one side is badly behaved (not a legal term obvs). Allison Bailley got £20K of costs from Garden Court Chambers because they did a terrible job managing the evidence bundle. It was a nightmare. And they refused to accept the alternative bundle produced by Doyle Clayton (AB's solicitors).
Costs are also awarded when there was no realistic chance of defending a claim. Lizzie Pitt in Cambridge got some of her costs when the opposition folded like deck chairs the morning the merits hearing was supposed to start.

I was talking about the cost all parties may incur if the ET is postponed etc. in terms of paying their respective teams.

I was not referring to costs that one side might claim.

If any of you watch Free Speech Nation, this is the kind of thing they usually cover. Not sure how much they can say at this point, as the case is ongoing, but may be worth a watch?

It strikes me as possible that this was the reaction of someone who knows that he is guilty of encroaching on women's spaces (and conceivably of a degree of voyeurism) and is therefore very highly offended at even a hint of a more serious criminal act. He could perhaps persuade himself that trespassing in the women's changing room, knowing that this made women feel uncomfortable, intimidated, violated, was nothing to be ashamed of - after all, it's the right of a trans identified person - but the suggestion of association with rape triggered what remains of his conscience.

It’s not that simple unfortunately.

I became aware of a case of a trans staff member requesting access to the opposite sex staff changing room and initially having their request denied.

A conversation with HR and a read of the NHS trust’s policy showed that they were perfectly entitled to have their gender changed on their staff record and be given the required access.

An ‘education session’ from HR to all managers soon followed. 🙄

I believe when DrU calls himself a woman with a trans history he means a woman first and foremost who happened to have the misfortune to be assigned male and therefore had to transition to his true self

It's a way of claiming to have always been a woman and the trans bit is irrelevant