NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #12

[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 February 2025 and was expected to continue for 2 weeks although at the start of the second week getting everything done in this time period was looking less certain. The hearing commenced with Sandie Peggie giving evidence. Dr Beth Upton started giving evidence on Thursday 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
Thread 7: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5270365-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-7
Thread 8: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271511-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-8
Thread 9: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271596-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-9
Thread 10: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271723-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-10
Thread 11: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272046-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-11

What they should do is give a different link to every 100 or so that ask for access.

You would then have multiple different 'rooms' viewing the hearing.

Each room would have it set that any observers automatically have their camera and microphone turned off.

If SP's case did (please god no...) fail, would the repeated failure of the other side to disclose potentially vital documents mean an appeal would definitely be allowed? It's making NC's job incredibly difficult, how can she do her best for her client?

Phew! Just caught up. Thank you everyone.

The system is at risk of crashing and assess is now only for the press and TT

Sadly that wasn't the impression I got watching - he seemed sympathetic to the idea that this stuff was likely irrelevant and NC should stop making such a fuss.

If it does indeed emerge that DrUptonogood was orchestrating a harassment campaign against she who said "no", it seems unfair that Sandie can't be re-examined. She must have felt that it was a hatchet job to have brought this case. Her answers were very factual (we didn't get cross examination about feelings).

It was sad logging off (after waiting so long to get in), knowing that you won’t be allowed in tomorrow 😒

appears all public access pins have been invalidated.

But he also pointed out that we can't determine its relevance without actually seeing it...

Anyone know any journalists? We could all go round theirs.

Yes this and it makes the hearing very unfair if Sandie's side get public viewing but Dr U's and more importantly NHS Fife's is not.

NHS Fife is paid for by taxpayers money and I expect everyone is very interested to know why they were pissing it away on persecuting a nurse.

Generally no but today was a disaster and they are now not expecting to give access except to media and TT, so who knows what the state will be tomorrow. Most of us got new links this afternoon. See discussion here passim!

And to hear that firsthand not via biased journalists using wrong-sex pronouns thus displaying bias.

@GCITC thanks, I did wonder if it was system overload. Obviously a lot of people interested in this case.

Interesting isn’t it how many different people DU contacted about SP? He really was attempting to cover all bases.

So could SP be recalled?

Nah, I'd say let the country grind to a halt when women's rights are at stake!

It might be frustrating but from today we've now confirmed:

1. The investigation that wasn't, definitely was with written proof and admission from DU.
2. Yet more undisclosed docs further underlining DU as unreliable at best
3. DUs complaint about patient safety so unreliable He can't provide a definite date/time/patient to support it.

This is the sort of thing I'm here for.

Anyone know a journalist from the Scottish press as they have been less biased than the English press? Also please define press - can mumsnet identify as press and have an accredited rep?

💯

IT consultant here, I've been on Teams meetings with hundreds and hundreds of people,
I call BS
I think IT support forgot to set the 'mute all' / camera off setting - and is using the numbers thing as an excuse

I thought it was chaotic and indicative of either defiance or negligence or a bit of both.. something like that

It's all a bit Upton

Yay, sisterhood

This is precisely why disclosure has to be done way in advance of the actual hearing, so the bundle and case can actually be prepared. Even if there is no 'smoking gun', the claimant has a right to see the materials which the judge ordered to be disclosed and figure out how they fit into the case. And last minute disclosure CAN make all the difference: I once did a case that was entirely decided based on materials that were only disclosed on the first day of the hearing. NC cannot be expected to wing it and read things in a 20 minute break, especially when it seems the failure to disclose is so potentially wide ranging. It's just massively unfair to dump this on the claimant at the last minute and then complain about an adjournment and delay for 'trivial' materials when this could easily have been avoided by just disclosing the stuff in the first place. As to Jr wanting the order changed to 'relevant' documents only - that is a weird thing to say as by definition disclosure is only of relevant documents!

Oh well..you got what you wanted now.....which is a load of irrelevent chit chat and no access to the friggin' tribunal.