NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #13

[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 was obtainable by sending an email request to [email protected] headed Public Access Request (Peggie v Fife Health Board) 4104864/2024 and requesting access.

However, as a result of problems with the liverstreaming, apparently as a result of a very large number of observers, remote public access to the hearing was suspended on Tuesday 11 February. It was suggested that it might be reinstated at some point but I wouldn't count on it.

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
Thread 12: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272276-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-12

I’m considering complaining too. I don’t think conducting this behind closed doors in any way provides a transparent route to justice and the court restricting public knowledge of the discussion is problematic.

😂It is so clearly the problem isn't it with this sort of activism. However, I am hoping there is more actual proof in the documents NC now has -- she will be holding such over for her questioning of NHS Fife witnesses I imagine.

J We have new productions. First page no ? NC If metadata it's 908 J 909 is metadata - they discuss numbering. NC there is email from Miles (spelling?) [rota] NC we have applied for order for corres with search terms from R. We have been flat out from yesterday

Looking forward to finding out what wasn't disclosed until yesterday's request.

I also twisted my ankle running to see if michael foran had posted and he hasn't.

I'm on the TT page and having selected most recent am aggrieved that it actually isn't showing most recent and I'm having to scroll and refresh to check to see if there's any update. Grr technology.

AFAIK they're still waiting for the judge.

I think that it probably isn't worth the extra hassle - there will be TT's substack as a record of the whole thing as soon as the session has finished, anyway. And a dedicated TT thread will almost certainly get filled up with chat, questions about access, etc...

If you want to provide a service by creating a thread and copying ickky's TT posts to it, feel free. I think such a thread would either be ignored or would get clogged up with comments though.

Didn't make it in person. Thanks so much to those keeping us informed. Plus to those interjecting witty comments and clever analysis. I bloody love this place.

That's very plausible.

I wish people would be careful about precise and factual language when discussing potentially career and reputation-ending matters but it's plausible to argue that they didn't.

One could almost think the Judge being impartial has realised the amount of media attention and tried to do damage limitation.

Which I'm sure isn't what has happened.

JR You have my applic J not to me yet. We'll deal with both applications tog.
DU you are still under oath.
NC You said in yest evidence you worked on snickers bar child and the time SP asked you to do obj was a different patient

The tribunal has permitted TT to continue........ for that very reason. The over-riding objective states that use of technology is a duty of a court, and that technology has proved wanting.

'- - - -' !

Tribunal Tweets has just started:
'J We have new productions. First page no ?
NC If metadata it's 908
J 909 is metadata - they discuss numbering.
NC there is email from Miles (spelling?) [rota]
NC we have applied for order for corres with search terms from R. We have been flat out from yesterday

JR You have my applic
J not to me yet. We'll deal with both applications tog. DU you are still under oath.
NC You said in yest evidence you worked on snickers bar child and the time SP asked you to do obj was a different patient'

DU y
NC you worked on snickers patient and also with SP on another date
DU Y can't remember date. Don't remember SP with snickers patient.
NC are you confident SP not working on sn patient.
DU Don't recall any other staff other than consultant on that child

Tribunal Tweets:
'DU y
NC you worked on snickers patient and also with SP on another date
DU Y can't remember date. Don't remember SP with snickers patient.
NC are you confident SP not working on sn patient.
DU Don't recall any other staff other than consultant on that child'

Great to see they started on time, as usual.

Got to work now but sure someone else with access to TT can take over!

NC So worried c C attitude. Wouldn't you have noticed re that incident?
DU only if she'd behaved inappropriately. I was busy with child - serious condition.
NC all work be serious cond
DU no - a range. That's what triage is for
NC Triage - not sick ppl don't clutter Jesus

Sorry, can someone remind me of the significance of little Snickers? Was that the patient who left before s/he was seen?

DU - yes, but lots of diff seriously unwell ppl. Prioritise closing airways.
NC SP can remember working with you on snickers bar. You don't want it to be that patient cos pins incident to H'een and you didn't want to give AG precise date

I think the idea is that snickers dates one of the incidents because it was the same day and it was a Halloween snickers. But it all seems to be disputed.

Is "Jesus" an autocorrect for "resus"?

between a qualified medical doctor claiming biological sex is nebulous and undefined, and the fancy footwork around the undisclosed emails my question is

are BU's doctor BIG doctor pants made of this sort of stuff https://texfire.net/en/flame-retardant-fabrics/mineral-fiber-fabrics/ or are they just ordinary large undergarments that have to be replaced every time they are reduced to ashes?

Pricey either way, just as well there's a fundraiser.

I would assume so yes