NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #14

[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 once it was in to the second week it was looking like this would not happen. 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 livestreaming, 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 don'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
Thread 13: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272398-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-13

Dipping in and out but can I check if I've understood NC's line of questioning? Is she basically saying he over egged the changing room situation and barely mentioned the patient safety incident? And if they both were true, then the second one should have been his priority? So either his judgement is shagged because all he cares about is the changing rooms (shock horror, how can that be), or alternatively he made up the patient safety one to try to bolster his case against SP?

I know we have!!

NC only has 1 hour left!!
What is left to cover?

I want to join in with the nebula ... for now, anyway

So according to DU evidence

• patient care concern - don't report immediately, no datix entry, don't speak to a colleague for 2-4 months because no formal meeting and too difficult to speak to senior on shift.
• hurt feelings after CR incident - run around A&E until consultant found, insist on speaking immediately, datix entry and demand follow up in a matter of days when no contact over Christmas ...

Maybe.

I interpreted that as JR saying you can't rely on the midwives' code because it's different to the doctors' code. Which would mean she knows what the doctor's code says. But I may be overthinking it!

No. It either didn't happen at all or didn't happen as you describe and had only been raised as a patient safety concern because you wanted to punish SP. That much is obvious

Following this on TT today I'm struck so much more by DrU's attitude now I'm focussing on words and not reacting to DrU's manner. I mentioned in an earlier thread that, like many people, I've had to deal with government officials as part of my job. I've always assumed the advice we got in preparation would be extrapolated to any other similar situation, eg courts, police etc. The aim is to establish yourself as a credible, honest source of information. Anyway, the key points are always:

Be professional - ie pleasant, polite, cooperative. Don't show emotion, don't crack jokes to try and relieve tension. No sarcasm or muttering under the breath.
Answer the question you have been asked, no more no less. If your inquisitor doesn't get the information they wanted, they will ask another question. Don't try and second guess them. The answer to "do you know the time" is yes or no. I'm quite a literal person so I find it quite easy. I was once in an audit and got asked "do you have a procedure to cover situation X" and my answer was "yes, we do". Silence. As it was supposed to be a "friendly" audit, I eventually relented and asked "would you like to see it?" after the auditor glared at me for what felt like 5 minutes!

In my experience, the junior members of staff manage very well - varying degrees of nervousness but they all act appropriately. The ones that don't are invariably senior management, and thinking about it, all examples I can think of are men. Mostly getting irritated and trying to argue back but only succeeding in digging themselves a hole. I can usually spot them well in advance and arrange the seating so I can sit next to them and nudge them when they start going off piste. DrU would be a bloody nightmare in that situation and I'd be doing everything I could to ensure that DrU was not involved in the meeting because DrU is totally unmanageable .

I wouldn’t blame him!

Thanks!

From the BMJ Website on reporting concerns
c. If you have concerns that a colleague may not be fit to practise and may be putting patients at risk, you must ask for advice from a colleague, your defence body or us. If you are still concerned you must report this, in line with our guidance and your workplace policy, and make a record of the steps you have taken.

• Follow the procedure where you work for reporting concerns.
• If you have reason to believe that patients are, or may be, at risk of death or serious harm for any reason, you should report your concern to the appropriate person or organisation immediately.
• Wherever possible, you should first raise your concern with an appropriate officer of the organisation which employs you – such as the consultant in charge of the team, the clinical or medical director.
• If you are a doctor in training, it may be appropriate to raise your concerns with a named person in the deanery – for example, the postgraduate dean. Be clear, honest and objective about the reason for your concern.
• Acknowledge any personal grievance that may arise from the situation but focus on the issue of patient safety.

In addition:

I think JR's mood changed after that moment where she let out an audible "oh".
Scales were lifted and fallen off since then, now She can't quite build up any motivation.

Again, apologies if this has already been mentioned. I noted from this post from TT

https://x.com/tribunaltweets/status/1889639822131708295?s=46

"DU Could have turned up at mtg with some policies.
NC DID you mention BMA discuss at mtg
DU Can't remember.
NC You had already provided BMA 2 days before mtg with B&H policy and EDI policy. On blink?
DU Not if not at work. Wife may have helped.They are better at this than I am"

Odd pronoun use here - it struck me that perhaps his wife is as steeped in QT as he is.

What happened to make her say that?

What other evidence is necessary to prove the following 2 claims against DU personally:

1. Harassment under EA for being a biological male in the female only CR

2. Whistleblowing – her challenge to Dr U in the CR was a “protected disclosure” that led to “detriments” – Dr U punishing her via formal complaints of bullying and harassment etc.

Are there any gaps or omissions in the evidence so far?

That appears to be his suggestion along with SP not speaking with him, which has been discredited by an independent witness saying SP did speak with him.

I think she meant 'distinct' not 'different' but what would I know... I'm not a barrister or anything like that, so I can get away with an imprecise use of language🙂

I'm also confused by the supposed patient safety incidents. They make sense as evidence of harassment potentially - even if pretty weak evidence. But it seems clear there's no patient safety element - was this actually alleged in the complaint / investigation? I guess it must have been?

I spotted that. You'd have to be wouldn't you just to get through the day?

I think it’s simpler. You can’t hold DU to a standard that doesn’t apply to him. You have to test his professionalism against his professional obligations.

Paraphrasing; NC pointed out to BU that he's dominating her right now by trying to get her to use his language the whole thing is about him cobtrolingvthose around him.

Two things, please correct if I'm wrong.

Did NC ask him if he'd spoken to KS between Oct and dec, and he said he'd perhaps seen her on shift but not had meeting? But then didn't he say he raised the August CR 'incident' where SP turned left and waited outside in supervision in October?

And is it me, or is he getting cockier and arsier today? Might just be TT's conciseness

That's how I've understood the line of questioning from the glorious NC.

He will get cockier and co kier won't he, nobody is stopping him.