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

NC: A few Qs about why there may not have been more complaints about your use of CR. SP has said others were also unhappy, you said to JR you were not aware of any.

All the stuff that's not directly contents of the documents. Name of file, date last modified, maybe who had access, all that jazz. Dates of modification the most likely to be relevant here I guess.

I'm so sorry @CocoapuffPuff that's horrible

@CocoapuffPuff So sorry for your loss at the hands of incompetence. ❤❤

DU: Pppl could have felt intimated by I'm not aware anyone was, certtainly didn't try to, sad to thinkk they felt could not approach me.

I wonder why ever not?

NC: You have said you are an empathetic person. Can you use that skill to say why those people might not have mentioned them?

It's data about electronic documents - when they were created, by whom, edited, by whom, etc.

NC: You have said you are an empathetic person. Can you use that skill to say why those people might not have mentioned them?

DU: Pppl could have felt intimated by I'm not aware anyone was, certtainly didn't try to, sad to thinkk they felt could not approach me.

NC: 3 possibilities I think 1. Nobody else had any concerns 2. Some ppl did but didn't want to hurt your feelings. 3. Ppl did have concerns but too frightened to express them.

information embedded in an electronic document or email or photo etc, that collects dates, authors, etc. Basically any information about the document that the organisation or user wants to collect, or needs to collect by law. With an email you can usually click into the top portion to find out where the email originated from and when. With a document you might find it by tapping/clicking on 'properties.

NC: 3 possibilities I think 1. Nobody else had any concerns 2. Some ppl did but didn't want to hurt your feelings. 3. Ppl did have concerns but too frightened to express them.

DU: Pppl could have felt intimated by I'm not aware anyone was, certtainly didn't try to, sad to thinkk they felt could not approach me.

It's a record that attaches to digitally created documents. It includes information about where and when they were created, edited etc.

DU: Agree that probably covers the range but ofc can't say which if any apply.

NC: Ppl can only raise, by saying you are a man and this is the women's CR

DU: Am not a man. And, they cd say transwoman.

NC: 3 possibilities I think 1. Nobody else had any concerns 2. Some ppl did but didn't want to hurt your feelings. 3. Ppl did have concerns but too frightened to express them.

We all know it's 3 with a sprinkling of 2...

CocoapuffPuff I had a similar incident, fortunately my mam recovered [temporarily, she was failing anyway] and what I have to say to you is YOU WERE THERE FOR YOUR MUM. YOU WERE THERE. Any comfort she had, you gave her. Hold onto that thought, you were there and you comforted her.

Sorry for the emotional derail, I was transported back to the incident with my mam, and that's how I dealt with how awful it was, that at least she was not alone, I was there. As you were, Cocoa

NC: But if you say 'ciswoman' and 'transwoman' that's implying 2 kinds of woman.

DU yes bcs there are

NC: So you wd be forcing people to say this is a CR for only a subset of women.

DU: Agree that probably covers the range but ofc can't say which if any apply. NC: Ppl can only raise, by saying you are a man and this is the women's CR DU: Am not a man. And, they cd say transwoman.

Surely there’s another possibility- they had concerns but couldn’t face being drowned in sophistry and patronising word salad.

There's a lot of multiple posts going on, please can we just have one person updating from TT. It's getting really confusing - I think Ickle was doing it well.

sad to thinkk they felt could not approach me.

because when they did you got them suspended!!!!!!

It's going to be ahowing when the document was created and when altered.

If NC was able to get a soft copy, she might be able to see all the track changes dated.

A big shiny solicitor firm sent me an entire restructuring document they'd previously used for another client (not mine) and simply edited.

How could they raise it when he simply asserts his 'rights' (ones he has appropriated) and his feelings in response.

ickky I meant :)

NC: Having to use your framing forces complainer to make herself look bigoted.

DU: TWAW anyway. And the EA manages to use language that is not pejorative when describing possible exceptions