NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #15

[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 gave evidence from Thursday 6 February to Wednesday 12 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
Thread 14: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272939-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-14

J: We may have request for new order, or variation of existing order, coming up. Anything else?

JR: We accept further productions will be needed, but will be looking for an element of proportionality.

NC: It is likely we will ask to add KS as individual respondent, and with specific act of her all-staff email as a detriment.

J: So we may have quite a lot to consider.

JR: Yes. But keen to hear ED tomorrow, we have put her off twice.

J: All right, we will start at 10 am tomorrow and will aim for 10 promptly. [END OF SESSION]

Going back again bit, but it's impressive speed of dobbing someone in to have had an incident on Christmas day morning, then to have had a discussion with the BMA between Christmas Day and the 27th December!

Good urgent reporting Dr Upton! (shame you didn't manage this speed with what you claim to be "patient safety" concerns, but, hey . . . what's most important?)

I do wonder how available BMA reps tend to be on Christmas Day and Boxing Day . . .any other medics tried contacting them over Christmas?!

So again I wonder if he was actually just chatting with his TRA mates in the BMA.

J: Your email to BMA p 739 to AW. 27/12 13:09 [I think] you say "thank you" re a discussion, so there was a discussion between the boxing day email and this one. Do you recall that? DU: It says 'as we discussed' so prob means a phone call but I can't recall.

And @ickky i'm not on Twitter, and I find trying to do it through Nitter is a bit touch and go, so you pasting the tweets is the difference between knowing what's going on, and having zero clue.

Fantastic work, thank you

2nd half of TT afternoon Tweets

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1889688088298782849.html

Oo, KS to be added as respondent!

@nauticant @ickky

The fundraiser is good.

What does that mean?? She has to answer to the case and not just as a witness?

IB is Isla Bomba, equalities person at Fife I think.

NC wants to add KS as a third respondent! July will be 🔥 scorchio

edited to add MASSIVE THANKS to nauticant and ickky

7 days! good man!

Yup, she'll be in same position as Upton

Who's that, Keir Starmer? 😊

I didn't hear or see that because I haven't followed all of it.

Did DU refer to himself as the victim in respect of the FC as he may just have been repeating that terminology rather than showing bias.

If he was being biased I am sure that NC would have raised it directly at the time as a concern.

I would like to thank Tribunal Tweets @Justabaker and her nimble fingered friends so much for all your hard work.

Thank you

Woah, KS added as respondent!

I may have to book some holiday in July

The judge quickly corrected himself after. It was a slip of the tongue, but one that highlights his thoughts I think.

Slow down!!!! I can't keep up with all this. 😁

@ickky@nauticant TT and all, very many thanks for your hard work. Seamless. Brava.

Seconded

Seconded

<Goes to get more flowers>

Eastenders Drumroll button pressed!

I'll be honest today was a lot better for my blood pressure not watching him.

I'm glad you said that about the judge - I didn't like the previous suggestion that he was biased, not being in the room to hear everything he said, and his manner in saying it. I'd need a lot of first hand evidence before I'd accuse a judge of being biased.

I hadn't even thought about judges having to treat laypeople and lawyers differently, that's a good point, it makes a lot of sense now I think about it.

And as far as open justice is concerned - just because there wasn't remote access did not mean that it was held in secret, so I think it was as open as justice used to be before video links/the internet/etc etc.