NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #20

[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 last 2 weeks. However, after 2 weeks it was not complete and it adjourned part-heard. It is planned that it will resume on 16 July and the last day of evidence will be 28 July and then there will be 2 days of submissions from counsel meaning that the hearing will end on 30 July.

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 caused by 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
Thread 15: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5273119-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-15
Thread 16: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5273636-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-16
Thread 17: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5273827-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-17
Thread 18: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5274332-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-18
Thread 19: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5274571-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-19

This is why it's important for everyone to "misgender" these men at every feasible opportunity. Normalising wrong-sex pronouns has been a disaster.

THIS. Don't play their game, especially if you can do it with impunity. You make it more possible for others to speak.

Even had it concluded, the ET ruling wouldn't be available for approx. 3 months or more (judging by previous ETs in this area).

I feel the only explanation is thee as t @Boiledbeetle drunk policy llamas are in fact in charge after all

Ok, I revise that: they thought they would “win”. That it would be obvious to all and sundry who the bigot was, and the judge’s conclusion would just be a confirmation of that.

Maybe they genuinely haven't been talking about the case and therefore don't know what they themselves are doing.

We either have drunk llamas or the grown up lawyers have entered to room seeing imminent disaster and tried an aggressive damage limitation move.

In either scenario they are fucking incompetent.

I wonder if this might prompt a reconsideration of the "ultra" categorisation in some quarters. This is a very clear, public demonstration of the harms that can flow for women who are in positions vulnerable. JT wasn't expressing a general luxury belief (Henderson)

In other news, I strongly recommend the podcasts I linked upthread: This isn't working. It contains nuanced discussions of the good and the harm of "good DEI" and "bad DEI" to use Grunwald's terminology.

From my experience of some senior NHS committees, I can only think that this is a Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid scenario. They're leaping off the cliff to avoid the pursuers, heedless of the consequences. (Discussing their options: "They could surrender to us but I wouldn't count on that.")

'Innovative' was my favourite description! 🤣

I think this is very important - given the notification was received 2 days into the case, when it was expected witnesses would have completed by last Friday, it now seems they won't be free until some point in July. I expect NHSFife to postpone this disciplinary hearing (on lawyers advice) - it's 10.15, Monday morning, and I think they'll be meeting to agree, then issue, a delay.

Is it wrong that I'm imagining so many of these phrases, on placards, held by people who convene on NHS Fife on Friday?

They would seem so supportive of NHS Fife's choice to pursue, "a course of action not lacking in ambition".

Surely the correct procedure would be to allow the ET to report before concluding the disciplinary? The ET is a court of law where witnesses are giving evidence under oath. It's the correct forum for any findings of fact in this case. Whether the disciplinary meeting exonerates or convicts Sandie the ET could come to the opposite verdict so it's surely prudent to postpone until after the ET reports? Given the shambles of the case against Sandie so far & my personal knowledge of how the NHS works perhaps I shouldn't be surprised they are doing the opposite.
In a normal world the IX should have taken only a few days at most & any disciplinary meeting held a few weeks later not over a year after the alleged incidents.
Initially when I read about this disciplinary meeting I assumed that it could only be for some separate unconnected matter but reports seem to indicate that isn't the case & in any case ED has confirmed that in 30 years the only other untoward incident of note was when a junior nurse swore at Sandie. If there had been some other matter under consideration she would have mentioned it.

Work intervening but

This is a very clear, public demonstration of the harms that can flow for women who are in positions vulnerable. JT wasn't expressing a general luxury belief (Henderson)

Should read: This is a very clear, public demonstration of the harms that can flow for women who are in vulnerable positions where this mishmash of inconsistent policies genuinely affect their working conditions and general services. JT wasn't expressing a general luxury belief (as per Henderson) but it felt like a situational luxury belief/indulgence for which the consequences redound to others whose circumstances are very different.

Haven't RTFT, apologies if this has been asked and answered, but if this misconduct hearing or any of these disciplinary processes have been pursued either in defiance of legal advice or without seeking legal advice, could the decision-makers be held personally liable for the cost incurred?

Yes.
And twitter/X handles, MN usernames, etc.

I think this is very important - given the notification was received 2 days into the case, when it was expected witnesses would have completed by last Friday, it now seems they won't be free until some point in July. I expect NHSFife to postpone this disciplinary hearing (on lawyers advice) - it's 10.15, Monday morning, and I think they'll be meeting to agree, then issue, a delay.

This must surely be the case. I can't see how they can continue with the disciplinary - it must be in contempt of court surely?

delaying the disciplinary pending the outcome of the hearing would also be terrible - that means it would be the best part of 2 years or maybe longer since the allegations emerged before the hearing

Michael Foran (@ 30 mins ago)

I’m staggered by the way NHS Fife’s legal team have behaved. Consistent and extensive failure to comply with a judicial order, baseless objections to x-exam, inconsistent claims about key evidence, and now prejudging an ongoing disciplinary investigation. It’s just shocking.

https://x.com/michaelpforan/status/1891429225015517566

Hear! Hear!

But it was clear from the beginning of last week that the case was going to go part heard. Or have Fife taken the view that as Upton and Davidson have given their evidence and been released as witnesses they can take part in the disciplinary hearing?

I don't think any of the witnesses can talk to the disciplinary hearing - well maybe those who have been on the stand, but even then they could be recalled. So it'll be a great big nothing-burger even if it takes place - convene the hearing, adjourn the hearing because no witnesses can speak, on to another date (August?)

I do think they can probably hold the internal hearing before the judgement is issued, however, and complete their process. Daft, but they probably could, legally.

The witnesses to be called in the ongoing ET aren't allowed to discuss the case with anybody between now and the July hearing. I wonder whether Sandie's team are expanding the list of witnesses to include Jillian Torrens, Fife's Head of Nursing and anybody else they can think of.

I bet the atmosphere in Victoria Hospital is "interesting" this morning.

If the charges all round being thrown around are harassment I genuinely don't see how either party can adhere to this disciplinary.

If they use Sandie making a none appearance for legal reasons against her I don't know how they hell it's not a problem.

Finally caught up with the threads!
I cannot believe the stress that Sandie is being put under- it’s astonishing. I hope she draws on the support that she’s getting, and that Friday goes in the right direction for her. It’s beyond disgraceful that a nurse with all her experience and expertise is being treated like this. For objecting, for truth, for common sense. Maybe common sense isn’t common anymore.
In the NHS staff are ‘just a number’ I know this to be true.
I’m glad that this has peaked so many people. You couldn’t make it up. Oh wait- I think George Orwell apparently did something similar????

@Gettingmadderallthetime I don't know the technical names for it all but basically Free Speech Union aren't officially a trade union, and many employers don't recognise them as a union. They supported somene I know with advice but their HR didn't allow them to attend any meetings. I think it is discretionary and imagine NHS would chose the same option of refusing them.

Not by the courts, no. However, their employer (NHS Fife) could take disciplinary action against them in this situation.