NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #32

[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 resumed 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] by 5pm on Wednesday 9 July. Detailed instructions were provided here:

drive.google.com/file/d/16-9POEZ7yHWUr6EmbfquJZO18Gv78bSm/view

The hearing is being live tweeted by x.com/tribunaltweets and there's additional information here: tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr-005. 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.ph/WSSjg.

An alternative to Twitter is to use Nitter: nitter.net/tribunaltweets or nitter.poast.org/tribunaltweets

Links to previous threads #1 to #29 can be found in the header of thread #30.

Thread 30: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5375337-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-30
Thread 31: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5375819-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-31

Even if the notes are good quality, there's till the question of why did he wait so long to report them. And it's still his word against hers in a situation that even as reported by DU, on its face could be interpreted in different ways that didn't threaten patient safety.

Following the tribunal through TT yesterday, like others I was just astounded when the statement(s) came from NHS Fife, but today I’m so angry. The statements show the institutional failings and lack of critical thinking, surely other board members weighed in with alternative view points.

I’ve long considered that a lot of people just want to be seen to ‘do the right thing’ and ‘be kind’ but this case really shows how damaging being ‘kind’ can be. We are in a ridiculous situation where we are being gaslit that senior leaders don’t know their own sex but are under no doubt the doctor is a woman based on well they say they are.

Saw an advert for this t-shirt. Quite a few of the Fife witnesses need to be reminded of this.

Can anyone tell us what patient care is like in this chaotic, appallingly managed NHS trust? I don’t think I’d go near them with a cut finger let alone something serious.

Oh I really look forward to it ending up as a film.

I keep thinking of the American film Erin Brokovitch (I know that's not the correct spelling but I can't get it Googling either)

I assume this meant to say nobody referred to locker rooms in the proceedings. They did actually. It was JR. I can't remember exactly when, certainly long before the statement dropped at the end of the day, but I clocked it and thought she was making a deliberate attempt to create the impression of a more neutral space without the 'people getting undressed' associations.

In law, EHRC guidelines are persuasive but not conclusive. The courts will listen to what EHRC has to say but will sometimes rule that EHRC has got it wrong.

@PlasticAcrobat Are you really suggesting that because you find it difficult to process/ cope with all the information and arguments, you think the whole case would have been better dealt with behind closed doors, with, say, coverage limited to the Telegraph, the BBC and the Guardian? Seriously? All you have to is turn off your social media and read the BBC or whatever.

Personally, I'm thrilled to see so many 'ordinary' women — non-lawyers, non-experts, women with little formal education, young women, women in their 80s, who are 'on' this and have command of the facts and can read a statement and easily discern the sub-text and its importance. It gives me hope that despite everything, there are lots of critical thinkers out here, people who can hold loads of different stuff in their heads, including an understanding of the law better than people who earn £50k as experts. It gives me hope. We need as much sunlight and transparency as possible.

I was taking locker rooms as being more of an Americanism, which I expect to see in AI generated stuff.

😂
That threads been in Active conversations for ages now

Can I cast Sharon Small as Sandie and Julian Rhind-Tutt (?sp) as Theodore in the mini-series. And if we could possibly resurrect Alan Rickman as a furious Fife board member, I would be a happy woman.

@SionnachRuadh Many years ago I was involved in a long and frustrating correspondence with the Guardian, who were being dishonest about an area I had specialist knowledge of, and that whole thing soured me on trusting journos with credentials. Journos without credentials can be valuable even if they're rough around the edges.

Realizing that a story is inaccurate when it deals with an area that we know well is common. There is a related cognitive bias that I think is interesting (and I still do it even though I know about it). I.e., when I read a story that deals with something I know a lot about, I'll recognize that it's bollocks. But I still give at least some credibility to stories that deal with other subjects.

Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case [Murray Gell-Manna Nobel Prize-winning physicist], physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.
That is the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. I'd point out it does not operate in other arenas of life. In ordinary life, if somebody consistently exaggerates or lies to you, you soon discount everything they say. In court, there is the legal doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus which means untruthful in one part, untruthful in all. But when it comes to the media, we believe against evidence that it is probably worth our time to read other parts of the paper. When, in fact, it almost certainly isn't. The only possible explanation for our behavior is amnesia.
— Michael Crichton, "Why Speculate?" (2002)

Loving the newly coined "lanyardocracy" phrase! That's my work to a tee. They've just ordered a shit ton of progress pride flag lanyards for us all to wear interspersed with our company logo. Those refusing (including me) will be marked I'm sure. I'm sticking to the neutral dark colour that's been the official one for years. It may be a bit grubby but I feel more appropriate for a public sector. Political alliances shouldn't really be promoted at work. Or if they do allow it, then they should also produce a purple green and white one for women's rights, one for disability, one for all sorts. It's depressing that my entire team minus a couple cheerfully took them without question and I now have to stare at the flag daily in meetings around their necks.

There are changing rooms at NHS Fife, but I believe that they are down in the basement, some distance from A&E, so people choose to use the locker rooms (which I think might be rows of lockers along the walls, a couple of backless benches and two toilet cubicle at the far end (think this might have been covered in days 1-3). I'm not sure we established what the CHANGING rooms were like; presumably just a bit bigger and without cubicles?

@Largesso Being fair to Fife - when Sandie and Upton were in the same department rearranging shifts meant they wouldnt meet. I dont know what role Upton had in his psych rotation but it would not be unusual for a&e to need a psych evaluation of one of their patients. On the night shift that might have meant Upton. He would then have no good reason for using the nurses changing room so shouldnt bother Sandie - but he might have done so anyway. Also while Sandie always seems to have been professional with him (there was a witness) he probably was going to run away sobbing if he saw her.

I think the rot set in once people were encouraged to take their whole authentic selves to work, instead of changing into their "work persona" when they walk into the building.

I like the “wet streets cause rain” idea. And this sort of fallacious thinking is everywhere.

Sharon Small would be perfect but Julian Rhind-Tutt would be too old to play Upton. One component of the latter's unbelievable arrogance came from his youth; he barely had enough workplace experience to know how staff birthdays are managed but was completely confident about persuading a harem of useful idiots to support him in throwing aside the human rights of a much more experienced colleague.

Something I liked about my job was the necessity for adopting and presenting a professional persona for the role.

Yes, as phased above (or in the episode!) it's not really a paradox. I was trying to be clever, but interestingly tricks of logic like that can actually be effective in removing limitations that have been imposed on an AI chats.

I don't know which papers you're referring to, but I'd recommend the Courier (of Dundee) and The Herald as the most reasonable and reliable sources. The BBC, The Guardian, and of course The National are not to be trusted on this matter. Some of the tabloids have sensational headlines, but the content is factually accurate.

IANAL and I need to reread the judgement but I don't recall any way you could take that meaning from it. It seems crystal clear to me. Would the SC issue a further clarification if people start twisting it like that?

And my understanding is also that this is about workplace regulation law which precedes the Equality Act and is very clear that when staff have need to change at work as medical professionals certainly do, there must be separate male and female changing spaces provided. Even if JR succeeds in arguing this point, doesn't the workplace law override it?

Does anyone remember this case?

Transwoman wins employment discrimination case against NHS for being treated differently from women in changing room | Mumsnet https://share.google/Aafy8wFCodsEWtucf

I've not reread the entire thread, I'm struggling to keep up with these ones. The consensus is the judge made an error comparing the tw to a woman rather than to another man. The tw was sueing the NHS trust. The trust did not appeal so no precedent was set. I hope the nurses at the Sheffield hospital, following the SC judgement, realise they may have pretty good grounds for also sueing their employer.

I’m a little uneasy about the drama/film business.

I genuinely can’t imagine anyone doing justice to both the serious and outrageous injustice involved, and the comic elements of Pete the Plumber, ‘I-sla may or may not be a woman as I can’t see my chromosomes’, and Beth ‘I’m not a robot, and I’m biological, so I’m a biological woman’ Upton.
And Attempting to show the young 6 footer doctor scared of the teeny middle-aged nurse will look like jumping the shark.

Just to remind everyone the Courier had covered this well since the start, and its reporting is fair to both sides. It's not the Courier's fault that one side is bonkers though so there's only so much their impartiality helps NHS Fife!

They were the first to state they would use correct sex pronouns and they have kept holding the bigger papers to account.

Forget the BBC, Guardian etc