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

I enjoyed my time in the Kingdom when I built Longannet power station.
Well. a little bit of it. I remember the lum.

Yes, and there is no viable argument that FWS is a one-off decision that should be confined to its particular facts.

It’s a claim with no substance, and if she’s a lawyer, not an activist, she’ll know that. Well, even activists should know that …

He may indeed take a dim view of the irrelevant mudslinging and could increase the compensation awarded as a result. Whilst the case is in progress, the judge will give each side a fair amount of latitude to present its case and will only intervene in limited circumstances.

I'm losing track of who I think should be fired.

Searle hasn't given evidence yet either.

Here's something that seems to have been overshadowed by the statement kerfuffle and maybe deserves more attention: from TT:

NC 12th January email from KS to all the same people in to or CC line, but with the addition of Dr Upton.
Compare those two emails the people they are addressed to, same subject line but prefixed 're:' this suggests this is a response to something
LC I don' tknow
NC but we don't see what that's a response to
But if we go back, it relates to previous email
LC - I cant comment to that
NC - you were copied in to that email from KS. Kate at this point with ED still in copy ED, ED is taking lead in investigation. Everyone is now aware
that ED shouldn't be involved. MC says ED can't do investigating, but days later, now ED is still investigating
LC - I really don't know. I don't know who authorised ED first place
NC if this is right, that 729 is a reply to MC email of 5January, are you surprised no responses
Nc no replies to email in chain?
LC - busy at that time of year, not idea why no replies

That is, Naomi is pointing out that, according to the bundle, there was not one reply to KS's 5/1 email, until 12/1 (and at 12/1, ED was investigating, even though at 5/1, it had been made clear she shouldn't). Given the incendiary nature of what had happened and that email, she wondered whether that was credible. The witness could not help...but it seems clear that the q is whether there is yet more non-disclosure going on here. I wonder whether the IT manager will be speaking to that kind of issue?

It's the vendor on ebay that you are promoting in your link in your earlier post.. Look at the rest of the stuff being sold by them on that ebay site. Which you have linked to.

A really random aside about genealogy which was mentioned pages and pages ago.

For me, the satisfaction lies in solving a mystery. I'm currently doing some local history research and had a name who I just couldn't pin down in the records. Very common name, not mentioned in sources I expected to find him and I was at a loss.

Until I realised that his name had been misspelled in one source, which also contained loads of other information which was relevant. And that just opened it all up. It's now gone from a name on a list to an actual person.

😂🤣🤣

People on Twitter are booking days off work for Searle's evidence.

Reminds me of when my colleague was threatening to take time off to go down to London and sit in the public gallery at the high court for the Wagatha trial. Unfortunately she's extremely captured so I don't think she'll be up for Zooming in for this one.

Searle sent the email (in evidence) around the consultants condemning Sandie and damning the integrity of the investigation.

Other defence witnesses have agreed this shouldn't happen (but bizarrely didn't object at the time).

Searle could have supported Dr. Upton in general times without mentioning Sandie by name or any details about what actually happened.

Edit - wrong tag sorry

@LarkLaneAgain I'm not "promoting" anything. People wanted to know where they could buy the mug, they can buy them on ebay. I f you want to look through their other products and find something to be offended by that's up to you.

This is superb. Sums up beautifully why I no longer, for example, listen to TRIP.

https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/politics/5291991/nhs-fife-tribunal-witness-list/

if you read the text she’s mentioned but the list of “other witnesses”

I love Burntistland in Fife. I used to pronounce it BURNT-EES-LAND until the Scotrail automated announcer schooled me better.

Got lost in the hills (generous use of the word 'hills') once about 4 years ago when out on a walk. It was 28 degrees. I ran out of water. One field had a sign which helpfully promised a short cut back to the beach. 10 metres up the road, was another sign stating 'BULL IN FIELD'.

Reader, I did not take the short cut.

Any that want to. See the Working Party threads - not one single NHS trust will maintain women's SS spaces if a man wants into them. Not one.

As Fife's line of defence has always been Sandi was a nasty person so we felt entitled to treat her like shit I assume they are calling witnesses who will say something along those lines. Naomi will then take them back to due process.

It's one of those cases (actually not as rare as you might think) where the defence witnesses actually do the prosecution's job for them.

It will be hard for them to prove that when she has had a 30 year unblemished record with (presumably) no complaints against her.

It's a shame you can't get online access for a day or two of the trial anymore. It would have been good to have just watched a day or two of some key witnesses ahem.

That really is an almost unbelievably bad thing to put Jane Sutherley through. It's abusive in my opinion. And that's before taking into account the fact that the percentage of women in prison who have suffered sexual abuse is sky high. Everyone involved in her persecution should be utterly ashamed of themselves. (Obviously they won't be).

Has this been covered on Newsnight at all? With the right presenter it could be excellent.

I've been reading the Masterchef articles on the beeb. They always stress that content and editorial are not connected so paying your license fee does not indicate support.

I think KS’s emails demonstrate the complete blindness NHSF have to how partisan their position is.

They think the moral imperative to affirm trans identities rightfully trumps everything else - biology, the law, fairness, inclusion. I think they come off the stand thinking they have executed their duties well and proud that they are acting in keeping with the Trust’s principles.

They are not wrong to believe that if SP embraced trans identities, the tribunal wouldn’t be taking place. If SP did view DU as being ‘a woman’, or wasn’t bothered by him using a SSS, the issues at hand wouldn’t be in the spotlight. However, she doesn’t, she did, her’s is a reasonable stance to take. This is the bit they are missing.

In addition to losing the tribunal, they need to understand that the position they are clinging to is partisan, ideological and discriminatory.

Yes I am distinguishing between their legal team who I must assume know their arses from their elbows and their PR dept which clearly does not 🤣

Surely nobody would put out a statement like that without running it past legal. And yet it doesn't seem conceivable that legal would have given it the green light.

Hopefully, it is also worth pointing out that under the NMC code nurses have a responsibility to tackle racism (which apparently there are rumours Sandie was which naturally she denies).

Quoting a UK nurse educator on Reddit on a thread asking what to do with rascist colleague:

If you don't escalate to management you are complicit.

It is every nurses duty to report this behaviour.

The NMC is very clear.

I assume this applicable to nurse associates too. There doesn't seem to be any registered nurses on the list so presumably none would testify against her. I doubt Sandie would ask any as witnesses in that environment.

Sandie did have support from a colleague during the investigation saying she didn't notice anything transphobic in a discussion with Upton which Upton claimed she deliberately ignored him.