NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #33

[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 and tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr-bd6. 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
Thread 32: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5376072-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-32

KS is in witness list. The newspaper article describes her as being in for a grilling by NC.

Fife's current problem is exactly the same as Sandie's was. She wasnt allowed to call him a man so she had no words to explain the problem.

And now they aren't allowed to call him a [redacted] hostile witness so they cant explain plainly why they cannot just settle or concede. They have to dance around the words while everyone bollocks them for their bad attitude and the problematic way they approach things. What goes around comes around.

Placemarking.

Thanks for the share @BingBongSong Hadley Getting It Right Again Freeman never fails to entertain whilst, er, getting it right again. Nice to see some insights into the absolute shite that went on at the Graun too - no wonder she left.

@NebulousSupportPostcard 100% right about the silencing but as Freeman alludes, even when you succeed at it, you can't stop people having 'bad thoughts'. Consistently when reflecting on this I have that line from Mis-Shapes in my head, 'We'll use the one thing we've got more of, that's our minds'.

Also a Hadley Freeman comment in the Times:
https://www.thetimes.com/article/2063c1d6-40f2-441e-93fd-dcfe310f1e6b?shareToken=2831c0ef0654d11aa0fde48839dc9226

Interesting that The Times highlights this as the most high profile case of JR's career. It's hard sometimes to know how much interest there is in these things outside of FWR. Clearly a lot judging by the number of articles and that assessment from the times.

I have been reading the Reddit thread about it but it's quite empty and what analysis there is is disappointingly light on thinking and heavy on "she's a bad nurse - sack her" (or even, laughably, she shouldn't have been hired in the first place...30 years ago 🙄🙄).

I don't see how NC working for SM could be considered a conflict of interest. NC is clearly not an impartial party in this case. If it transpired that the judge or panel members were on the board of SM then, yes, that would be a conflict. Wonder if they've ever done any stonewall training?

No, she is not! Her husband is the ancestor of Victorian PM Lord John Russell AND Bertrand Russell… I had no idea! It explains a lot - the ‘most marginalised’ always had the ear of the most powerful, didn’t they? Hence their ability to rewrite biological and legal fact.

Good morning and Happy Sunday.

I thought I would share this with all of you, just for the giggle.

Thank you @nauticant and I hope you had a good night's sleep.

www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/barrister-gallops-through-london-celebrate-becoming-kc

Does anyone have a link to the article about JR and her husband please?

Ah, found it! As you were

Trying to catch up with you night owls.

I don’t have a Times sub, but I imagine that there will be quite a few raised eyebrows at breakfast this morning. So many damning articles.

I suppose that NC/Judge can’t ask too many witnesses “Have you actually seen the changing facilities we are talking about”, but for IB to have not bothered to look at what facilities were on offer is crazy!

Morning. 4 pages after my bedtime. You dirty stop ups!

Sorry, this may have already been said- but in the Times article about JKR's comments it has a bit where Findlay says the entire NHS Fife board ought to resign based on gross incompetence. A spokesperson for Fife said that as the tribunal is ongoing it would be inappropriate for them to comment.

Then WTF was their Friday statement about? Honestly they are so incompetent they are laughable.

(Also- placemarking).

It would be inappropriate for us to comment. So here's a 1,400 word comment we made earlier 😁

For the person who asked whether Scottish judges had been trained by Stonewall - according to AI it was probably Gendered Intelligence. "In Scotland, judges have received training on transgender awareness, with sessions often delivered by organizations specializing in the topic like Gendered Intelligence. These training sessions aim to educate judges on the issues faced by transgender individuals and ensure they are equipped to handle cases involving transgender people with sensitivity and understanding. The training often involves presentations and interactive exercises to foster open dialogue and address questions. "

Questions about judges training wont be answered.

Someone made reference to this in a previous thread and I just assumed it was some kind of joke, not a real thing that actually happened. That is ridiculous, honestly people really do have a way of showing themselves up for who they are, don't they?

As for JR's ancestors by marriage; Bertrand Russell must be looking down from heaven in deep disappointment (that's a philosophy joke for you).

Years ago I instructed another barrister in JR’s set and for a short period had JR on the other side.

My barrister would often describe JR as “barmy”, “cuckoo” and “away with the fairies” and suggested that that was a commonly held view in chambers.

Many pp pointed out here in Part 1 that JR was likely to have a conflict of interest at some point if her clients’ needs diverged. The Times article says she shouldn’t act for both if she’d give them separate advice.

It’s now looks to me that - to prevent complete & utter reputational meltdown - NHS Fife should stop calling witnesses. Their press release says they have to continue with the Tribunal - but they could do that AND stop shooting themselves in the foot?! Their own witnesses are only making things worse for them as with every new person another gaff seems to be revealed… can they really bear any more? At some point they’ve got to start damage limitation don’t they?

Don’t get me wrong I’m finding this whole thing amazing to witness but arent there any grown ups there?!?

Of course that’s not in DU’s interest at all is it? DU needs to pivot away from SP as persecutor to NHS Fife as bad employer to salvage his situation.

This puts JR in a very tricky situation. As the Times say - Shouldn’t she be advising Fife & DU that it’s no longer in their interests to combine their defence?

Based on her statements this week about the “narrow definition” of the SC ruling, JR seems to think there’s a line she can argue there that it wasn’t about toilets. BUT imo (and IANAL) isn’t the SC ruling the clear point where we might say that the advice to her two clients might have diverged?

If JR didn’t highlight that to them and thought only of the argument against the SC Ruling, then isn’t she potentially in a very tricky spot? If they were all business-like why didn’t they split the defence after 16th April?

I had the impression during the first run that the judges were studiously being impartial, but with a slight edge of sympathy towards ‘poor Dr Upton’. As the process has unfolded, I’m sensing a shift in attitude- like a babysitter after a long evening of persuading the dc to stay in bed, knowing you aren’t allowed to get sharp but feeling your patience wearing thin at the delightful nonsense your charges are using to delay ‘lights out’.

Bing's version

Does JR have an involved junior, and if so could they split at that point? Or would knowing the previous discussion and case strategy effectively be prejudicial?

Personally I hope that Fife does not stop calling witnesses. I dearly wish to see NC take Kate Searle through those e-mails.

Now we know why they're so committed to protecting nuts.

Squirrels are usually smart though.

can someone confirm yes or no, if KS and VV will be witnesses? Those are the two I'd like to see.