NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #38

[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
Thread 33: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5376608-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-33
Thread 34: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5377387-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-34
Thread 35: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5377598-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-35
Thread 36 mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5378031-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-36
Thread 37: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5378200-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-37

Probably short staffed for 'sexing doctors'

My DH has started reading the threads himself and points out absurdities as he reads. He's always been peaked though, which is nice.

Same here. He keeps looking a bit blank and saying "well the legal process is working" and I have to explain further fighting is still needed if unions won't represent you when you fight for your legal rights, lower courts literally get the law wrong, public bodies (and private ones for that matter) conspire to defy the law and everyone just refuses to uphold it and doesn't give a shit who knows it.

It won't really start to work until there's a proper legal and financial AND social penalty for not upholding the law. People do still run red lights and drive on the hard shoulder but the more they do it the more likely they are to get a penalty, plus nobody thinks they're stunning and brave for doing it.

I’m pretty sure replies would then show Re:Re:
Forwarded emails would show Fw:Re:
It would be evident what happened.

10k + staff. 84% female

According to Isla Bumba (not the other one) less than 5 that have identified as trans.

Interesting - what particularly piqued his interest over the last few days?

Im always intrigued by the details that make someone suddenly think - “say what?” and then enter a new paradigm.

Particularly if it’s a left leaning male who seem to have difficulty computing this problem

Why?

I still cant believe she said doctors are trustworthy and have integrity.. in the middle of this case 😂🤦‍♀️

The fawning around DU is ridiculous. When I was a lowly staff midwife I was shouted at by my manager, in front of colleagues, at work, for daring to go off sick after having a miscarriage at 13 weeks. I doubt things are much better for ordinary female nurses these days, given the recent persecution of Nurse Peggie. The glaring double standards are a disgrace.

Been out and about since Friday and finally caught up ( well not fully caught up as I have had to miss out an entire thread from the weekend).

I don’t think KS has helped the Rs case. Yet again, more evidence of any attempt to balance the rights of the people involved. It would appear that no only are trans rights human rights but trans rights are the only rights that matter. Not only has SP got the right to hold GC beliefs but even more relevant she has rights to female SSS.

Im curious about NHS Fife IT bloke. Will he be giving evidence about the very sincere efforts 🙄 if NHS Fife to comply with the disclosure requirements? Or will he throw colleagues under the bus?

'Rose' the trans IDing male in the Darlington nurses case also offered to give the nurses who didn't want to get undressed in front of him training on gender ideology, the managers wanted them to agree to that to help them learn their place.

Well you must know what to do with a courgette, particularly given all this talk of henopausal double yolkers ... 'for goodness sake, you've a courgette fritatta': Eggs make a meal out of anything

'Re:' is ambiguous bcos the mail clients prefix Reply Subject lines with it, (which led to a confused negociation between NC & KS yesterday).

I'd suggest 'Re -' or 'About' , 'Regarding' instead

I cannot wait for NC to ask the IT Security witness about KS's "I don't think you can prove that the emails are linked" 😁

It's going to be like the festive weeks where Christmas Day falls on a weekend, so the bank holidays follow straight after, and everyone loses track of what day it is. But with much better entertainment than usual on screen!

Agree the fawning is ridiculous - I think it also shows it up as posturing.

Horrible managers being totally unreasonable and refusing bereavement leave etc notwithstanding, most people's experience of needing allowances for personal trauma/grief/medical issues at work is that these are managed as discreetly as possible to protect the privacy of the individual involved. Not relaying all the details to 20 senior staff and sharing widely across the whole department!

Lifton (8 criteria for thought reform) and Cialdini (social psychologist and several books about influence and persuasion) plus Festinger (When prophecy fails) would say that KS will display the demeanour of a true believer unless advised otherwise.

The only way a witness would not be called is if both advocates agree that their statements as submitted to the court do not require cross or re examination.
IANAL though and my experience is mainly criminal and family so will stand to be corrected

There needs to be a MN appalled face reaction button for that story, but in the absence of one, I’ll just say 😱😱😱😱

Hasn't this thread gone on long enough?
It comes up every day now

she was badly rattled, caught out on about 3 serious issues (non disclosure, witness collusion, possibility of perjury), so came out with an awkward defensive phrase which will hang over her and the other conspirators

Ah ladies welcome to room 101 where today's reprogramming training will take place. Just pop your pronouns on an ID badge and we will get started.

The tribunal continues so therefore the thread will continue.

Any organisation wants new recruits to fit in to the existing team. The BBC therefore tends to recruit people with a similar world view. Whilst not everyone at the BBC will share this world view, it means the BBC's outlook is generally Guardian-reading, liberal, slightly left of centre. In many areas of their output that doesn't matter, but it does mean that much of their political and current affairs coverage approaches being impartial and unbiassed from that starting point. I suspect they genuinely believe that their coverage of this case is impartial, although it clearly is not. I doubt it will change until someone gets right through the BBC's complaints process and takes it to Ofcom.

So terribly inconvenient of one woman to object to Upton’s presence in the female changing room? They won’t want to spend any money or time on providing alternative provision. Why can’t she just STFU and allow the Trust to virtue signal through lanyards etc…writing a trans policy was even too much effort for them.

Because the case it is about is still on going. Not interested? scroll on by.