NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #39

[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: 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
Thread 38: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5378463-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-38

JR is disputing that the Supreme Court judgement applies here. The judge is not agreeing with her, he is saying that Fife dont accept it. He has to allow JR to make her case in submissions. He should then dismiss it but he has to allow the case to be made.

Don’t worry NC will add it to the bill 😂

Yes. NC and team have paid to have their own stenographers (who (used to?) use fancy machines so their reports are almost verbatim)

The Feb hearing. The current hearing they are both getting transcripts daily is what I heard.

The Feb session. Transcribed from the audio.

Is anyone else kicked out of Nitter? it tells me it is in maintenance mode - I dont use X so its been my way of following.

First one I assume.

I wonder if they will release the transcripts to the public once the judgement is in? Does anyone know if that could happen?

try this one https://lightbrd.com/tribunaltweets

Me too. I don't use X either. I have refreshed and reloaded but still getting maintenance mode.

I think Re: in email subject lines does mean regarding/pertaining to. It's regarding the subject of the original email.

So JR isn’t applying it to this situation but NC is and the judge is considering both sides? I want the supreme courts ruling to put the fear of god into JR 😡

No I'm still getting TT on Nitter.

Thank you - but that stops at the 10 minute break to deal with the Bryson arguments

I was thinking about something related to this earlier. Most stenographers these days are freelance. So they are booked in advance for a set period of time. And then, if a case runs over, well, places to go, people to see.

And there are very few of them left in the UK. And they charge £££.

There's a .gif, under 'don't engage'.

NC: "It's ours, we paid for it...." "No obligation to share"

Yes, but she threw herself under a bus on 29/12/2023 with her email to the ED consultants. She just loved (in a motherly way) poor Beth a little too much.

She (Rihanna/Rahana not sure of sp.) was named as being present during the first part of these tribunal hearings. KS seems to have been unaware that her name was already known/in the public domain. KS's emotional reaction is the only thing that has confirmed that Rhianna/Rahana is the same person who, allegedly according to KS, claimed not to want to be involved because she feared racist repercussions.

I laughed when JE said she didn't know there was a transcript and the judge said 'we've talked about this' I have an imagine in my head of him shaking his head in an 'I'm not angry just disappointed' sort of way

But tbf NC is asking questions based on it, as the judge pointed out.

From TT

NC - about that, said I communicated was not willing work and KS would ...
JR - wasn't aware there was a transcript
J - we've talked about this
JR - not shared with both sides
NC - will share
JR - i need it now
NC - requested and paid for by us, no obligation

KS would what??? KS would what???....😬😬😬

If the judge decides that the SC judgement does not mean what it says, or that it does not apply to female changing rooms, that would be easy grounds for appeal.

I remember mention of a healthcare assistant (she had no concerns) but didn't know she had been named.

How many 'In hindsight' is KS going to insert in her answers? It's pathetic and obviously only being said as she's been caught red handed!

See how they are turning on each other now. Let the hunger games begin.

Am I the only one who read fifers part aloud. Trying to sound Scots but coming out jordie!