NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #41

[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: 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
Thread 39: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5378747-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-39
Thread 40: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5378996-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-40

I think IT GUY's amorphic field is creating tech problems as now we can't hear anything properly.

Impossible to tell, but I suspect that they will issue a grumpy statement suggesting that they think they would win on appeal but they aren't going to bother. I expect their witnesses who got them into this mess will continue to believe that they are right and that the horrible, corrupt, bigoted tribunal got it wrong. Hopefully they will comply with the law on single sex changing rooms in future, but I doubt much else will change. Compare with Post Office, where we know that many of those involved in the scandal are still there and getting promotions, and there are still many in Post Office who genuinely believe the subpostmasters are thieves who got lucky.

It sounds like Borthwick is going to be challenging Donaldson's evidence.

I would love to know this, and I think it might sharpen minds if it were the case.

The sound is appalling.

PD - theres a genuine belief they were earlier but can't show how
JR - why is the may edit date earlier than creation date in oct?
PD - unable to explain

Will PD be able/prepared to swear that no changes have been made to the notes or the dates they purport to have been made?

Will calls to the BMA show up??

From TT

PD - record, every edit
JR - earliest date sc3
PD - Oct date, 26 Oct 23
JR - there are 4 columns, left hand last entry 3:10am download. Criticism by JB, 3669, says despite title date wasn't actually created till Oct 2023
PD - consternation on call, agree how google presents
PD - on face of it earliest is Oct date. our supplementary notes have same problem DU said sync'd at same time
JR - JB been definitive about it, your confidence in creation date?
PD - accept what I've seen, how google presents. Definitive? Not convinced DU isnt right, don't have an explanation. Time stamp is right, don't have a tech answer.
JR - you mention other notes date stamped 26th Oct, takes to one called terrain shopping list, version hist also has 26th Oct 23 and to R says may2nd 23, whats the may date

Fifer : is that a Warhammer shoppin list? A yased tae love the Warhammer. Michty sair dear noo likes. Five poond a wee placcy mannie, ye believe it?

PD - DU said convinced made earlier
JR - whats may date
PD - edited date ??
PD - we couldn't no explanation for inaccuracy, couple of notes with same issue. accepted definitive date Oct, but others had earlier dates too - don't know tech issue, haven't been able to replicate

Fifer : it's gey clear that NC will be comin back tae this.

PD - theres a genuine belief they were earlier but can't show how
JR - why is the may edit date earlier than creation date in oct?

Fifer : if we kin sow doobt on the dates, then any notes wi a suspiciously late edit or creation date will be waved aff like yer Auntie Bessie gettin on the bus back tae Leven.

PD - unable to explain
JR - JB says version hist is incomplete, to your report 1670 comment on that, fig 9 what makes it not incomplete, full clip

PD - i think i know what they are saying, think he's saying we haven't produced all 4 versions of that.
JR - look at bottom rh corner word
PD - dismiss
JR - explain if that word is in your report
PD - ah was cut off, put no relevance
JR - anything else missing
PD - not that i no

There are no insurers. There is a fund that most (all?) of the health boards in Scotland pay into that covers things like this.

I was reading the judgement on Kenny MacBride's leave to appeal and from the quotes from his ET judgement it would seem that the judges thought him being sacked within two days for sending an email asking someone to explain what they meant by 'harm' when he was enquiring about a local SEEN network on yammer (they had commented that they mere suggestion of this amounted to harm in their reply comment) that we can't have any confidence that an appreciation of due process matters to some of these folk. Luckily it goes to EAT on appeal where I hope there will be a different approach but it suggests to me the panel might well be willing to overlook lots of issues in certain circs.

However, I think if they did that in this case there would be a HUGE public outcry that a sensible J would want to avoid.

I watched both Karen Reed trials and the phone and car data bits were mind blowingly complicated.

Paul Keeley, the senior leader much criticised in the Porton Down case has been significantly promoted since the judgement.

I'm not convinced this is going to go anywhere. The time stamps seem to be inconclusive and there's a difference of opinion between the experts. It might make a different if Borwick can come across and authoritative and much more informed about the subject matter.

No, I don't agree it's fair. People's trivial behaviour is spied on and collected and bad motives are imputed to it.

Letting a door slam in your face is either an accident or it's an act of deliberate physical aggression. Either way, it's not a "micro"aggression. Doing it multiple times just suggests it was not an accident but deliberate aggression.

Walking out of a changing room (or a lift, as per the video) is not an aggressive act. No matter how many times you do it or how much you obviously despise the person you're walking away from. Cutting someone dead is an ultimate insult but it's not an act of aggression.

"Microaggressions" are a terrible idea in the workplace. They don't even have to be deliberate. The implication is that just did them because you're naturally and unconsciously racist or homophobic or transphobic and it's on you to prove you weren't. Don't go there.

yes -
PD - i think i know what they are saying, think he's saying we haven't produced all 4 versions of that

I'd hazard a a guess that they will. The board are already fighting for their jobs and an appeal may allow them to hold onto their jobs a little longer but as people including snp MSPs are already figuratively baying for blood and having received the black spot (swinneys complete confidence) i very much doubt that anything can save the board, and their replacements won't want to touch this with a barge pole so its unlikely to get passed considering options.

JR leading again

The mics are not working properly

His other GMC registration says Theodore Benedict Onni UPTON

It's interesting that he is posh enough to have three first names with an obscure Finnish 3rd name. Perhaps this is a family tradition.

PD - but edited earlier, all of the notes edited before created, DU didn't lead us up the garden path, included to show similar notes unrelated but have predated time we can't explai

Is judge bristling - 'we'll be the judge of that, my good man!'😁

So they are saying it looks like they were produced later than DU said? But they can't be sure?

the black spot (swinneys complete confidence)

😄

Well, why not, Peter?!

thank you for this. makes so much sense. 😊

I hope NC isn't going to ask Peter about Pete 😄

As was said at the beginning, PD is not a IT forensics expert, he's just an IT guy in NHSF who had expertise in other areas, and was dragged in by management (possibly to save money) because he has some past knowledge of forensics.