NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #46

[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 had been intended to be 28 July with 2 days of submissions from counsel meaning that the hearing was to have ended on 30 July. However, it became apparent as the hearing progressed that this schedule wouldn't be followed. (Considerable understatement.)

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 #40 can be found in this thread: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379717-sandie-peggie-list-of-threads-covering-employment-tribunal-and-afterwards

Thread 41: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379334-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-41 24 July 2025 to 25 July 2025
Thread 42: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379820-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-42 25 July 2025 to 25 July 2025
Thread 43: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379979-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-43 25 July 2025 to 27 July 2025
Thread 44: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5380196-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-44 25 July 2025 to 28 July 2025
Thread 45: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5381518-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-45 28 July 2025 to 28 July 2025

They were from 2022.

I guess what else can they say?

I strongly recommend reading One Hand Tied Behind Us by Jill Norris and Jill Liddington, an excellent account of working-class women's involvement in the suffrage movement.

NC is going at quite a pace this morning.

Regarding yesterday's evidence and the racism angle, I do hope S wins her case, but I fear it will be a pyrrhic victory in some ways. She may no longer be seen as the icon of GC and womens' rights to FO changing rooms. I think the media (captured) will see to that.

Now onto the missing email. the RE email

Seriously??

The minimising of comments as racist as - uk has plenty of spare p* - is next level.

My principle for anything written is 'how would I feel if mum saw this?'.

(no longer here to see it, but the rule soldiers on)

I had exactly the same problem when I was using Safari on my MacBook. I switched to Chrome & it works fine. I can't get it to work on my iPhone at all whether I use Safari or Chrome.

I'm sure it's been said 1000 times but I'm still astounded when one of Fifes witnesses say they can't tell DU is male. Saying they think of him as female is one thing and they are entitled to think that, but outright lying about something that is patently obviously to everyone is just ridiculous and just makes them look not a credible witness imo.

MC Wld have imagined convos wld happen and ppl come 4wd as a group if they were unhappy. Am only aware of 1 who raised concerns. Wld have had opp to discuss concerns beforehand in our flat heirachy

NC [new doc] this email "Catch Up"..asking u to agree, Has Re: here. Once a repl you get a colon. Do u agree? [that's a : colon, not a bit of your innards!]
MC Yes
NC [p1253] Email of ?12 Jan to KS, ED the Ixer, LC, LH and DU's LM
MC Can I say ED had been removed as Ixer
NC Who told you
MC Esther
NC Did u know Ix til end Jan
MC Not aware. Not part of process

Sullen tone, similar to my teenager when called out.

Thank you, I shall add it to my reading list. My grandmother was a working class women however had class and dignity. A proper Northern no nonsense women.

NC Yr v busy in the chain. Putting limits to info sharing beyond the group, updating re mygs w ED and DU, condemnation of the C, praising DU for coming 4wd for benefit of all. Preventing foot in mouth syndrome. Being busy Yes Setting up a working gp
MC Doing what it says
NC Y're clear about what side u want the board to take
MC Not my intention
NC Yr important in the dept
MC Not really. Flat heirachy so no more imp than my colleagues
NC Any replies to email
MC I dont think so
NC You hesitated. Bearing in mind may be more email searches for

These sessions are live and also recorded.
I have found them incredibly helpful to understand the details and logic.
Yesterday was an epic 3 hour session and explained why NC and CE are such gifted cross examiners. Without that insight I would not have known.
I think £5 is a bargain to access this knowledge so soon on the same day.
There is a real appetite for accessing justice, without the filter of poor journalism. Over 700 on the call last night.
Go Michael!

Ooh, NC signalling that there is other ‘chats’ somewhere and is nailing Curra to the mast in a lie.

NC still on emails.

I'm convinced she has had sight of something that isn't in the bundle.

NC You hesitated. Bearing in mind may be more email searches for more legal action how confident are u?
MC I didnt find a reply
NC Potentially 3 possibilities: set up an informal WG but were ignored, You set up a busy email group successfully w some traffic on it not produced, or thirdly someone said this email cld be FiM syndrome so lets take offline
MC I disagree w yr framing. I set it up. No-one replied and the end of it
NC Are u confident that not a quantity of chat somewhere else eg WhatsApp
MC I dont use FB. No Teams or WA chat on this
NC This email chain - has no Re: LH, LC, ED and ? on p279

@Boiledbeetle I think she knows there is more but hasn't seen it. If she had she would have produced it by now.

So frustrating that they're again wasting time arguing about whether something is a reply to something else based on its subject line, recipients, whether it includes another mail or not!

It’s been admitted that at some point in his induction DU was asked about his ‘happiness’ to use the female changing rooms. Unless they ask every female clinician this, then it’s obvious they know what sex he is.

NC Look at email 12.01.24 at 9.47 at bottom of page has the same recipients? But for addition of DU?
MC It does but arrangement of recipients is different
NC Is typical. Sometimes u remove names within header
MC No. I dont routinely do this. I normally hit reply all
NC Says Re: but subject line the same in the FiM email
MC Yes, it does but it doesnt incl FiM email as part of the trail
NC We have a mystery. That 12.01 email which then goes to emails betwn ED and DU. It looks like a reply but dont see what a reply to
MC Nothing there

@tribunalObserver It's because whatever is missing was damning enough to remove from all the productions from the fife employees.

Also a good article: Race, Class and the Demographics of the British Suffrage Movement

yes, but the disclosure included - or perhaps more likely, should have included - the email headers that would make it unequivocal what's a reply to what and whether something is missing. It's not rocket science.