Thread by @tribunaltweets

We continue live tweeting day 6 of nurse Sandie Peggie v Fife Health Board and Dr Upton, due from 2pm. SP’s claims are of sexual harassment, harassment related to a protected belief, indirect discrimination and victimisation.

The employment judge has given specific directions to witnesses called by the parties to not read our, or any other coverage before giving evidence:

"The Tribunal also grants an order that (i) all those who are to be witnesses in the Final Hearing save for the parties...

...(in practice the claimant and second respondent who are entitled to be present throughout the Final Hearing as parties) shall not to read, watch or listen to any report, of any kind, of any part of the evidence given by any witness in the Final Hearing of this case before...

...they give their own evidence, and that that is communicated to them in writing by the solicitor for the party calling them and (ii) that the witness must disclose to the solicitor for the party calling them if they have inadvertently or otherwise read, watched or listened...

...to any such report, who shall then raise that with the Tribunal, all in the terms set out in the Orders above."

More background information on the case, our earlier coverage and press articles can be found at … If you would like to support our work please consider subscribing to our Substack via the above link.tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fi…

We endeavour to catch as much of what we hear in court as possible but our live tweeting is not a verbatim transcript. We make every effort to report accurately and will correct relevant inadvertent factual errors.

Abbrevs used:
C/SP - Claimant, Sandy Peggie
NC - Naomi Cunningham, C’s barrister
MG - Margaret Gribbons, C’s solicitor
R/Board - first respondent, Fife Health Board
R2/DU - second respondent, Dr B Upton
JR - Jane Russell, KC, barrister for Rs
AW - Adam Watson, solicitor for Rs

J - Employment Judge Alexander Kemp
ET - Employment Tribunal
P1, P2 - additional panel members
CR - changing room
AE - Accident & emergency department
B&H - bullying and harassment
SocMed - social media
SM - Sex Matters
HR - Human Rights
TW - Transwoman
HI - Hate incident

PCP - provision, criteria or practice is a rule/policy/ practice that can put ppl at a disadvantage based on certain characteristics. The term is used in employment law to assess whether an employers actions create different outcomes for employees based on their characteristics.

KS - Kate Searle, DU's supervisor and A&E consultant
ED - Esther Davidson, SP’s line manager
SF - Stuart Fraser, SP’s RCN Rep
AG - Angela Glancy, headed up SP's investigation
IX - investigation
CX or FC - (formal) complaint
DX - disciplinary
FtP - fitness to practice

WR – Workplace (Health, Safety, and Wellbeing) Regulations 1992
GRC – Gender recognition certificate
GI – Gender identity
GNC – Gender non-conforming
SS – Single sex
M – Male/man
F or W – female/woman/women

People are taking their seats in the room.

J and panel have arrived.

J New production arrived, numbers 9.11 and 9.12. NC - anything in response to objection?
NC Can put it again without ref to 1984. Can't recall foundation of obj.
J obj was to demand C has to submit to pretend you a women which you both know to be

NC untrue

DU No because I know I am a woman. Asking for basic level of respect and dignity.

DU Not asking her to submit. It's the pattern. One off incident could be anything

NC [reads DU meeting with KS re his comments on CR incident] That's to a specific incident not a pattern.

DU I described as upsetting, not hostile.

NC Your mtg with supervisor, two months after incident, she agrees it was unpleasant. For you, not good enough for SP to manage

her upset by withdrawal - you said to your supervisor that she was a bigot.

Du I don't schedule mtgs with supervisor. It was unpleasant, based on misinformation or else. I did not tell supervisor SP was a bigot.

NC KS agreed it was unpleasant

DU That was mine. You'd have to ask KS for her opinion..

NC What consensus you reach with supervisor - that SP withdrawal was unpleasant - shows you expect Sp to remain present when you change.

DU I assume someone assuming harmful things about my community to be unpleasant.

DU There was some kind of issue re attitudes to TW not based on reality but other person may well feel that and up to them to pursue it. Didn't escalate. If it makes me feel uncomfortable that's irrelevant in this instance.

NC you reached consensus in mtg that Sp conduct unpleasant.

DU we reached consensus that I found exp unpleasant.

NC What exactly was agreed.
DU that is was unpleasant for me .
NC It's unpleasant for Sp to have dr to discuss with consultant about her behaviour

DU Seniority in hospital isn't as simple as drs and nurses. To do with responsibility not rank. [describes seniority egs]. Colleague goes to supervisor re unpleasant exp. Not wanting to bring formally but want you to know in case it escalates. Dr/consultant thing is irrelevant.

NC Long answer. Unpleasant for SP feeling that two colleagues discussing. It upset you
DU Yes
NC what could SP have done
DU Possibly nothing. Might be prejudice. If a patient sees me and goes over my head to a male doctor to say a woman shouldn't be a doctor.

We are possibly at an impasse.
NC All SP could do is stay in CR and change in your presence.
DU I didn't run to my supervisor. Previous arranged mtg. Not on SP to regulate my emotions. If she is unconfortable she need to leave. She can't control my emotional reaction.

I don't hold her responsible for my feelings.
NC So you would leave.
DU Yes, as I did on other occasion.

NC What about you changing elsewhere, single occupancy.
DU If I had asked management may well have offered.
NC There was conversation with Sp about single space to change

DU Yes, I know about that now
NC So you would have been offered a single space, but not what you wanted - you wanted access for f CR
DU As a women should have access to F CR. And would have needed access to put my stuff in a locker.

NC If you had asked for a locker elsewhere would have been accommodated?
DU Don't know about other lockers spaces. Locker space at a premium. Othering nature of everyone knowing that's my locker elsewhere. Don't know about anything else

NC You wanted specifically access to F CR. Would it be fair to infer the demand is not c safety and privacy but for your colleagues to validate your id.

JR Q was also about availability of lockers
NC repeats qs
DU as you saying I demanded it
J NC perhaps ask q again/rephras

NC - not chiefly about somewhere safe and private but having f colleagues validate your if
DU No. Not fair to say that.
NC no one suggesting all TW predators. But your wish to use F CR seen by F colleagues as breaching boundaries.
JR not other colleagues. Just SP

DU I'm not a man. Says nothing about my respect for women's boundaries. Would have been good to have discuss about how to resolve situation.

JR unfair to roll qs up re boundaries.
J answer been given.
NC now you know your presence in CR is distressing violation by SP.

But you stood your ground.
DU it's right to talk to someone, It they are accusing you of things - rapist ref etc - it's important to respond but I was doing what I was advised was the right thing to do. i was under sustained harassment and did my best to diffuse situation.

NC Do you know how many f AE staff use room?
DU Don't know
NC Assume many f use the locker room. [Discussing numbers.] Could be crowded.
Du Can't assume. Some may not use locker room.
[counts up among staff ] I cannot give you an account of numbers

NC so N number of w use room. But you and the board have been willing to satisfy dignity and privacy - sorry , q before that. Of N women, none can unless in there feeling confident a f only space only used by cis w.

DU No- that's a cis women space. And many of my colleagues agree that I am a woman.
NC assume a subgroup of that number have what you would call gc views, think there's a diff between m and f women

DU Don't recognise the difference between those bodies.

NC Will be some women using the space view you as a man
DU Y any given population will inc some who don't respect or recognise trans is

DU Biological sex is a nebulous term that doesn't really mean anything.

Sex characteristics give a rough binary of sex which doesn't encompass. Would have to explore characteristics - like primary and secondary sex characteristics, endocrine/ reproductive sex. Could enfold societal, cultural sex, chromosomal sex, genital sex.

Not all of those things are concordant with the other, You are talking to someone in medical prof. I am aware of implications of someone's bio makeup. No agreed def of bio sex - it's a nebulous dog whistle.

NC if two people are to make babies together you need

people who produce small/large gametes.

DU. They may need donor, etd. Human repro need sperm and egg cells.

NC two kinds of bodies producing each time

Du Biology is so much more complicated than one person produced large gamete and some produces small

and you mash them tog to make babies. People with hormone treatment of the opposite sex can produce children. Lots of different kinds of bodies.

NC is there a third gamete
DU not to my knowledge.

NC a number of w using that CR may hold the view that you need a large gamete and small gamete person to produce babies.
DU I'm sure there are people who believe those things. Doesn't make them right or allowed to disrespect people who thing otherwise.

NC W who believe can't change sex - you and board have sacrificed them.
DU No. I'm not the board. There is a challenge to work out best way of dealing. I am a woman and can use the CR. If I'm talking to a homophobe they may believe negative things about me and my wife.

DU Privacy of one's id and exp. We would have had to have a conversation of weighing up situation but not my decision

NC wasn't there a better way to deal with the problem

JR unfair. There are 3 t ppl at hosp, so it's 3 agst 1 going that way.
NC Is there another TW using CR

DU Not aware, but don't know.

NC Given the numbers, wasn't there a better solution.

Du Don't know how many t ppl in hospital

NC Moving on. No disputing re first two incidents.

DU Don't know. Haven't seen C evidence.

NC Re Christmas eve. Your email to AG as part of IX. You said had already changed ready to go home and washing hands. [they look at photos] Apart from personal possessions, this is how CR was on Xmas eve.
DU y
NC Handbasins nearest toilet cubicles
DU y

NC between toilets/basins and door there are the lockers.
DU y
NC You say you walked around SP to get your bag after washed your hands.
DU y
NC SP didn't block your path
DU N
NC Then you were nearer the door than she was.
DU y
NC so you were free to leave at any time.

DU Physically free, yes.
NC How tall
DU 6 ft
NC SP is 5ft 6. F, She couldn't intimidate you.
DU I'm a woman.Not just on physical attributes. And able to be intimidated even so. My grandmother was small and intimidating.

NC [reads DU to KS, DU's summary.] You describe conversation. You say SP says she feels intimidated and so do others. I said I'm sorry etc

NC Stands her ground, and so do you.

DU Y, that's part of the conversation

[missed]
DU She could have let go and left. She chose to persist and maintained this conversation. Don't consider this disagreement, consider it harrassment.

NC You confirmed last Thurs that SP manner was calm, correct, almost rehearsed. So 'Beth was approached in

confrontational manner' not correct
DU I did feel it was confrontational if your colleague says not appropriate time or place but you keep going, that feels confrontational and aggressive. Not necessarily to raise voice to be so. But KS's email so need to ask her

DU She appeared angry. I consider line of dispute agressive, inappropriate time and place. I would describe it as confrontational if a patient spoke to me like that.
NC You say SP needs to raise it through channels.

DU I can't control if she feels uncomfortable with a trans person but I need to use CR to get changed.

NC But you were changed, near door, and could have left at any time. You stay put until SP says
DU I left when we had decided what was going to happen next. I was tired,

Christmas Day morning, unpleasant experience, trying to de escalate conversation so I could safely exit conversation. She would do what I consider the correct process - to raise with appropriate channel with senior person.
NC A lot of words for yes

DU I can speak to give you clarity
NC conversation doesn't end until SP capitulates.
JR Can we see a doc where the C says that
NC Trying to summarise
J That could cause problems. Use words in evidence or refer to doc.

DU SP saying she feels intimidated by me. Don't remember embarrassed.
NC She wants you to leave
DU She felt uncomfortable. If she wanted me to leave she could have said so, not talking about my chromosomes etc.

NC The encounter ends at time of your choosing when you have asserted your dominance..
DU Gross mis characterisation . Wanted to ensure I wasn't accused of ignoring her. Ensure we had mutual understanding re our positions. I wouldn't have stopped her leaving.

That would be her decision. Not c dominance but understanding.

NC You are 6 foot and she is 5 6

DU agreed if you say so re her height

NC you are dr she is staff nurse

DU Y but there are various other considerations. Not sure what it's got to do with height.

NC you are middle class, privileged

DU not aware of C social class, not sure relevance

NC You expected her to bend to your will.

DU, no, I wanted for her to stop harassing me.

NC This could be break time.
NC No chance of finishing today
JR Will my witnesses be needed tomorrow am
NC/J/JR will discuss

Court breaks.

@threadreaderapp

@threadreaderapp Pls unroll