‘We are all Sandy Peggie’ banners, a press scrum and an unprecedented case
Supporters of nurse gather outside hearing as dozens of reporters follow proceedings online
It is one of around 40,000 employment tribunals dealt with each year by the HM Court & Tribunals Service, but few, if any, have generated such interest and debate.
Even before the tribunal brought by Sandie Peggie resumed taking evidence yesterday after a five-month break, the level of scrutiny and attention was clear to see.
Outside the offices in Dundee’s Greenmarket, a large contingent of press photographers and broadcasters were in attendance alongside supporters of Ms Peggie holding banners. ‘We are all Sandy Peggie’, read one.
READ MORE: Sandie Peggie cleared of misconduct charge
Such was the level of demand for access to the hearing’s live stream, interested parties were asked to log on a half hour before it began, with numerous tests to ensure everyone could hear, and see, the proceedings.
When the hearing eventually started, the online lobbies were full, comprising not just a small army of journalists from the Scottish and UK media, but numerous members of gender critical campaign groups and prominent commentators on such issues.
The day’s proceedings were largely overshadowed by the events of the previous evening, when it emerged that Ms Peggie had been cleared of four gross misconduct allegations by NHS Fife, but the evidence that was heard on Wednesday remained significant.
Over the course of around five hours, there was intense scrutiny of the health board’s policies - or lack of them - and the decisions that were taken in allowing Dr Beth Upton, a trans woman, to use female facilities.
Only one person - Isla Bumba, lead officer for equality and human rights at NHS Fife - gave evidence, but plenty of details emerged to generate discussion in the case, especially when Ms Bumba was questioned by Ms Peggie’s lawyer, Naomi Cunningham.
Ms Bumba explained that the advice she gave at the time was that not letting a trans person use the space that aligned with their gender “could be deemed discriminatory,” and over the course of numerous questions and answers, she and Ms Cunningham addressed at length the kind of issues that have been major talking points before and since April’s landmark Supreme Court gender ruling.
Ms Cunningham asked her about the definition of ‘trans’, and suggested that Dr Upton was a man who wants to be seen and treated as a woman, to which Ms Bumba replied: “I think that’s your definition, I would say that Beth is a trans woman.”
Elsewhere, Ms Bumba said that she would “reach out to HR” when presented with the hypothetical scenario of being approached by a woman and a trans person complaining about who is able to use changing facilities. Ms Cunningham, however, accused her of “ducking” the question.
There was also ambiguity when Ms Bumba was asked if a “third space” could have been provided for trans members of staff to get changed. She said that was a “complicated question” and that she was not sure she could comment.
Towards the end of the day, the hearing witnessed a tense moment when Ms Cunningham referenced an email exchange between her and Dr Upton’s line manager, Dr Kate Searle, and claimed there was a plan to “appropriately” punish Ms Peggie. Ms Bumba dismissed the suggestion as “quite a jump” and described it as inaccurate. It was a flashpoint in a high profile case spanning emotive issues, and it will surely not be the last.
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.