NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #19

[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 continue for 2 weeks. However, after 2 weeks it was not complete and it adjourned part-heard. It seems that it will resume on 16 July and the last day of evidence will be 28 July but it wasn't completely clear whether it might end a day or two later.

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] headed Public Access Request (Peggie v Fife Health Board) 4104864/2024 and requesting access.

However, as a result of problems with the livestreaming, apparently caused by a very large number of observers, remote public access to the hearing was suspended on Tuesday 11 February. It was suggested that it might be reinstated at some point but don't count on it.

The hearing is being live tweeted by https://x.com/tribunaltweets and there's additional information here: https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr. 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.is/xkSxy.

An alternative to Twitter is to use Nitter: https://nitter.poast.org/tribunaltweets

Thread 1: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5186317-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse
Thread 2: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5267591-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-thread-2
Thread 3: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5268347-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-3
Thread 4: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5268942-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-4
Thread 5: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5269149-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-5
Thread 6: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5269635-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-6
Thread 7: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5270365-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-7
Thread 8: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271511-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-8
Thread 9: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271596-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-9
Thread 10: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271723-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-10
Thread 11: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272046-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-11
Thread 12: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272276-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-12
Thread 13: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272398-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-13
Thread 14: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272939-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-14
Thread 15: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5273119-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-15
Thread 16: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5273636-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-16
Thread 17: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5273827-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-17
Thread 18: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5274332-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-18

I would be very surprised if they haven't already been warned that speaking to anyone about this issue could be a disciplinary offence. They will have received trust comms to ensure that any approach or query goes through to the pr team and that they shouldn't respond to any direct requests for opinions or statements.

DEI is important! Unfortunately lots of people in them seem to care very little about the inclusion and human rights of women, disabled people, minority ethnic people, people of faith, and so on, and instead focus on pronoun policing and changing the labels on loos.

I would also be contacting the finance department. Tribunals are expensive.

I'm wondering about what happens after this case? If Sandie wins, do we think she will go back to her job?

How could she go back and work with the people who threw her under the bus...

Completely agree, @IDasIX. One of the terrible consequences of this bloody gender takeover is that it's undermined DEI as a concept, despite it being the reason why many of us (women, disabled, gay, ethic minorities) have been able to push back against discrimination at all.

She is going to win the case because they didn't handle the disciplinary process correctly

I foresee an outcome whereby a 'win' for SP will be spun by TRAs as 'not a loss' for 'trans rights' . I can imagine them saying it was won on a technicality and that the principles of the Board's actions were valid, they just didn't follow the right technical steps.

Following Maya Forstater's win, they were saying that the judge made it clear that it was unacceptable to misgender someone in the workplace regardless of their beliefs being WORIADS.

... As another aside I note the Genuine Occupational Requirements section below - I may be misunderstanding it, but it suggests that where a person is employed in a post requiring a particular sex, if that person transitions then they will be redeployed elsewhere. I suppose, within healthcare, there aren't many jobs that specifically require a man, I certainly can't think of one. But where the requirement is specifically for a woman, eg female radiographer for mammography service, they will be redeployed if they transition to man.
I'm guessing these cases are vanishingly rare so I doubt it has been put to the test, but it's certainly an interesting policy rule.

"6.2.1 Genuine Occupational Requirements
In the vast majority of cases, the gender of a worker is of no relevance to their ability to do a
particular job. However, the Equality Act 2010 does allow for an exception where being of a
particular sex is an “occupational requirement” of that post. If this is the case for an employee
transitioning at work, they will be redeployed into a suitable position.

[from post by @FannyCann earlier today]

======================================================

It does seem odd because they are conflating gender and sex.

If there is an "occupational requirement" for someone to be a particular sex, then their transition to a different gender shouldn't require their redeployment.

If it were true then the corollary of that argument would be that a transwoman would become eligible for the role of female radiographer with an occupational requirement to be of a particular sex - ie female

That makes no sense to me - or any other sensible person

I know; in real life do understand that too and, sadly, that’s the whole point of the case.

But maybe in the Disney version, after it’s all over 😊

looking at what Sandie is claiming, I'm not sure if she will win on all points. The sexual harrassment one is the one I'm unsure of but the victimisation one is very clear.

DEI is important! Unfortunately lots of people in them seem to care very little about the inclusion and human rights of women, disabled people, minority ethnic people, people of faith, and so on, and instead focus on pronoun policing and changing the labels on loos.

DEI is important, but many organisation's initiatives and policy have been wrecked by an obsession with the primacy of identity and critical theory at the expense of preventing actual discrimination and intolerance.

If she wins because of the poor handing of her suspension etc. But loses on the other matters, can she appeal part of the judges decision or if you appeal does the whole claim have to be reassessed?

Thanks for this comment - en masse or as a group of like-minded individuals if this were to be the case they should contact NC privately and express their concerns. They have protection in law. Both Upton and ED have relied upon the claim that no other female had a problem using the changing rooms to do so. Another potential swerve to the case when some other female nurses say that they too were not comfortable with him in the CR.

Just saw this on Twitter and was struck by how different reporting looks when it's sympathetic to women's rights rather than the trans agenda. This report from GB News centres Sandie's fight, and all the support she has from family and other women. It's rather lovely:

x.com/WatchdogTh96012/status/1890733717263380871

I agree. I saw this come up several times on other threads.

Yes - but I think there will also be a call for clarification of how the rules should be interpreted if for no other reason that so much time and money is being spent on tribunals.

You can't claim the status quo is working if the law is being understood and implemented in diametrically opposing ways.

The government will have to choose who is more scary - Nadia Whittome or voters seeing NHS money being thrown down the drain.

You can appeal the Judgment in whole or in part.

It's terrifying to think of the ramifications of this case if Sandie loses.

It's effectively saying that there are no single sex spaces for women, and that women are not entitled to same sex intimate care even when they ask for it, because the person treating them is allowed to lie under the law.

It's terrifying.

And there are people championing this shite. OTHER WOMEN!

What happened to the world that people started hating women so much?

Seconded Omg Jo March <fangirls>

This is my experience too. Until a couple of years ago I worked for a huge international company based in the UK.

The DEI training was 99% focused on identities. I have a disability, and there was nothing in it about supporting people like me in the work place or about sex based discrimination etc. This was despite the fact that someone had written sexist language in a changing room

The DEI group at the company was exactly the same. Their dedicated page on the company intranet was only about the LGBT community, but of course even with that they seem to have forgotten that lesbians exists. They just don't care about anything that doesn't directly affect men

Is it possible for SP to lose on the specifics of the claim - that she suffered sexual harassment, harassment related to a protected belief, indirect discrimination and victimisation - without reference to whether NHS Fife should have provided single sex changing facilities?

Can the two questions be separated?

Re: IB, I do agree that there shouldn’t be a pile-on, especially before she has given her evidence.

But this doesn’t seem to be a case of a woman taking the fall for a man’s actions. She applied for that job on purpose and is being paid a good salary. The public sector in Scotland is rife with under-30s who feel entitled to relatively senior positions they aren’t actually qualified and experienced for.

Finally got my Mumsnet login sorted and waited my 24hrs in the isolation tank because I need to delurk and say thank you, SO MUCH for this space, and these threads. Particular thanks to @nauticant and @ickky for keeping this behemoth afloat. Oh and Tribunal Tweets - such an important service you guys provide. I know there was a tiny push for the tweets to be re-posted here in a separate thread, but for me I needed the commentary, the shared WTAFs, the speculation on who should play whom in the movie version of all this. It helped anchor the tribunal in reality, and I think that’s vital - this is not something remote, happening to other people. It’s here and it’s happening to us.

I peaked some time ago, courtesy of an ROGD child (who, fingers, toes, eyes, tits and everything else crossed, is now safely out the other side, though I do live in eternal fear). I researched and researched and came across Hannah Barnes and Helen Joyce, and somewhere along the way I read (heard?) an interview with someone (I feel like it was Graham Linehan) who was asked why the UK was so terfy, and he said “Mumsnet”. And it’s true - you are the loveliest, viperiest, rights hoarding dinosaurs anywhere on the interwebs. I am endlessly impressed by the cogent arguments, the informed commentary, and the real thoughtfulness of everyone on here - by which I mean the sort of thoughtfulness that takes on board all information and is prepared to change course in the face of new facts. Truly, this is a magical place and I have found such comfort here when I was really low and angry and in despair.

But I may lose you all when I say: the Caramel Wafer is the superior Tunnock’s confectionery, and I will brook no discussion on this matter.

So, I've been thinking about this case compared to the one that the Darlington nurses are bringing. NHS Fife (and their lawyer) seem to have made a big deal about the fact that SP was the only one to officially complain (and seemed oblivious to the fact that they have fostered a culture which makes complaining about this issue difficult).

But with the Darlington nurses, I think there are six of them going to tribunal? But many more complained to HR, so it seems even more difficult for the Trust to defend their stance. The crux of the issue is the same - a man being supported to use the female changing rooms, but I think there have also been complaints of inappropriate behaviour from the man in the Darlington case (walking around in his boxers, hanging around their lockers asking when they were going to get changed etc)

Given that a significant proportion of the population seem appalled at NHS using public money to defend their case, is the Darlington Trust really going to want to have all this aired in public? I suspect Wes Streeting can see exactly how this is going to go down, which is why he has been supportive of the nurses.

Yes very true. And legal while we’re at it!

As I understand it for sexual harassment, sexual discrimination etc there has to be a comparitor which is would someone of the opposite sex have been harassed/discriminated against in the same way.

So.......would a man have been sexually harassed if DU had been changing in front of him. The answer is no. Because DU and the man are the same sex and so the man wouldn't be bothered about sharing a CR with him.

However, ianal !!