NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #22

[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 is planned that it will resume 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] 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
Thread 19: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5274571-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-19
Thread 20: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5275782-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-20
Thread 21: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5276925-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-21

It is shocking and believe me, ordinary Scots are not behind this at all. See the colour of the petition map to repeal the GRA as proof of strong feeling. Scottish signatories have turned the country red!

All the people I've spoken to irl have been shocked and horrified. All of them, bar one friend who works for a captured uni, has a captured partner and no kids. She was the only one who tried to tell me off.

I was speaking to a mum from school the other day whose partner works in a male prison up here and she was singing the praises of Rhona hotchkiss (as in her partner was). So that made me pleased, there are still officers in prison who know the score. She didn't know about Sandie I said oh did you hear about Sandie Peggie's case? She was like, no, what's that? So I showed her a herald article about it and that's another one peaked!

I'm sorry Jazzy. It's very frustrating. I have had same with DD1 - she got a 1st from a top Scottish university. Her degree was 30% statistics but she can't see anything wrong with recording by gender. 
All her friends have swallowed the kool aid dripped into them at that uni.

I'm afraid I lost my rag and said some unkind things but the truth is I put no value at all on that degree and her achievements. It's worthless in my eyes if she can't work this one out. She's doing well in data consultancy and long past listening to her mother so there it is.

I'm much prouder of DD 2 who struggles academically but got a 2.1 in psychology. No post degree job yet, she's back working in her pre-university job as an HCA at the hospital I work in but hopefully she will find a way forward soon.

does the 1992 act actually use the word 'sex' or just 'women' and 'men' cause I wonder if they could just argue DU is a woman so no law broken

That's exactly what they are trying to argue that Dr U is a woman.
This is exactly why the trans movement have tried to push transwomen are women.

The reverse argument is in 1992 transwomen wasn't a thing, the only type of women was a natural born adult female.

The full thing needs blown apart

It clear that NHS Fife expected the tribunal to be private, for no one to pay it much attention, for it to be over in 10 days, for only a few documents to be sufficient evidence, and for the outcome to go their way.
What a fuck up. Who will be thrown under the bus here?

It's interesting that it's the most educated who buy the trans rights argument. I think the concept is so far fetched, and they know this but also think that only the most clever can understand it ie them.

It is like entry to a club. Mothers are excluded because we are not clever enough to understand.

My daughter is 25 and works in a nursery. She has zero time for trans ideology and neither does any of her friends or colleagues. Neither does anyone in our families, apart from my two Scottish nephews, who of course both went to uni.

There is a huge class thing going on imo. Daughter's nursery is in an upmarket area and the kids are all dressed in neutral colours and parents are obsessed with non gendered play etc. She previously worked in a much more deprived area - there it was very clear who was a boy and who was a girl. Lots of pinks and blues. So she has been exposed to the ideas but finds them ridiculous.

Who will be thrown under the bus here?

An adult human female.

They will try to throw IB under the bus. But it won’t wash because she is obviously too junior (despite her salary, which is not in the realms of senior manager or exec compensation), and she was not qualified for the role as described in NHS Fife’s Job Purpose document. So blame will turn next to whoever recruited her, and whoever signed that off.

Ultimately the buck stops with the Board, and they know they carry that responsibility. It’s the reason the Job Purpose document for IB’s role was so narrow, and specific about protecting the Board:

“The post holder will lead on mainstreaming the organisation’s approach to equality and human rights.

The post holder is responsible for ensuring the Board is sighted on the legislative requirements of the Equality and Human Rights agenda and is responsible for leading on the delivery of these agendas.

The post-holder will be a subject matter expert and lead on the interpretation of and compliance with the Equality Act 2010, the Equality Act 2010”

IB has been in role for a couple of years, so plenty of time for HR and the Board to have realised that the necessary bases have not been covered.

NHS Fife Board are toast, IMHO.

@DontTellMeWhat2Do absolutely they thought it would all just go away.

They'll probably go for the EDI person who i forget the name off.
But if they have any real sense, they'll kick the can up the way - we followed guidance from Stonewall who were supported by ScotGov - so really they'd be better to put their hand up "Sorry we got it wrong"

Because the EDI person could also go for Unfair Dismissal they followed guidance from above.

I think NC is trying to ferret out the decision making process and who is actually behind what SP was put through.

They are regulations rather than an Act of Parliament. They they refer to separate facilities for men and women. They don't mention sex. However, my view is that, unless DU is in possession of a GRC (and it appears he isn't), it makes no difference. He is not legally a woman so is not entitled to use the female changing room. It might be different if he got a GRC as he would then be a woman as far as the law is concerned.

Why smart people hold stupid beliefs. It’s an interesting read.

https://www.gurwinder.blog/p/why-smart-people-hold-stupid-beliefs

There is discussion about this on:

So sorry to hear what’s happened with your DD1 Fanny. That wouldn’t have been Edinburgh Uni would it?

I expect all unis are affected, but it does seem that Edinburgh and especially its student union have a strong TRA streak. They had a lot to do with the setting up of the infamous trans friendly Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre, which until recently had a trans woman, Mridul Wadhwa, as its boss, and lost its tribunal with gender critical worker Roz Adams. Many of the ERCC’s non-exec directors (too young and inexperienced) are ex-Edinburgh uni and student union officers.

Edinburgh Uni is one my daughters will be avoiding, along with Leeds Uni perhaps, which is emerging as a similar TRA hothouse.

I am seriously very concerned about the graduates coming out of universities today. I’ve watched clips of students being interviewed about the whole trans/gender/women’s rights. I realise the people who make the videos select the ‘best’ or most controversial bits but oh dear.
One female student said she couldn’t possibly comment on trans in loos/sports etc as she herself hadn’t been through the struggle that trans people do. She felt it wasn’t right for her to express an opinion! So many agreed that if men identify as transwomen that’s fine as that’s what’s ‘inside’ eg ‘I have no problem with that’ With the obligatory amount of ‘like, like, likes’ peppering the speech
Good grief what the …
My offspring are not really radical and would rather not discuss the subject but have said ‘for what it’s worth Mum, we do agree with you’

That's really interesting. I have another daughter, who has a proper learning disability, went to a sen school. She and her friends absolutely don't understand any of it. But it is rammed down their throats at any club or service they attend. Word searches on trans words, colouring in a rainbow flag etc.

The reason highly educated and intelligent young people think “transwomen are women” is that the entire school system, and most especially the entire higher education system, is completely captured and no one will speak up for fear of being cancelled. You would think that top level biologists would be pointing out the reality of sex but they are too worried about losing their research grants and maybe their jobs. It’s only famous retired people like Robert Winston who are able to speak out.
In humanities subjects of course there are extra brownie points for teaching and researching “queer theory” and shoehorning queerness into research topics wherever possible.

@FannyCann
Can I possibly defend your DD?
Given people can change actual sex records, Birth Certs, GMC, Doctors records, Driving licence and Passport.

And they are probably more important than a GCR then sure it means distinguishing the difference between Sex and Gender is verging on completely pointless.

People should never have been allowed to change actual observed at birth sex records.

Isla Bumba. For not having done an impact assessment.... meaning that everyone on the Board can simply pretend confirm that this would have all been fine (and a different outcome) if she had done so, because this "case by case" type of assessment would have drawn out and managed all the issues that could have surfaced in relation to it... blah blah.

Despite being completely unimpressed with what's happened, includeling IB and others' contributions to this mess, I am concerned about Isla Bumba and the duty of care that she is owed by the NHS here.

(Edited... hopefully quick enough... to remove the fact that I accidentally positioned a completely different Isla B in this comment. One with a penchant for pink leggings. D'oh. 😬😂 To be fair, that Isla is partly responsible for the mess we're in.. but has also made a significant contribution to addressing it)

Section 20 of the 1992 Workplace Regulations re sanitary conveniences says 'separate rooms containing conveniences are provided for men and women except where and so far as each convenience is in a separate room the door of which is capable of being secured from inside.'

Section 21 re washing facilities: '(h)separate facilities are provided for men and women, except where and so far as they are provided in a room the door of which is capable of being secured from inside and the facilities in each such room are intended to be used by only one person at a time.
(3) Paragraph (2)(h) shall not apply to facilities which are provided for washing hands, forearms and face only.'

Section 24 re facilities for changing clothing: '(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1), the facilities mentioned in that paragraph shall not be suitable unless they include separate facilities for, or separate use of facilities by, men and women where necessary for reasons of propriety [and the facilities are easily accessible, of sufficient capacity and provided with seating].'

'Man' and 'woman' are only defined in the Equality Act, as 'a male of any age' and 'a female of any age'. The problem being that some lawyers seem to argue that 'female' can be an acquired gender rather than only referring to sex.

Front page of The Herald, today, is the 'news' that NHS Fife did no impact assessment. This is an archived version: https://archive.is/oqbVn

Original, slightly paywalled, article (you can read the comments)
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/24960314.nhs-fife-may-broken-law-skipping-impact-assesment/

It seems to me that the solicitors are quite keen to answer questions, if asked.
It's a strong article.

In other news I see that Sir James Mackey, currently head of Newcastle Hospitals, is going to take over from Amanda Pritchard as interim head of NHS England. (Is Darlington part of that group?)

It will be Isla Bumba thrown under the bus. Dr Upton will be fine. That's what is so fucking frustrating about this entire ideology. Men are the ones who benefit, men are the ones who cause the issues in the first place yet it's the women who get punished, even the ones who buy into it get punished.

Time for that quote again:-

"When society will believe a man who says he's a woman over a woman who says he's not, then this proves that society knows exactly who the men are and exactly who the women are."

All I can hope for is that this wakes Isla up and she realises exactly what is happening here. I get so depressed at the number of young women willing to go along with this ideology. Men are the only winners.

IB is typical of all DEI colleagues across NHS Scotland. They don't understand the basics of the law, and when asked about single sex spaces, they contact organisations with a vested interest in doing anything but ensuring single sex space is protected. Reaching out to, for example, trans groups rather than lawyers who can advise on what the legal position is. The whole system is captured and the timely intervention of Baroness Faulkner is a nuclear reminder that other people have rights in the NHS too. Even the DEI ideologues can't ignore that.

Its 'men' & 'women'. They could only argue DU is a woman if he had a GRC (since one of the appeals in FWS v Scot gov), but from his evidence, he has not been "living as a woman" long enough to be eligible.

'No outstanding effects noted' ie its fully up to date, not revised by anything later
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1992/3004/regulation/24

https://www.nhsfife.org/about-us/equality-and-human-rights/equality-impact-assessment-eqia/
No equality impact assessment for the situation of men who say they are women using the women-only changing facilities.

'Leading to change allyship programme' EQIA section on GR: 'The programme aims to provide the workforce with a
common understanding about what allyship is and how
you can be an active ally to anyone with a protected
characteristic (and beyond). This includes gender
reassignment.
No additional impact is anticipated for this protected
characteristic but given sensitivity and media discourse
communication and stakeholder feedback will be key to
make sure the programme does not cause harm by
perpetuating any stereotypes or prejudices.'
https://leadingtochange.scot/allyship-hub/
Had a quick look at the toolkit, can't find anything about using single-sex facilities, only 'pronouns' and 'misgendering'.

Edited for clarification and to delete duplicate link.

paywall free ver was on the archive site
https://archive.is/oqbVn