NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #24

[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
Thread 22: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5280174-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-22
Thread 23: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5285690-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-23

I doubt that they will need to offer that much for it to be a reasonable offer. However, in my view a reasonable offer would also include withdrawing disciplinary proceedings, a public apology, a guarantee that men will not be allowed into the women's changing room no matter what they believe their sex to be and probably a few other things.

It’s been said that her costs are being covered. We are all assuming a lovely benefactor with ties to witchcraft and wizardry, but no one actually knows.

Is MN deleting posts for using correct sex pronouns? Re someone who we know does not have a GRC? Today when the highest court in the land has just ruled that sex means biological sex and that means sex at birth?
Really MN?

I doubt that they will need to offer that much for it to be a reasonable offer. However, in my view a reasonable offer would also include withdrawing disciplinary proceedings, a public apology, a guarantee that men will not be allowed into the women's changing room no matter what they believe their sex to be and probably a few other things.

Aside from Sandie Peggie being correct all along don’t forget that the whole disciplinary process was catastrophically mishandled & didn’t adhere to the correct process. Even without the FWS Supreme Court ruling she would have won just because NHS Fife didn’t adhere to their own procedures. There are individuals who have committed misconduct who should be brought to book as they have cost the NHS hundreds of thousands of pounds.

@prh47bridgeThe question is if they just offer money and say the disciplinary process will continue - would the court consider that a fair offer, because I certainly would not. I suspect if an offer to settle has been made and refused it was on that basis.

If mystery benefactor didnt wish to continue a crowdfunder would likely pull in a fair bit.

That annex B is so odd tho - apart from being listed in the contents page it’s not referred to in any of the rest of the text or in the list of exemptions. So it was always spurious. After today it’s completely clear that it’s always been an irrelevant appendage

Sandie has been treated so badly, not just over having to share a changing room with a male bodied person, but being suspended (which Fifes own HR described as ridiculous), the circulation of the “hate” email, allegations of patient safety.
I’m not so sure she’ll want to settle. She may well want to hold their feet to the flames and when Fife lose the case it is headline news

An irrelevant appendage - like a penis in a lesbian-only meet-up maybe?

My personal view is that an offer that didn't include stopping the disciplinary process would not be a fair offer. I can't guarantee that the court would take the same view, although various EAT decisions give me reason to believe they should.

Yes she's been treated shockingly.
I do hope she doesn't back down .
I think we all want to see Mr Upton squirm

I know - it reads as if someone different wrote it and no-one ever edited it or tried to make it fit the rest of the document. They just stuck it on the end. The language, content and style are totally different from the rest of the document.

It's far from irrelevant though. It has sigificant effects like the hosopital rape that couldn't have happened because there were no "men" in the ward as reported by Baroness Nicolson of Winterbourne when she tried to get Annex B withdrawn.
https://hansard.parliament.uk//lords/2022-03-16/debates/84C9B6AA-0214-4CEF-A41D-302373BDC190/HealthAndCareBill#contribution-2C34DA23-A5AD-483E-ACB8-AF8A5C547F73

But also see Annex C, para 18

A claimant in a tribunal can't refuse a reasonable settlement offer without becoming liable for the other side's subsequent costs.

I suspect any offers of settlement that may have been made would have included a hushing up clause. And given the very public accusations of unprofessional behaviour and endangering patient safety - which would be career ending if allowed to stand - I don't see how it could be unreasonable for her to refuse any secrecy clause, and demand a public apology and retraction (as well as financial restitution, policy guarantees, ending of disciplinary investigation etc, etc).

I agree. It’s not the policies or so-called ‘good faith’ interpretation (that determines women could only object if they’re hateful
bigots) of ‘trans inclusion’ initiatives that are directly in play here. It’s the actions of NHS Fife staff in their response to SP’s reasonable objections to Upton’s presence in the female changing room, & the detriments she suffered as a result. The final judgement may well address the wider issues/policies/hostile environment that’s developed under the external training orgs telling NHS Staff they should welcome larping blokes into female spaces or accept they’re being ‘discriminatory’ & hateful bigots if they object. But SP has personally suffered at the hands of zealous staff who have hit her hard in terms of actions & implied accusations.

She’s every right to continue (so long as it doesn’t adversely impact her/her financial funding) and seek full vindication as well as assurances going forwards to enable her to return to the role & shifts that she had previously.

I think the UKSC judgement will elevate the legal arguments made by SP’s legal team, moving from solid legal arguments to slam dunk arguments. But, IANAL, so this is just me speculating.

I saw your post before it was removed and didn't see anything wrong with it. But then I had a post deleted recently (only the second time in over 15 years of posting on Mumsnet!) for reasons that don't make any sense to me.

As if today wasn’t exciting enough, is everyone remembering that tomorrow is the deadline for NHS Fife to respond to the EHRC providing their changing room policy and it’s EqIA?!

This week is turning out to be a belter

Typo edited

The only two options are "the dug ate ma hamework" or "a big loddie done it an ran awa"

Oooh - I'd forgotten tomorrow was the day! Thanks for the reminder.

I bet the conversations at NHS Fife today have been interesting in a 'fuuuuuuuuck' sort of way

Well indeed. (my italics in what follows)

18. How can I ensure that the wishes of all patients in an area or on a ward/bay are considered when accommodating the wishes of a small number of those patients?

A) Staff should remember that, under the Equalities Act and the Public Sector Equality Duty, it is a legal requirement to ensure that trans people are not discriminated against. This guidance clearly states that trans and non-binary people should be accommodated in line with their stated gender identity. In all cases staff should communicate to all patients and or their carers the situation that arises, ensuring sensitivity to all views and acting accordingly to protect the privacy and dignity of all patients. Where the situation, for example, relates to trans patients, staff should do everything they can to respond to the wishes of all patients, while still protecting the dignity and legal rights of the trans person. There may be some circumstances where it is lawful to provide a different service or exclude a trans person from a single sex ward of their preferred gender but only if this is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. Any decision to do this must therefore be made on a case-by-case basis, and based on:
• an objective and evidence-based assessment of the circumstances and relevant information
• respecting the rights and needs of the trans person and the detriment to them if they are denied access and balancing that against the needs of other service users and any detriment to them if the trans person is admitted.

---

There isn't an "Equalities Act" in the UK, That's a red flag that this policy point was not written or reviewed by anyone with a clear unbiassed understanding of UK equality law. It doesn't mention women at all nor the legal rights of the "other patients" who only have "needs" and "wishes".

The law covering statutory provision of spaces for men and women now seems clear. But what about when an organisation offers men's and women's facilities when under no statutory obligation to provide them? Is their use still subject to balancing competing rights?

No. This has clarified that a single sex space/service is always single sex. Statutory or not (and most statutory ones come under separate legislation, not the Equality Act that was ruled on today).

Wander if Carol Potter and the mean girls (Kate Searle, Esther Davidson and Angela Glancey) have met in the girls loo top floor today.

NC has probably celebrated by having cake with her coffee today. JR is going to have to pull a rabbit out of her wig to save NHS Fife.

I can’t see this case settling. Dr Upton made some very serious professional misconduct allegations which NHS Fife seemed to believe with minimal investigation, that were looking distinctly flakey to say the least under cross examination.

I do hope the Judge granted the requests for the phone audit and additional respondents.

LOL - unisex loo - please check your facts 😂

I think Fife will desperately want a settlement with an NDA but the fact Dr Upton, and potentially Dr Searle, is a respondent makes it more complex.

Apart for the incorrect policy and lack of guidance from managers Potentially there is a lot of process failures e.g. the suspension, the investigation that wasn’t an investigation, the time taken to do the investigation, the return to work options etc. Then you have the allegations of professional misconduct and Dr Searle’s inappropriate email.

The professional allegations have far reaching effects for both Sandie and Dr Upton. If there is evidence they were not factually accurate and reported promptly then Dr Upton may have acted unprofessionally. If they are factually accurate and reported on time (highly unlikely) then Sandie has a case to answer.

I can’t see how Fife can get out of this unless they let Dr Upton and Dr Searle take the blame. The difficulty is Dr Upton & Dr Searle could then sue Fife themselves for incorrect policies, failure of process etc.