NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #25

[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
Thread 24: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5301295-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-24

@SternJoyousBee:

Can she now swivel and claim that NHS Fife were just following orders even if those orders were not lawful (and if anyone had actually taken the time to undertake a good faith impact assessment they would have seen that the Emperor was clearly naked)?

My guess is that this may be the way they swivel (where they = people who just went along to get along, not true believers). Having seen all the NHS policies, they are absolutely wall-to-wall TWAW, with extra support and privileges for trans staff and patients that are not remotely there for other staff and patients. And attendant EqIAs are not worth the paper they are written on.

If you have come up through the NHS since this ideology was imposed, you will almost certainly think that it is just how things are supposed to be. Your only defence at that point would be to say “they told me to do it”.

From what I remember of EDs evidence it was all about #bekind and respect (🙄) rather than “because it’s the law”.

The irony is that Goodwin is too dated to be a template for human rights, which ever way you view it.

It’s ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’, which was never practical or reasonable and is completely unsustainable in a world where more and more people have a digital footprint that can’t be easily erased.

Goodwin’s argument that he is a woman doesn’t rely on people not knowing he is trans. It relies on removing sex classifications completely in science and law.

“If you have come up through the NHS since this ideology was imposed, you will almost certainly think that it is just how things are supposed to be. Your only defence at that point would be to say “they told me to do it”.”

But instead of explaining their rationale to Sandie they went down the suspension and discipline route. This is possibly where Upton as 2nd respondent comes in as he went nuclear and ( I am speculating here ) with the potential 3rd respondent’s help created a situation here he was the delicate flower who needed months of sick leave and Sandie was the evil bigot who needed to be punished for not just wrongthink but for having the gall to speak out.

….sorry my thoughts on this are all over the place this morning. I’m concerned that NHS Fife will get let off lightly when they really need to be made the example to ensure other public bodies get their act together. I have said since the ruling that only when organisations have to pay out £££££ will these illegal policies be stopped.

@SternJoyousBee:

But instead of explaining their rationale to Sandie they went down the suspension and discipline route.

That’s built into their policies too.

'... possibly where Upton as 2nd respondent comes in as he went nuclear ...'

It is so refreshing that we have moved to the point where real sex pronouns can be used without immediate policing.

Claiming back language is such an important step - it makes plain what is actually going on in reported cases.

Being policed to use nonsensical language put the GC point of view on the back foot at the start of every discussion.

It neglects to reflect how many transpeople make sure you absolutely know they are trans.

I think they can probably defend their changing rooms policy up to 16 April (SC), as guidance fom the EHRC used to recommend that approach.

It's far harder for them to defend their actions towards SP throughout. It seems incontrovertible to me that they repeatedly breached their own HR policies.

The kindest interpretation I can put on DrU's behaviour is that it was boorish, entitled special pleading that was pandered to at SP's expense.

Worth noting too in this context how often the request for anonymity has gone in to a court on this basis, and been refused as the person asking has widespread SM coverage everywhere that is open about their transition. They have demonstrated widely that they do not seek privacy on the matter.

Like pronouns, it often seems less any actual desire for privacy, than a demand for deference. To establish hierarchy and whether speech/behaviours can be controlled.

It looked pretty clear that Fife had lost quite a few of the claims before the SC ruling. After I’m not sure I can spot any they can possibly win.

For Upton as individual respondent - before SC I wasn’t sure how NC could “prove” the Dr’s presence in the CR was harassment in itself if the average person accepts that women can have a penis and Upton claimed to be a biological woman …. because so many people seem to run with TWAW… maybe it was me who is out of touch?…. however post SC biological definition that seems pretty clear. Upton should not have been in the CR and can’t rely on saying Fife having said was ok as the started without permission- and only spoke to managers after female staff stood outside/protested quietly

It’s been clear for a long time that NHS Fife should never have tried to defend this case. But fortunately for all of us they did - Praises to NHS Fife- thank you for your service! 🤣

The only defence Fife can have is they were following orders from ScotGov.

Wonder if Fife would ever be able to claim ScotGov or Stonewall for giving out duff guidance?
Because not only from an organisation point of view but it makes the individuals who enforced the guidance look stupid.

Which is probably why they tried to brush it under the carpet, and suspend Sandie until Beth finished his stint in A&E

I think they can probably defend their changing rooms policy up to 16 April (SC), as guidance fom the EHRC used to recommend that approach.
**
But could Fife win that point legally? Would the tribunal look at the law or the EHRC guidance?
The guidance was wrong but law hasn’t changed, what they were doing was always illegal.

The whole 'you can never tell' argument is just so ludicrous. Look at teeny tiny Whittle in these photos. They've even stuck her on a top step and cropped the feet as to not make the height difference as obvious!

i have a wild hypothesis that trans men will mostly be below average height for a woman.

Looking at unconscious bias, a short woman would boost status by becoming a short man - and at a young age they can look boyish so are more likely to pass. Add in the other benefits of no sexual attention/harassment and improved assumptions about intelligence/competence if male, it is more understandable as a course of action.

I wonder if there’s any way to prove the height issue?

Yes - the brain is unsettled seeing such a typical female stance combined with a beard. It’s just so tragic that people are so unhappy that they feel compelled to do this. It makes me angry to see the damage socially enforced stereotyping does. It is simply wrong, on a very deep level, for me to be asked to deny the evidence of my own eyes.

They've even stuck her on a top step and cropped the feet as to not make the height difference as obvious!

But unfortunately making her both small and far away.

Another Shakira moment.

Couldn't help myself....

Yes - the brain is unsettled seeing such a typical female stance combined with a beard.

But less so these days. As per the bus-driving clowns, we have got used to seeing teeny bearded ladies and huge frocked men, and we increasingly have got used to them. We far more readily accept what they are without a double-take. Just not in the way the clown lady intended. (Actually I'm not sure what she intended, and I doubt she's sure either)

That cleavage is doing a lot of heavy lifting.

Shame the bra isn’t.

One thing that strikes me in the wake of the SC ruling is that the TRAs don't seem to be using Uptons line of 'I'm biological and I'm a woman therefore I'm a biological woman'. Have we found something that is too batshit even for them?

If we get used to bus driving clowns, it's because we have noticed a new pattern - clowns can safely drive buses (although it's not a good example because it's more likely that we would notice that bus drivers need a uniform to establish their authority, and clown costumes are really impractical.)

Sex is relevant to humans (and other animals), so if beards and voices are no longer a reliable indicator of sex, our brains spot new patterns and other differences become more obvious, like hand size and hip ratio.

@TwoLoonsAndASprout I salute you for that line

Except from the BMA