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

NHS Fife keeping it vague, as ever

BBC reporting of this case has been slanted - I would not read anything into their report of the outcome. They probably really regret having to say that public access continues.

I'm sure that some of the people who wrote to the tribunal will have made the point that there appeared to be a deliberate attempt to restrict access.

I'd love to see the report FIFE's lawyers presented and what the "inaccuracies" were supposed to be. Unless there is actually a recording of proceedings how can we be sure NHS FIFE's lawyers werent being inaccurate?

The questions that would be relevant are: is the inaccuracy material and what was the intent?

I put a fiver on the complaints being from JR. She only misgendered Upton three times and not the six* in the TT reports

• completely made up numbers

I noticed inaccuracies - but they went in Fife’s favour! TT missed the word “robot” out of the Upton’s legendary evidence. I should have complained that it made the Dr sound too sane compared to what the observers were treated to!

What was attempted was really something. Some people are very invested in stopping women talking about this. Amazing.

I watched the footage until it was restricted. TT was the only coverage that reflected what I saw. Most of the mainstream media was shockingly biased and did not represent what actually happened in the courtroom at all. To an actually terrifying and Orwellian extent.

I wrote to the ET about this. It also seemed to me the 'interruptions' were deliberately designed to shut public access down. They mostly didn't seem like accidents. Notably they increased in volume once Upton was saying reality-denying nonsense on the stand.

Also it doesn't seem like rocket science to mute all observers. The public shouldn't be punished for the ET's lack of IT skills, frankly. And given the public interest and extent of public money being pissed away by NHS Fife's apparent dedication to an unscientific political ideology ahead of healthcare, I'd think they could probably find the money to fix this problem before July.

The cost of the sc case is out

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/whopping-bill-snps-humiliating-supreme-35229947?utm_source=linkCopy&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar

I think there is often one journalist covering something like this and they put out a report which is picked up by all the media. So that's why they all run the same story.

Hoardasurass I think the figures quoted are just the first 2 hearings, not the 3rd Supreme Court one? You probably need to add another £200/250k for the Supreme Court hearing.

They could have given everybody a free Tunnocks teacake for that sort of money!

Given they've stated the position with the viewing of the remainder of the case, do we know about the other issues? Third respondent? Dr Upton's mobile phone? (Apologies if it's hear and I've missed it)

I have to say that listening to live court cases is a lot more interesting than listening to biased and boring BBC radio with so much misinformation.

For a start people are at least supposed to tell the truth in court.

I see from another thread that the RCN has woken up and told Darlington to give the nurses their single sex changing room back and allocate the small one as mixed sex.

I know that Health is a devolved matter in Scotland and Wales, but will they be writing to NHS Fife, I wonder, and asking them to remind staff that single sex means just that, either biological women or men. Not men who witter on about not being robots.

Not sure what’s happening. The Herald published a story yesterday and so did the sex matters blog (?) but both got pulled. Keen to hear!

RCN refused to support or represent Sandie so I doubt it

Sorry if this Times article has already been posted:
https://archive.is/ugn8y

I was in the hospital a day or so ago (shiny new Orthopaedics centre). All the toilets are like single disabled ones. I still don’t like that but they are separate and lockable withbsinks inside. Not great if you faint or have a seizure.

I don’t know when it was built imagine they were trying to appease Beth or his buddies.

It does seem to be legit. There is another thread on it.

Another poster on that thread postulated that as Sandie was accused of "discrimination", the RCN will use that as their get out, for why they didn't support Sandie.

Someone else suggested it might be linked to people leaving the RCN, and joining thr Darlington Nurses union. A flood of lost members might just have focused their understanding of the Workplace regulations.

I'm posting the continuation thread now. Although I'd prefer to leave it closer to the end of this thread to do this, if there's a rush of posts, and things have livened up today, I might miss the chance to get in the link to the next thread.

However, please would posters continue posting on this thread to fill it up before moving over to the next thread. Thanks!

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5335861-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-26

That sounds about pretty plausible explanation to me.
They refused to support both Sandie Peggie and the Darlington nurses.

The WFS case and the Supreme Court seem to have given people confidence to accept Women are not men in dresses or pink leggings.

Very disappointing.

Under building regs, shouldn't they have put in single sex toilets unless there wasn't enough space - which is unlikely as the building is new so space could have been made at the planning stage?

I've been to two hospitals recently - one is new-ish and has separate men's and women toilets. The other is an old building, and they have 'universal' toilets that are also accessible, which have been shoe-horned into the only space available.
That's fair enough, but when planning a new building, surely there is no excuse for not making space for single-sex toilets?

I think the 'excuse' is that sex is a nebulous dog whistle and nobody knows what sex they are really so if confronted by a male/female binary choice no-one has any idea where to go. (Apart from trans identifying folk who have magical powers to define their inner sex).

Although it was posted on the new thread it deserves to be here too - tribunal tweets substack https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-nhs-scotland-and-dr-b-upton

What I love about this is Tribunal Tweet's comment "However, based on the respondents detailed analysis, our own recollection and other contemporaneous reports, we have prepared two corrections, as below."

An indication that what was identified by NHS FIFE was either disputed or so insignificant it was not worth correcting.