NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #29

[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 resumed 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] by 5pm on Wednesday 9 July. Detailed instructions were provided here:

drive.google.com/file/d/16-9POEZ7yHWUr6EmbfquJZO18Gv78bSm/view

The hearing is being live tweeted by x.com/tribunaltweets and there's additional information here: tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr-005. 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.ph/WSSjg.

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

Thread 1: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5186317-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse
Thread 2: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5267591-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-thread-2
Thread 3: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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
Thread 25: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5318518-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-25
Thread 26: 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
Thread 27: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5372582-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-27
Thread 28: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5374630-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-28

So could they also be sacked for holding Gender Ideology views too? How would the test that in the legal system? Could BU have taken NHS Fife to court if they didn't support their views that they could change their gender?

You'd have to include Maggie personperson with them to be fair otherwise ns would just go on about herself, Maggie would keep it on script

One of the nurses from pt1 claimed that other than blood count (and that was drawn out of her by nc on x-exam) she didn't know of any difference between men and women so that's 3 of them now

Doesn't know what sex she is 🙄🙄🙄 as far as I was aware stupidity is not a protected characteristic (much as it is treated as one among TRAs).

Ladies, pardon my French... I have been reading the transcripts with delight but I cannot for the life of me understand why sometimes NC (who I agree is abfab even when she uses afab) seems to censor herself instead of fully hammering home the point. Eg when Foola Bumba says "should have raised it with line management", why doesn't NC say "it's exactly what she did and she was ignored and then bullied". Or when Bumba claims that except for the other IB (the rapist individual) TW are less of a risk, why doesn't NC raise the stat that TW are actually MORE likely to be sex offenders? She most certainly has the statistics, but Judge Kemp may not. Would that be in her "written submissions"?

@EmmyFr i think it is because NC is building to the mic drop moment. Plus she uses each witness to make different key points to support the case she is building.

NC [to bundle] Your email to KSearle on 3/1/24. You say you have through Datix. KS wasn't charged with i/x.
IB I have no involvement in i/x
NC So what business was it of yours if neither involved.
IB KS coming to me as Eq lead for advice. Would have been my opportunity to
defend w rights as well - be balanced
I said should engage with HR, appropriate for me to signpost them to HR
NC HR already involved though
IB Didn't know that
NC Why didn't you just say go to HR
This looks more elaborate. I suggest the plan between you and KS
was to make sure SP was punished.
IB That's quite a jump. Not the case.
NC No further qs.

For me the questions I wanted to ask IB are - if you don’t know your own sex how do you know if you are cis or trans? Equally how do you know DrU is a transwoman not a Ciswoman?

If you and most people don’t know their sex/gender how does anyone make a case for sex discrimination? Or equal pay? how would they know if someone was a comparator?

And so begins another day.

The Maya case established that GC beliefs were protected because they met the Grainger test.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grainger_plc_v_Nicholson

The original Maya ET case found that GC beliefs met the first four elements of Grainger but not the fifth (worthy of respect in a democratic society/not interfere with the rights of others). The EAT found that GC beliefs met the fifth element too, so GC beliefs are protected beliefs.

GI beliefs have not yet been put through the test, because no-one has yet been sacked for their GI beliefs (despite trans people being the “most vulnerable” in the world). While it seems likely they would, if tested in court, meet the first, second, third and possibly even the fifth limb, the one they might struggle with is the fourth one, about attaining a level of cogency. That is not to say it would definitely not pass, just that that is where the heaviest lifting would be required.

She is paid to advise on the protected characteristics and yet isn't aware of one of her own?

As we used to say 'pull the other one love, its got bells on'.

If no-one knows what sex they are, why was sex included as a protected characteristic? Surely as a DEI lead (not sure what Isla's exact title is), knowing the protected characteristics is pretty fundamental? Did she never wonder how anyone could prove discrimination based on sex if no-one know what sex they were? And if we don't know what sex we are, how do we know we're the "wrong" sex i.e trans?
I can't believe that people actually say in public that they don't know what sex they are. How does she decide which public toilet to use? Why does she think there are toilets for male/female? None of it makes sense.

What does it mean if your belief is protected? Does it mean I can refer to trans or non-binary people by their biological pronouns in the work place, for example?

(I really didn’t like the “fantasy changing room” discussion from over night).

Thanks. Still a little frustrated tho (but I'm sure it will all turn out to perfection. You're lucky your UK judges, with the exception of the NWORIADS moron in the first Maya judgment, can be relied upon for sanity. We have plenty of Bumba judges unfortunately!)

I think she just lets the stupidity hang in the air. It's almost visible, metaphorically speaking. She's eliciting the complacency and blinkered view of the management. What's the object of the Tribunal? Did NHS Fife treat Sandy less favourably?
She doesn't need to win the argument with Bumbles.

Following. Depressed at the absolutely resentful, sanctimonious and righteous demenour that characterises NHS Fife personnel’s attitude about genderism.

IANAL but I think if one was arguing a case about being fired for belief in gender ideology it would probably be easier to argue it either as a non belief in the protected GC beliefs or as discrimination around gender reassignment - in the same way as you don’t have to be disabled to be the victim of disability discrimination.

What I can’t understand here is why the Fife defence isn’t so much more straightforward. The Scottish Government repeatedly told us transwomen should be treated as women. At the time they were in court winning that very debate. We took training and advice from Stonewall who were championed by the Scottish government as the experts in this area. We recognise with hindsight that we came to the wrong conclusions but we behaved in line with the most up to date legal thinking at the time.

ok it’s a crap defence. But it’s significantly better than all these people claiming they don’t know their own sex and it’s so complicated and hard to understand.

My guess would be they are scared of Stonewall. There's still this underlining fear that the backlash from going against Stonewall will be worse than protecting woman's rights.

Fear goes a very long way.

I think I’ve made a comment along these lines every time we’ve watched a court case, but it is a delight to see the same mind numbingly stupid gender ideology arguments we’ve been seeing online for years actually articulated in a court of law. Every time a new journalist/observer/member of the public gets to hear of the madness that been permitted in deference to this cultish thinking is a resounding victory for us, as things have only been allowed to get this far through subterfuge and backroom lobbying.

I know a number of nurses, and several of them have been put in the situation of having to accept GI because a friend’s child was declared trans and put on blockers and they felt they had to support their friend/the situation. The Sandie Peggie case has got them all up in arms, though. Not one of them is making allowances for “Beth” Upton the way they’ve been pressured to for their friend’s child, and it’s really making the scales drop from their eyes. Their views of trans kids have done a 180 during this case, and it’s all thanks to the sunlight of of hearing the likes of Upton and Bumba clearing that they don’t even recognise what biological sex is.

It’s all incredibly cathartic.

I'm not sure how employment tribunals work but "ignorance of the law is not a defence" is definitely a thing. If they said "we were wrong because we didn't know better" they were still wrong and SP wins her case.

@ConspicuouslyLawAbidingWoman I think the reason why no-one is falling back on blaming Stonewall or the Scottish government is because the foot soldiers in these cases, like Bumba and Upton, are true believers. They got themselves into positions of power and then have leaned hard into the climate created by Stonewall and the Scottish government rhetoric, creating such a coercive environment that all their colleagues could see that there was no way to stand up to them because the entire deck was rigged.

The more the public sees the cultishness of the thinking in action and hears its proponents declaring the beliefs, the better. It’s like getting Scientologists to talk about what they REALLY believe.

I’m not so sure about the pulling strings - that JD and person spec is so vague, how anyone can assess a candidate against it with any real accuracy is beyond me. I also suspect that the role descriptions for similar jobs elsewhere are equally vague.

I remember working once with a very senior manager who was clearly not suited to his job. I couldn’t fathom how he’d got past all the interviews. I didn’t “blame” him - but I did towards those who were meant to know how to recruit and also ensure a proper probationary period and review. I actually felt quite sorry that a person had been appointed to something that was obviously not for them.

If nothing else, yesterday (at the latest) should trigger the lodging of a big fat concern and performance review (or whatever the nhs does) of the execution of this role across the NHS. It’s like if a company receives a complaint from a customer, good quality practice should lead whoever is investigating to review whether whatever problem could be happening elsewhere.

Barbie Kardashian once he gets out, perchance.

Will that be saved for closing statements?

I agree. Based on IB's performance, I think in some ways she can't be blamed for going for a generously paid job with criteria so fuzzy that her lack of relevant experience and knowledge isn't a real issue. And an interview panel with really vague criteria to go on will just have seen an enthusiastic young person who talks a lot about the importance of allyship and social justice.

Which is fine if it's an entry level job where you're just handing out lanyards and similar. Not so fine if it's a senior job where people are coming to you for advice, and then you end up in tribunal with NC cross examining you.

I think this makes a case for reviewing all these vibey DEI jobs. It's not HR, it's not Legal, it's not Governance, it's not clear what the job actually adds.

(I really didn’t like the “fantasy changing room” discussion from over night)

I didn’t either.

Morning all! Just caught up, phew.

In case this helps anyone else who like me is struggling with work (and deadlines) but distracted by the case. I “lost” yesterday morning being distracted. But for the pm I put my phone away and then yesterday evening I sat in the sun and read all the TT in one go, then caught up on here. I am hoping to do the same today - lunchtime catch up on everything (although will depend how many pages on here!)

Just in case this helps anyone else juggle (especially in my case my work isn’t anywhere near so interesting right now than this case!). It was also good to read all the TTs in one go - binge reading if you like!!!