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

Exactly, whispers of ‘have you checked your chromosomes’ will abound!

The control exerted by Stonewall / trans rights activism always reminds me of the Gibson's Bakery case in the USA.

Gibson's Bakery v. Oberlin College - Wikipedia

Here college members took offense at the treatment of shoplifting students. Staff proceeded to support and encourage students in unwarranted protests outside the bakery.

Messages between staff members make it clear that some staff consider the student body to be a sort of army that they can deploy to make people's lives unbearable.

'Fuck him. I'd say unleash the students if I wasn't convinced this needs to be put behind us'

The same sort of behavior seems to occur when trans dissenters are identified in Diversity Champion workplaces. It is hardly surprising that few people put their heads above the parapet.

It did not turn out well for Oberlin College - the bakery won the court case and were awarded $11 million in compensatory damages with a further $33 million in punitive damages and legal fees.

It makes perfect sense if you believe in gender ideology, though - trans women can rape trans men..

Which reminded me of that insane woman who gave evidence at the ERCC hearing.

It was like she was a glitchy computer and kept randomly saying TWAW out loud to Naomi.
She was utterly terrified of the consequences if she had said absolutely anything to the contrary.
She couldn’t go back to work if she had put so much as a toe out of line.

Gotta be an ally. Gotta be an ally. Gotta be an ally.

My understanding is that in UK law a penis is required for rape.

So a woman using a strap-on would be a serious sexual assault.

The only debate would be about whether a neo-phallus (post-op transman - so female) counts as a penis. I would argue that it does not, but I don't know what the law would think.

There's also the joint enterprise route for a woman to be convicted of rape in England and Wales but I have my doubts that IB would have been referring to that.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/rape

I don't think a strap on would meet the criteria in the UK?

I think women have been found guilty of participating in rape though.

So now they have to admit there is a difference between men and women, but claim that without a chromosome check no one can know.

It would help us confirm whether Dr Upton is conclusively male or female though.

The tribunal will know the talk of chromosomes is a nonsense.

In law there’s lots of applying reasonableness tests - reasonable person, reasonable adjustments.

‘The reasonable person test is a legal concept used in UK law, which seeks to establish a standard of conduct that a hypothetical reasonable person would exhibit in a given situation. It is also known as the objective standard test or the reasonable man/woman test’.

With this is mind - it’s not reasonable for a person who said in tribunal that they were protecting the rights of women and tasked with equality activities to say they cannot tell if they themselves are a woman. Anyone in that room knows it’s not reasonable. The Judge most of all.

Very telling when he commented that you don’t know what we’re talking about - in relation to the changing room. It was a leak - I think he really meant - you don’t know what you’re talking about full stop.

If she’s still in post - she needs performance managed as clearly doesn’t know the basics of her role and is putting vulnerable groups more at risk with her incompetence.

It would be assault by penetration.

If Bumba doesn't know what sex is, how does she know what sexual discrimination is? If she doesn't know if she's a woman, why is she so sure Upton is? If sex is so impossible to ascertain, why have supposedly SSS at all? Why not openly scrap them and have one massive, designated unisex space?

Thank you all for the discussions. I had access first time round but not this time and your updates keep me informed on the madness

I wonder how Isla will find her return to work after giving evidence? She will surely have read the news reports and know what her colleagues will have read about her.

To be fair to Isla Bumba she did say she wasn't the Top Trans Ally.

I think her LinkedIn also had her down as a bar manager at some point. A very tenuous link to the job spec but possibly a tick in the box from the people conducting the sift.

If a man mis-sexes another man for sexual purposes, thinking he is a woman, he may be disappointed or annoyed, possibly sexually gratified. I suppose he might be attacked, but it’s an even match.
If a woman mis-sexes a man in a similar way, she runs the risk of pregnancy or serious harm if attacked. It’s not symmetrical. Women have evolved to be more astute and aware of sex.

I work in HR and have supported complex cases around equal pay, discrimination etc. I have trained managers in reasonable adjustments and EDI. I have challenged managers on discriminatory practices, mainly with recruitment. I hqve done loads of data analysis. I have applied for EDI type accreditations. It feels like I have seen it all.

A few years ago, I was looking for a change, I applied for a few EDI jobs and didn't get to interview stage, they just weren't interested.

So maybe I am embittered, but I think for these roles they are looking for the more nebulous 'inclusion'. But, the legal framework cenres the equality act.

Also, equality is really hard. Equal pay, reasonable adjustments - it is hard. But that is what employees want - alongside flexibility, a manageable workload and access to decent working conditions and facilities. IT that works, reasonable office space, not 'death by meetings', coffee, tea, a kettle, a changing room.

Thank you. So am I right in thinking a colleague could make every genuine effort to discuss DU by nouns and not pronouns and that would be ok? Obviously in person it’s easier to avoid pronouns completely.

I was ok with the overnight changing room discussion as a thought experiment, and would like to see the Bumba's of this world exposed to that thought experiment and hear their reasoning / answers.

As a mother of 2 (i am a woman, i have had my chromosomes checked) close in age children, i know that when one comes and says "X did blah blah blah" i don't immediately punish X. I go to where they were, look at what they both say happened then we work out if a puishment or whatever is needed.

EVERYONE knows that. Everyone who has ever been to school knows that is what (should) happen. The fact that Bumba didn't a) get any statement or make contact with Peggie and b) didn't go and check out the facilities for her/himself is stunning in its stupidity.

When i first heard about the case, my first thought was: is there a 3rd space that could be used, how big is it? is it more appropriate for the (many) women, or the few trans people/allies who want to use it?

I think most women (who don’t disregard the rights of other women and don’t enable the fetishes or sex offending of men) would be uncomfortable with such a scenario. However, on reflection it does bring home how Isla Bumba appears (the impression I gathered at least) to be quite happy to put other women in such a situation with men. Any man at all who claims to be a woman. It seems that women shouldn’t question him if he says he is a woman (although we don’t know this man’s intentions). Indeed, Isla Bumba appears to say that he must be believed (over the women I presume even though we don’t know whether or not he is a dangerous fetishist with malice aforethought) as he alone knows he is a lady.

ps. Just reposted this as my wording of the previous one was a bit clumsy.

In the McKinney case nearly 50 years ago, the terms of the 1956 sexual offenses act meant she could not be accused of rape. I have not read the newer legislation.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manacled_Mormon_case

I'm WFH today, so have (some) hopes of following along on here in real-time.

Thanks to all for the updates yesterday.

I've just finished catching up on the previous thread, and noticed one of the ads in the middle of the page; Go Compare. It would have been better if it was confused.com.

Oh gosh - thats absolutely not what I was thinking when I posted!

More thinking of a mental “short sharp shock” and getting IB to think of the reality she was inflicting on others.

They are not looking for people who are interested in genuine inclusion and fairness, they are looking for people who will promote TWAW. Similarly, I don't think there are many people looking for genuine inclusion and fairness applying for these jobs because they know what they really are. It's one way of capturing institutions.

They're not used to pushback, are they? Anything that disagrees with their mad worldview is deleted from the Trans reddit.

So when they read that Scottish one, they begin to realise that not everyone thinks like them. And then they have a little mantrum.

From that Reddit link posted upthread:

We've already established that Isla doesnt understand the law - so the difference between rape and assault by penetrartion would not figure in her thinking. Still trying to understand what she was thinking.