Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #31

1000 replies

nauticant · 18/07/2025 12:49

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

Links to previous threads #1 to #29 can be found in the header of thread #30, found here: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5375337-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-30

OP posts:
Thread gallery
24
cigarsmokingwoman · 18/07/2025 20:59

It wouldn't surprise me now if NHS Fife appealed the outcome when it inevitably goes Sandie's way. They are determined to dig all the way to Australia.

NotAtMyAge · 18/07/2025 21:00

anyolddinosaur · 18/07/2025 19:52

Current version of Fife's statement - I'm apparently now blocked from their website for trying to put it into the wayback machine

Statement on the Recommencement o...
Statement on the Recommencement of the Employment Tribunal
NHS Fife is setting out its position on a number of matters related to the ongoing employment tribunal and provide clarity around some of the misinformation circulating around the tribunal case that NHS Fife is defending.

With the employment tribunal now having recommenced, NHS Fife would like to clarify its position on a number of related matters. This is intended to answer some of the questions posed to the health board by members of the press, elected representatives and the public, and provide clarity around some of the misinformation circulating on social media and being reported in the wider media relating to the tribunal case that NHS Fife is having to defend.

NHS Fife has obligations, both as a public sector organisation and as an employer, to maintain the confidentiality of members of its staff, including those directly and indirectly involved in the tribunal. This, coupled with the requirement not to take any actions which could be seen to prejudice the legal proceedings, means that NHS Fife is restricted in what it can and cannot say publicly. NHS Fife remains committed to transparency, however, and will always aim to be open in the information provided directly to the public and to the media and will continue to act in accordance with its legal obligations and public duties.
While NHS Fife recognises the clear public interest in the tribunal, and of scrutinising NHS Fife’s actions as a public body, it remains important to be mindful of the privacy of all those giving evidence in the case. There has been significant and very polarised debate on social media regarding the case and associated issues, throughout. In some cases, however, what began as debate has evolved into much more worrying behaviour, including a threat of physical harm and sexual violence, which has required the involvement of Police Scotland. To be clear NHS Fife is not seeking to suggest that anyone involved with Sex Matters have contributed to the behaviour or issues mentioned above.
We value the contribution of every member of staff and the diversity that strengthens our teams, services, and care. Our staff are committed professionals, and we are proud of the work delivered across NHS Fife every day. At this critical time, it is essential they remain focused on providing high-quality care and services without being subjected to unacceptable personal attacks and trolling on social media.

Why is NHS Fife continuing the tribunal case? Why not simply drop the action?
NHS Fife did not initiate the ongoing tribunal proceedings and is instead one of two ‘respondents’ being sued. NHS Fife cannot unilaterally stop proceedings.
The health board is not pursuing any legal action against the claimant - it is instead defending itself, as it is required to do. The legal case concerns a range of different claims and allegations, against NHS Fife and its staff, including in relation to the claimant’s suspension, the investigation, and other matters allegedly said or done.

Is this case not just about a staff member raising concerns about a trans woman using a female changing room?
While the claimant raised concerns about a trans woman’s use of a locker room, this was not the reason that NHS Fife’s internal investigation was initiated. As made clear during tribunal proceedings, the disciplinary process was initiated due to concerns raised about interactions with a colleague and patient care.
The Health Board has a responsibility to fully investigate where concerns are raised about the conduct of any of its employees, in accordance with established policies and procedures. The act of investigating a concern does not assume any wrongdoing.

An internal disciplinary investigation is not of itself punitive in nature and exists to fairly assess concerns raised by establishing facts. At the stage legal action via an employment tribunal was taken by the claimant in this case, NHS Fife had not reached any final conclusions on its internal investigation although, as widely reported, this has since been completed. NHS Fife believes its internal disciplinary process in this matter has been fair and impartial.
A statement regarding the conclusion of the internal investigation and the internal conduct hearing is available on the NHS Fife website here:- Media Statement – NHS Fife Outcome of Internal Conduct Hearing | NHS Fife.
To be clear, the NHS Fife internal disciplinary process (now concluded) is separate and distinct from the ongoing Employment Tribunal. The Employment Tribunal hearing will conclude on 30 July, and the Judgment is expected in the months following that.

How much has defending the employment tribunal case cost NHS Fife?
The cost to NHS Fife of defending the tribunal case is capped at £25,000. NHS Fife participates in the Clinical Negligence and Other Risks Indemnity Scheme (CNORIS), which works in a similar way to an insurance policy by protecting members against financial losses and legal costs pertaining to both clinical and non-clinical claims and settlements.

As of 30 June 2025, £258,831.31 in legal costs have been recorded as expenditure related to the legal services associated with this case. NHS Fife is liable for the first £25,000 of costs associated with defending the case.
Why did NHS Fife not provide the costs of the legal defence sooner?
Earlier this year, NHS Fife was asked to confirm the legal costs associated with the employment tribunal under FOI legislation. At the time these requests were made, NHS Fife believed that it did not hold the figures requested, as the legal fees were managed through the Central Legal Office (CLO) and National Services Scotland (NSS) who administer the CNORIS Indemnity scheme.
The Scottish Information Commissioner was critical of the thoroughness of the search carried out by NHS Fife and instructed the Health Board to “carry out adequate, proportionate searches for the information requested, reach a decision on the basis of those searches” (Decision 133/2025 | Scottish Information Commissioner).

Separately, NHS Fife sought and obtained information from its legal representatives, Central Legal Office, on the cost of legal services.
In the interests of transparency, and on the basis that similar information was being actively sought, NHS Fife made the decision to publish this information on its website with costs up until 31st May 2025, which at the time amounted to £220,465.93.

While it has been widely reported that NHS Fife was told to provide this information by the Scottish Information Commissioner, this is inaccurate. The information commissioner stated in his decision cited above that: “the withheld information the Authority provided to the Commissioner was obtained from CLO after the date it received the Applicants’ requests. This means the Commissioner cannot make a finding on, or require disclosure of, this information in his decision notice.” NHS Fife subsequently made the decision to publish the figures on its website up until 31 May 2025 in the interests of transparency, and on the basis that similar information was being actively sought.

Why did NHS Fife seek a Rule 50 (Privacy) Order at the start of the tribunal proceedings?
NHS Fife has a duty of care to all its staff. For those staff members involved in the tribunal, particular consideration was given to protect their safety, security and wellbeing. We believed that having the tribunal heard in private would mitigate the risks to the safety and wellbeing of all staff members attending or identified during the tribunal proceedings.

Why did NHS Fife seek to restrict Tribunal Tweets, and public access to live proceedings from the tribunal?
Following the end of the earlier tribunal hearings in February 2025, NHS Fife’s legal representatives were contacted by the Employment Tribunal and asked to provide comment on tweets by the Tribunal Tweets account on the X platform after a complaint by a member of the public. The account had originally been granted permission to live-tweet proceedings on the basis their reporting would be ‘fair and accurate’. The Health Board’s legal representatives analysed the tweets and highlighted several inaccuracies to the tribunal.

The tribunal subsequently ruled that Tribunal Tweets would be allowed to continue live reporting of the case; however, did state “It is a matter of concern nevertheless that mistakes were made, including writing a comment not by a witness or participant, but another observer, for example. The Tribunal reserves its position should further matters be brought to its attention, and the conditions for live tweeting provided previously are further breached”.
During the initial phase of proceedings there were also issues and disruption with the livestream due to the significant number of people granted access. To assist the smooth running of proceedings, our legal representatives sought to limit the stream to media as a means of reducing the opportunity for further disruption and interruptions. The livestream was disabled by the tribunal administrators for a time during the February hearing, because of these issues. The tribunal has since confirmed that it will continue to open the livestream to all that can be accommodated, for the July hearing dates, having implemented certain measures in this regard.

The Health Board appreciates that there are deeply entrenched views on both sides of the debate around single-sex spaces and has never sought to stifle fair and reasoned debate on the topic, asking only that any media coverage is respectful, fair, balanced, accurate, and distinguishes fact from opinion.

What changes have NHS Fife made in response to the recent Supreme Court ruling on the legal definition of a woman?
NHS Fife acknowledges the Supreme Court’s ruling and other developments in this area. Work is underway across the entirety of the health board's estate (including toilets, changing and locker rooms) to identify areas where any adaptions may be required and schedule any work that may be necessary to improve facilities. We are committed to delivering appropriate and respectful workplace arrangements.

  • NHS Fife is not seeking to suggest that Sex Matters have contributed to the behaviour or issues mentioned above.

That version omits the potentially defamatory paragraph about Sex Matters and the people connected with it which means the line about not implying anything about Sex Matters is nonsense.

At 9pm the statement is live on the NHS Fife website and the original paragraph about sex Matters is again included.

The legal case brought against NHS Fife began after it commenced an internal investigation following allegations made by a member of its staff. The claimant’s case is being supported by Sex Matters, whose chief executive officer and co-founder was called as a witness by the claimant in the earlier hearing. The claimant’s barrister is also chair of Sex Matters. Other members of the organisation’s ‘advisory group’ have provided commentary to the media on a number of occasions where no reference is made to their direct involvement in the organisation. Sex Matters have been very active, making numerous statements which it would appear are aimed at steering public opinion in a way that NHS Fife as a public body clearly cannot.

https://www.nhsfife.org/news-updates/latest-news/2025/07/statement-on-the-recommencement-of-the-employment-tribunal/

RedToothBrush · 18/07/2025 21:02

PronounssheRa · 18/07/2025 20:52

The handling of this situation, todays statement, the pissing off the ICO

Im now of the opinion there should be board level resignations

We are at that point.

As a previous poster just said

"It's only day 3".

There are witnesses for another 6 days.

How much worse can this get??!

RedToothBrush · 18/07/2025 21:03

NotAtMyAge · 18/07/2025 21:00

That version omits the potentially defamatory paragraph about Sex Matters and the people connected with it which means the line about not implying anything about Sex Matters is nonsense.

At 9pm the statement is live on the NHS Fife website and the original paragraph about sex Matters is again included.

The legal case brought against NHS Fife began after it commenced an internal investigation following allegations made by a member of its staff. The claimant’s case is being supported by Sex Matters, whose chief executive officer and co-founder was called as a witness by the claimant in the earlier hearing. The claimant’s barrister is also chair of Sex Matters. Other members of the organisation’s ‘advisory group’ have provided commentary to the media on a number of occasions where no reference is made to their direct involvement in the organisation. Sex Matters have been very active, making numerous statements which it would appear are aimed at steering public opinion in a way that NHS Fife as a public body clearly cannot.

https://www.nhsfife.org/news-updates/latest-news/2025/07/statement-on-the-recommencement-of-the-employment-tribunal/

They've reinstated it?!

What the actual fuck.

Largesso · 18/07/2025 21:03

CriticalCondition · 18/07/2025 20:40

It's a looong statement.

When somebody up thread suggested that it was a spiteful response to Maya's publication of the content of the Kate Searle emails earlier in the day I thought it unlikely. It's too long and wide ranging. It's been in preparation well before today and must have been signed off by someone senior to the author(s).

I hope an FOI reveals the dates, times and people involved.

Perhaps it was delivered earlier than anticipated in response to that? The first iteration certainly felt like it was awaiting another pass? The comments about Sex Matters would have been removed, I think as they weren’t even very well expressed.

Perhaps they had been planning to run it by JR even (imagine that!) by asking her to review it over the weekend.

I don’t doubt that Maya transcribing the bundle email for Twitter infuriated them and that goes then to trigger the release early. Perhaps.

Largesso · 18/07/2025 21:04

Largesso · 18/07/2025 21:03

Perhaps it was delivered earlier than anticipated in response to that? The first iteration certainly felt like it was awaiting another pass? The comments about Sex Matters would have been removed, I think as they weren’t even very well expressed.

Perhaps they had been planning to run it by JR even (imagine that!) by asking her to review it over the weekend.

I don’t doubt that Maya transcribing the bundle email for Twitter infuriated them and that goes then to trigger the release early. Perhaps.

Ie That the original Sex Matters bits were added today, in response, and cooler minds on Monday would have removed them — altho the whole statement would still have been nuts!

KateShugakIsALegend · 18/07/2025 21:05

RedToothBrush · 18/07/2025 21:03

They've reinstated it?!

What the actual fuck.

This is nuts. Surely the case can't continue as it was.

TeenToTwenties · 18/07/2025 21:05

Are you sure the paragraph is back? I can't see it?

Waitwhat23 · 18/07/2025 21:06

At this point, there should be MSP sackings frankly. Neil Gray for a start. This is turning (all right, continuing to turn) Scotland into an international laughing stock. We must look like a nation of reality denying, bumptious numpties.

It's an absolute embarrassment.

Largesso · 18/07/2025 21:06

RedToothBrush · 18/07/2025 21:03

They've reinstated it?!

What the actual fuck.

FFS. Someone has gone rogue. I’m beginning to think KS is pulling the levers here.

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 18/07/2025 21:08

Do NHS Fife's board feel that they have some sort of special protection, a 400 lb gorilla in their corner that allows them to speak with impunity to the ICO and the tribunal?

Perhaps someone who would publically express their full confidence in the board? Maybe a political party? Perhaps just the right side of history?

Largesso · 18/07/2025 21:08

Largesso · 18/07/2025 21:06

FFS. Someone has gone rogue. I’m beginning to think KS is pulling the levers here.

It doesn’t appear to be reinstated? Perhaps you looked at an old one or is this an archived link?

https://www.nhsfife.org/news-updates/latest-news/2025/07/statement-on-the-recommencement-of-the-employment-tribunal/

QuetzalTerfLus · 18/07/2025 21:09

I can’t see that the paragraph about Sex Matters is back either… just the comment at the end.

Winterwonders24 · 18/07/2025 21:09

God,you pay attention to everyday life/school run/abd a good back, then you turn back it it's all got bit more mental again! Just done a little gardening though 👍

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 18/07/2025 21:11

The Sex Matters comment appears twice. Once in the main body and once as a bullet point at the end

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 18/07/2025 21:13

I’ve screenshot them

NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #31
NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #31
ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 18/07/2025 21:14

It’s now a complete non sequitur to refer to Sex Matters because the original “toys out of pram” wording has gone

MelodyMalone · 18/07/2025 21:15

GetDressedYouMerryGentlemen · 18/07/2025 20:32

I have a vision of anyone who have ever been on the board at NHS Fife frantically rewriting their CV to remove that fact.

What can I put instead? I lost these years to drugs, alcohol and prostitution? Yep that way less embarrassing than I was on the board at Fife and probably makes me more employable too.

"I'm just wondering about this gap in your CV. What were you doing over this period?"
"I was... in prison."
"Oh, I thought you worked for NHS Fife."
"No. Prison."

Taytoface · 18/07/2025 21:18

They can't even fuck up right. They release the statement whilst the tribunal was still in session. They release multiple versions in quick succession as even a five year old could suss how unwise it was, their website crashes, they put content back in they had previously released and they include details that contradict what they told the Information Commissioner who was already very very pissed off with them.

The only thing that could make this worse is no heads rolling and more statements of confidence in the Board.

PachacutisBadAuntie · 18/07/2025 21:18

Been following along around work but not commenting as it's moving SO FAST but wanted to say thanks everyone for TT updates and all the laughs (especially @BezMills ) and @nauticant for the full time thread wrangling. You are all amazing 🤩

Mmmnotsure · 18/07/2025 21:19

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 18/07/2025 20:07

Whoops, sorry

No! I got that second interpretation, but posted because I just loved the reference and tone of your proper meaning.

(English degree - never leaves you.)

Appalonia · 18/07/2025 21:19

Phew, just caught up with the thread. What a day! This case has more twists and turns than a John Grisham novel... Huge thanks to everyone keeping us all updated, I did watch the first part of the tribunal, but not able to this time, so really appreciate everyone who is, and for all the astute observations and the lols, I've actually laughed out loud so many times reading this thread!

Roll on Monday...

moto748e · 18/07/2025 21:20

They haven't reinstated anything about SM, except the now pointless disclaimer at the end, though. On the latest version read from their site.

socialdilemmawhattodo · 18/07/2025 21:21

This is the 2nd statement that I saw. It differed to the first in that the final line now say ENDS, where as previously it had an * with a statement referring to SexMatters (now gone), replaced by ENDS. And the end of the 4th paragraph, after the Police Scotland, had the same phrase referring to SexMatters = now also gone.

Statement on the Recommencement of the Employment Tribunal
NHS Fife is setting out its position on a number of matters related to the ongoing employment tribunal and provide clarity around some of the misinformation circulating around the tribunal case that NHS Fife is defending.
Back to list 18/07/2025
With the employment tribunal now having recommenced, NHS Fife would like to clarify its position on a number of related matters. This is intended to answer some of the questions posed to the health board by members of the press, elected representatives and the public, and provide clarity around some of the misinformation circulating on social media and being reported in the wider media relating to the tribunal case that NHS Fife is having to defend.

NHS Fife has obligations, both as a public sector organisation and as an employer, to maintain the confidentiality of members of its staff, including those directly and indirectly involved in the tribunal. This, coupled with the requirement not to take any actions which could be seen to prejudice the legal proceedings, means that NHS Fife is restricted in what it can and cannot say publicly. NHS Fife remains committed to transparency, however, and will always aim to be open in the information provided directly to the public and to the media and will continue to act in accordance with its legal obligations and public duties.

The legal case brought against NHS Fife began after it commenced an internal investigation following allegations made by a member of its staff. The claimant’s case is being supported by Sex Matters, whose chief executive officer and co-founder was called as a witness by the claimant in the earlier hearing. The claimant’s barrister is also chair of Sex Matters. Other members of the organisation’s ‘advisory group’ have provided commentary to the media on a number of occasions where no reference is made to their direct involvement in the organisation. Sex Matters have been very active, making numerous statements which it would appear are aimed at steering public opinion in a way that NHS Fife as a public body clearly cannot.

While NHS Fife recognises the clear public interest in the tribunal, and of scrutinising NHS Fife’s actions as a public body, it remains important to be mindful of the privacy of all those giving evidence in the case. There has been significant and very polarised debate on social media regarding the case and associated issues, throughout. In some cases, however, what began as debate has evolved into much more worrying behaviour, including a threat of physical harm and sexual violence, which has required the involvement of Police Scotland.

We value the contribution of every member of staff and the diversity that strengthens our teams, services, and care. Our staff are committed professionals, and we are proud of the work delivered across NHS Fife every day. At this critical time, it is essential they remain focused on providing high-quality care and services without being subjected to unacceptable personal attacks and trolling on social media.

Why is NHS Fife continuing the tribunal case? Why not simply drop the action?
NHS Fife did not initiate the ongoing tribunal proceedings and is instead one of two ‘respondents’ being sued. NHS Fife cannot unilaterally stop proceedings - only the claimant can choose to withdraw the case. The claimant has said in a recent statement from her legal representatives that she is determined to continue with her legal claim, as she is entitled to do. NHS Fife respects and recognises the right of employees to pursue legal recourse if they believe wrongdoing has occurred.

The health board is not pursuing any legal action against the claimant - it is instead defending itself, as it is required to do. The legal case concerns a range of different claims and allegations, against NHS Fife and its staff, including in relation to the claimant’s suspension, the investigation, and other matters allegedly said or done.

Is this case not just about a staff member raising concerns about a trans woman using a female changing room?

While the claimant raised concerns about a trans woman’s use of a locker room, this was not the reason that NHS Fife’s internal investigation was initiated. As made clear during tribunal proceedings, the disciplinary process was initiated due to concerns raised about interactions with a colleague and patient care.
The Health Board has a responsibility to fully investigate where concerns are raised about the conduct of any of its employees, in accordance with established policies and procedures. The act of investigating a concern does not assume any wrongdoing.

An internal disciplinary investigation is not of itself punitive in nature and exists to fairly assess concerns raised by establishing facts. At the stage legal action via an employment tribunal was taken by the claimant in this case, NHS Fife had not reached any final conclusions on its internal investigation although, as widely reported, this has since been completed. NHS Fife believes its internal disciplinary process in this matter has been fair and impartial.

A statement regarding the conclusion of the internal investigation and the internal conduct hearing is available on the NHS Fife website here:- Media Statement – NHS Fife Outcome of Internal Conduct Hearing | NHS Fife.
To be clear, the NHS Fife internal disciplinary process (now concluded) is separate and distinct from the ongoing Employment Tribunal. The Employment Tribunal hearing will conclude on 30 July, and the Judgment is expected in the months following that.

How much has defending the employment tribunal case cost NHS Fife?
The cost to NHS Fife of defending the tribunal case is capped at £25,000. NHS Fife participates in the Clinical Negligence and Other Risks Indemnity Scheme (CNORIS), which works in a similar way to an insurance policy by protecting members against financial losses and legal costs pertaining to both clinical and non-clinical claims and settlements.

As of 30 June 2025, £258,831.31 in legal costs have been recorded as expenditure related to the legal services associated with this case. NHS Fife is liable for the first £25,000 of costs associated with defending the case.
Why did NHS Fife not provide the costs of the legal defence sooner?

Earlier this year, NHS Fife was asked to confirm the legal costs associated with the employment tribunal under FOI legislation. At the time these requests were made, NHS Fife believed that it did not hold the figures requested, as the legal fees were managed through the Central Legal Office (CLO) and National Services Scotland (NSS) who administer the CNORIS Indemnity scheme.
The Scottish Information Commissioner was critical of the thoroughness of the search carried out by NHS Fife and instructed the Health Board to “carry out adequate, proportionate searches for the information requested, reach a decision on the basis of those searches” (Decision 133/2025 | Scottish Information Commissioner).

Separately, NHS Fife sought and obtained information from its legal representatives, Central Legal Office, on the cost of legal services.
In the interests of transparency, and on the basis that similar information was being actively sought, NHS Fife made the decision to publish this information on its website with costs up until 31st May 2025, which at the time amounted to £220,465.93.

While it has been widely reported that NHS Fife was told to provide this information by the Scottish Information Commissioner, this is inaccurate. The information commissioner stated in his decision cited above that: “the withheld information the Authority provided to the Commissioner was obtained from CLO after the date it received the Applicants’ requests. This means the Commissioner cannot make a finding on, or require disclosure of, this information in his decision notice.” NHS Fife subsequently made the decision to publish the figures on its website up until 31 May 2025 in the interests of transparency, and on the basis that similar information was being actively sought.

Why did NHS Fife seek a Rule 50 (Privacy) Order at the start of the tribunal proceedings?

NHS Fife has a duty of care to all its staff. For those staff members involved in the tribunal, particular consideration was given to protect their safety, security and wellbeing. We believed that having the tribunal heard in private would mitigate the risks to the safety and wellbeing of all staff members attending or identified during the tribunal proceedings.

Why did NHS Fife seek to restrict Tribunal Tweets, and public access to live proceedings from the tribunal?

Following the end of the earlier tribunal hearings in February 2025, NHS Fife’s legal representatives were contacted by the Employment Tribunal and asked to provide comment on tweets by the Tribunal Tweets account on the X platform after a complaint by a member of the public. The account had originally been granted permission to live-tweet proceedings on the basis their reporting would be ‘fair and accurate’. The Health Board’s legal representatives analysed the tweets and highlighted several inaccuracies to the tribunal.

The tribunal subsequently ruled that Tribunal Tweets would be allowed to continue live reporting of the case; however, did state “It is a matter of concern nevertheless that mistakes were made, including writing a comment not by a witness or participant, but another observer, for example. The Tribunal reserves its position should further matters be brought to its attention, and the conditions for live tweeting provided previously are further breached”.

During the initial phase of proceedings there were also issues and disruption with the livestream due to the significant number of people granted access. To assist the smooth running of proceedings, our legal representatives sought to limit the stream to media as a means of reducing the opportunity for further disruption and interruptions. The livestream was disabled by the tribunal administrators for a time during the February hearing, because of these issues. The tribunal has since confirmed that it will continue to open the livestream to all that can be accommodated, for the July hearing dates, having implemented certain measures in this regard.

The Health Board appreciates that there are deeply entrenched views on both sides of the debate around single-sex spaces and has never sought to stifle fair and reasoned debate on the topic, asking only that any media coverage is respectful, fair, balanced, accurate, and distinguishes fact from opinion.
What changes have NHS Fife made in response to the recent Supreme Court ruling on the legal definition of a woman?

NHS Fife acknowledges the Supreme Court’s ruling and other developments in this area. Work is underway across the entirety of the health board's estate (including toilets, changing and locker rooms) to identify areas where any adaptions may be required and schedule any work that may be necessary to improve facilities. We are committed to delivering appropriate and respectful workplace arrangements.

[ENDS]

Decision 133/2025 | Scottish Information Commissioner

Costs of a specified employment tribunal

https://www.foi.scot/decision-1332025

rebmacesrevda · 18/07/2025 21:21

Waitwhat23 · 18/07/2025 21:06

At this point, there should be MSP sackings frankly. Neil Gray for a start. This is turning (all right, continuing to turn) Scotland into an international laughing stock. We must look like a nation of reality denying, bumptious numpties.

It's an absolute embarrassment.

Yes, there should, but I expect John Swinney has full confidence in Neil Gray, as he does in NHS Fife 🙄

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.