NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #46

[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 had been intended to be 28 July with 2 days of submissions from counsel meaning that the hearing was to have ended on 30 July. However, it became apparent as the hearing progressed that this schedule wouldn't be followed. (Considerable understatement.)

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 and tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr-bd6. 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 #40 can be found in this thread: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379717-sandie-peggie-list-of-threads-covering-employment-tribunal-and-afterwards

Thread 41: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379334-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-41 24 July 2025 to 25 July 2025
Thread 42: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379820-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-42 25 July 2025 to 25 July 2025
Thread 43: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379979-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-43 25 July 2025 to 27 July 2025
Thread 44: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5380196-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-44 25 July 2025 to 28 July 2025
Thread 45: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5381518-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-45 28 July 2025 to 28 July 2025

Since someone asked (thanks to Google).

Victoria Hospital in Kirkcaldy, Fife, aims to have 95% of patients attending A&E seen, admitted, discharged, or transferred within four hours. However, due to current pressures, waiting times may be longer. In the week up to January 7, 2024, 68.3% of patients at Victoria Hospital were seen within the four-hour target, according to Fife Today. For non-emergency situations, it's recommended to call 111 for advice.

Here's a more detailed breakdown:
Target: The Scottish Government aims for 95% of A&E patients to be seen within four hours.

Current Situation: Due to high demand and other factors, waiting times may be longer than the target.

Victoria Hospital Performance: In the week up to January 7, 2024, 68.3% of patients were seen within four hours at Victoria Hospital, according to Fife Today.

Would I be correct thinkjng The trying to blacken her name stuff is just fuel to the fire if she lose, the ET went of in tangents irrelevant to NHSF not following due process in the suspension and Upton shouldn't have been in the changing room.

Ok the jokes were a bit sick as most disaster jokes are. But I don't think it means she'd treat an ethnic minority person any different to a white person in the department.

Apologies if already asked, but were the list of jokes (the numbered ones) posted by SP one by one, or were they linked to as one item?
Just trying to get my head round how it happened

I was with you until you mentioned 'guys' - why is that a problem? I don't believe it is, but I may have missed something in the post.

@Needspaceforlego I believe the witness did say that Sandie usually changed in the toilet even before Dr Upton was on the scene. Not sure what point she was trying to make, but it does seem to indicate that Sandie wasn't that keen on getting her kit off in front of an audience of any kind, let alone Dr Upton.

After some thought — inexpert — and having read previous ET judgments, I think that JR is resting her defence in whether the panel view SP’s actions as being in good faith or bad faith.

I read a recent judgement where the claimant was judged to have politely enquired about the assertion of harm (as a result of the mention of the possibility of a local SEEN network on yammer) and requested more information about what they thought was harmful was meant in bad faith.

I mean it was a total stretch to think it was written in bad faith and you’d only do so if you were already captured. This has gone to appeal (not on this point but on the point that the world has changed about these concerns since — which probably includes the possibility of upending the bad faith and harm thing).

But JR will have read that judgement before this and would be building her case on the idea that if you can demonstrate she is a bigot generally then it is not a stretch to think her actions were not good faith (ie a reasonably held view on the right to SSS) but bad faith (trans shouldn’t exist or such) then the issue of whether women should have access to SSS and what that means becomes moot.

This panel will have access to the appeal judgment (allowing it to go to appeal).

But if the decide SP was engaging in bad faith NHSF could win. I think. For all the shenanigans.

I personally don’t there is sufficient evidence of that and can’t excuse the lack of fair process.

I can’t wait for submissions!

Wow, what a day. Only just catching up on it now. Who knew this tribunal could get even more dramatic!

But even if you demand your legal rights in bad faith, they are still your legal rights.

Sandie was in the toilet cubicle on Christmas Eve when others were there.
No one said, I think, she usually got changed there
She wasn’t actually changing her clothes on that occasion either I understand. Or at least no one noticed. She could easily have taken a spare set of clothes to get changed into mid shift, through necessity, but no one has commented in that regard

If JR and Fife hadn’t fucked about in Feb there also may not have been a need for a split hearing. JR seems to think that calling SP a bigot is sufficient to justify the behaviours from Upton and the staff at Fife.

Unedifying and tangential. I think that sums up today.

What a shit show.

I work in HR, and every so often someone might ask me about their own work situation. I advise them to go to ACAS, their union, maternity action (if maternity related) etc.

I tend to say, 'walking away is a valid option' and that tribunals can be damaging to everyone.

My experience is that more bloody minded, difficult people raise tribunal claims. But being a 'difficult woman' is a badge of honour in my view. She has had the guts to bring a legal claim when many of us would have walked away.

I am a hopeful that many women will benefit from her claim, as employers act with a greater degree of caution.

Yep those jokes shouldn't have been said, they were racist and it wrong. But she is still a woman of tenacity.

THANK YOU TO ALL THE MUMS NETTERS keeping me and others up-to-date.

A lurker closely following the threads and discussions in real life with a few trusted people. Including my female no nonsense PT while doing Pilates and weights. My trusted confidents know that NC is my favoured barrister if I could possibly afford her for an ET I am bringing against my employer.

My husband has taken time to understand the issues so far. Which has been frustrating as I am a CSA survivor and have experienced rape in a hospital ward by a male nurse. He is fully aware that no male no matter their status is to be left alone with me when I am ill. I had made a comments that should we visit Fife I was never to be taken to a hospital no matter how poorly I am. I am autistic and when physically poorly not going to be in a position to mask. I asked him what he would do if a male member of staff attended to me and I refused them even if they stated they identified as a women. He said he would tell them to leave, I pointed out this made him transphobic and he finally understood.

My husband is very respectful of women, when I was attending a CSA survivors group. He would travel with me drop me near by and leave the area to afford the other women their privacy and safety.

He is also very sarcastic he is very well known for it and he is British Born Chinese and has worked in the NHS previously. I brought up the racist jokes this evening. Asking his opinion especially about the laughing emoji. He said that is not sarcasm that is agreeing with someone. I then told him about the patient details issue. I asked him which is worse? He unequivocally said the sharing patient details.

As an aside, I gifted him tickets to Romesh Ranganathan last year and during his set he made jokes about Jimmy Saville and a majority of the audience laughed. As a survivor of CSA was I impressed or happy NO. However I have the intelligence to understand that people make jokes I do not agree with.

In my previous work place I had to listen to inappropriate comments concerning SEND even in my own community we have some darkish jokes about our illnesses. There are women I do not like yet I respect their right to privacy. Sadly I have known student nurses from twenty years ago when I studied Nursing who said it is the bitchiest profession going. I experienced some nastiness from nurse practitioners.

Although with all honesty my autistic self does not understand the back-stabbing behaviours. Then again I never trust anyone who is overly virtuous it is fake. I had heard that I am lovely and one of the nicest people. My response I try to be fair and reasonable I am not perfect though or entirely innocent. To be honest I despise the words “BE KIND” that is another story though and could be identifying.

I'm probably going over the same ground as a previous poster, but I just wanted to comment on the phenomenon of groups sharing offensive jokes. I'm assuming that Sandy was sharing jokes that some other bright spark had sent to her and the others were doing something similar. I haven't had much experience of it and like others I've been shocked at some of the revelations today, but the judge probably isn't.

It may be because of the type of work I've done, but it was only in one role about 10 years ago that I'd encountered it. Some new members of staff joined the team I was in and after induction one of them (a man) suggested setting up an email group so that we could share informal info, which he then did, with the intention that it would help us all to bond. After about a week it became obvious that 90% of the stuff being shared was off-colour jokes and memes, many of which were misogynistic, racist/xenophobic or homophobic. I was so naive I didn't know that sort of stuff still existed, or that anyone over 17 with more than one braincell would be sharing it. Only two of us out of a group of about 15 did a reply-to-all saying that we thought sharing such content was offensive and inappropriate for the group. I thought it had closed down after that, but I found out months later that it still existed only without the two uptight women who complained. So much for team building.

I knew most of the other team members well and was shocked at how quickly the behaviour was normalised. There were several members who remained in the email group who found it just as shocking and inappropriate as the two of us who spoke up, but after they saw how we were now set apart from the rest of the team for being stuck-up killjoys they didn't want to rock the boat so just didn't open the emails. As far as I know the attitudes expressed in the jokes were not reflected at all in their work. I think, to them, it was like in the 70s a bloke who got on really well with his wife's mother might laugh at misogynistic mother-in-law jokes. 🙄

I'm trying to tell myself that unfamiliar as we may be with this sort of behaviour, employment tribunal cases often concern toxic workplaces and the judge, panel and lawyers are probably no strangers to some objectionable behaviour being revealed during hearings. They won't have found it as shocking as we have and will also (I hope!) be able to distinguish between misbehaviour that is relevant and vicious mudslinging that is not pertinent to the case.

I think it’s their last ditch attempt to prove that it was SP (as alleged vitriolic bigot) who harassed DU in the CR, rather than his presence harassing SP (all the women). If NHS Fife can turn that over then they have cleared themselves of the worst claim. Unfortunately DU’s own evidence seems to undermine that… so I think it’s a big smokescreen to distract as much as possible from FWS/the SC ruling. It’s all very painful and unedifying to watch

Questionable comments aside, what a display of sheer vindictiveness we saw today. I wonder what their colleagues think of them now?

I read up to close of play today. Skimmed some since.

But my tuppence, why do we NEED Peggie to be cleaner than the driven snow? Why do we need her blameless perfection in order to make the case, unequivocally, that men should not be in female spaces?

In some ways, her human imperfection should help us highlight that being a sex realist is not intersectional with other alleged phobias. That’s TRA purism talk, Reddit-style. You can be racist while also not wanting to undress with men. OK it was amusing watching NC hoist that witness, I have to say.

But so many of us in the NHS have witnessed the racism between different racial groups, Muslims against Christians, let alone Hindus, Filipino against Muslim. But you’d be MAD to report it in the current NHS because only white people can be racist. And you don’t want to know what my sub-Saharan colleagues think about small boats!

This discrediting of Peggie was deeply unedifying, abetted by quite a few on here with their ‘Oh No!’, instead of ‘So what?’

Do only the good girls deserve justice?

I agree that it’s going to result in walls of negative press. JR has known about it all along.

But I can’t see how it has impacted Sandies legal position around single sex spaces negatively. The outcome of the case is still important for all women - including Sandie.

NC did clearly show that the witness giving evidence was just like Sandie and did offensive things just as Sandie did. She’s still in her job and backed by the Trust. Sandie was discriminated against by the Trust.

So I agree JR got the bad press and evidence of racism. Doesn’t stop the case being valid overall.

Bloody hell wims! I'm glad I was busy with work all day today, I don't think I could have coped with the stress of following live! Thanks to everyone for the updates.

Except in South Africa, where it is a specific group designation for people on the Cape of mixed descent including Malay, Dutch, and the Khoisan: indigenous people who were there before the Bantu-speaking Africans crossed the Snake River

The “coloured is offensive” trope comes from the US, and the “black is beautiful” movement.

As EM Forster once pointed out, we’re all some colour or other.

Even if the panel decides that SP is transphobic I don’t see that it makes any difference. NHS Fife encouraged Upton to use the FCR, they didn’t bother to check the law, they were all absolutely fine with it, that is documented, and the minute they did that they broke the law, they denied her her legal right to SSS. Not only that, they then doctored evidence, invented and embellished tittle tattle and personally attacked her and her family under oath.

IANAL, but surely it is NHS Fife who would be more worried right now.

There's no sugar coating this is there? Played right into the hands of the TRAs who equate GC with bigotry and racism. I know SP was merely sharing the "jokes" and may not have said them verbatim from her own mouth, but it will be a key moment in the tribunal I think.

I do realise that the tribunal is not about whether S is racist or not, but in most people's eyes (and ears), this will be remembered and will stay in people's minds. Up to now S was saintly in her situation as the beleagured and bullied nurse in the face of a narcissistic TiM. But I fear that will be forgotten. Maybe not by the tribunal panel but by the ordinary observer.

Anyway, onwards and upwards. I believe S will be back on the "stand" soon. I hope she will be OK.

I think in some ways this will harm LN's future more than SP's. SP (if she ever goes for another job) can say I was an idiot, gallows humour went too far etc. Still a good nurse with 30 year+, good team player etc
She can repent.

LN though.... if her name came up you couldn't trust her. SP you might not like but LN would say one thing to your and smile as she reaches round to stab you in the back. No way could she claim to be a team player and that is what you need in A+E.

Out of the choice of those two i know which i would emply (although I would want an explanation and ideally to be shown the chat to get a better idea).

I would love to know what went on with those two.

It's a salutary lesson about social media that everyone should take on board. I mentioned up thread a colleague has recently been sacked for social media posts. A couple of months ago I saw something they'd posted that I thought was very offensive and I immediately unfriended and blocked them. I didn't want to be associated with what they were saying.
I'm in very few What's App/Messenger groups, just with close friends.
It's not worth the risks, like emails, we've seen today where it can end up. And I suspect at least one of the witnesses today could now end up in front of a disciplinary. It's just not worth it.
None of this makes a difference to SP deserving SSS, but mud, unfortunately does stick.
Hopefully the judge and the panel will disregard it as I don't see how it's relevant to the matter at hand.

Using masculine words as 'gender neutral' words is a reflection of the way our society sees male as default and female as other.

Would you ever get a group of men or a mixed sex group referred to as gals, lasses, ladies? No.

But somehow we can call women guys, lads, dudes.

I don't like being called a guy because I'm not a guy. I don't call women guys. But otoh I don't make a big deal about it because I know most people have never given it a moment's thought.

Not majorly relevant to the thread but there it is.