NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #47

[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/womensrights/5379717-sandie-peggie-list-of-threads-covering-employment-tribunal-and-afterwards

Thread 41: mumsnet.com/talk/womensrights/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/womensrights/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/womensrights/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/womensrights/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/womensrights/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
Thread 46: mumsnet.com/talk/womensrights/5381640-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-46 28 July 2025 to 29 July 2025

Well the statutory training obviously isn't working for many, many people. Perhaps the 'inclusivity trainers' need to have a long, hard think about why that might be.

I can just picture the training session - half the room are handmaidens like KS who aren't paying attention as they don't think it applies to them as they are kind people. The other half of the room are down to earth nurses who think Isla's wittering on is a waste of time. Other than the guy in the corner who is sniggering over what puns he might make out of Bumba.

Absolutely.

Continuation thread:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5382317-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-48

To get shot of a bothersome nurse with deeply problematic views who had so far managed to dodge any complaints?

I expressly stated that any staging of the situation would not have been with the eventual view of a tribunal and all the publicity this case has garnered ("not knowing how it would blow up in everyone's faces"). But more an assumption she'd go quietly when confronted with the evidence of her 'wrongdoing', possible police involvement, etc, etc.

I don't actually believe this to be the case. But the thought had crossed my cynical mind.

I agree. Whilst she showed her racist hand - and that of others, who are as guilty of this as she is - she didn't hide behind the lies, incompetence and deceit we've seen from others in far more senior roles.

If the TRAs want to argue that it fits their narrative of all terfs being racist bigots then optics for transwomen look awful, thanks to Dr Upton who has clearly shown that TIMs lie, deceive, break the law and get a big old kick out of their fetishist behaviour.

Who in their right mind would now want to work for NHSF. Carol Potter has a lot to answer for.

The training sessions may well improve if people are allowed to speak up. Behaviour becomes bunkered- ok in certain small groups who reassure each other they are nice people and it’s just banter.

Until it’s aired out and directly addressed it won’t change.

I was incredibly shocked by a ten yr old making a joke at my son’s bday party, about ten years ago. It was racist and sexist at the same time. I had no idea such offensiveness was alive and well and out there, because I don’t mix in those circles. I’d been a bit jealous of the girl group his mim was in- they were party animals and had such a fun time. I realised why I wouldn’t have fitted in though 😅. They’d masked well when I was around.

It has zero bearing on her legal right to not be discriminated against or victimised unfairly on the grounds of her sex and gender critical belief. Upton’s seeming evidence falsification and the collusion between staff against SP on the trans issue, not other issues, is far more relevant here.

You are a glutton for punishment!

Thank you so much for your hard work, despite interrupterons, recipes and much other flak you have steadily and consistently kept us in writing space. Sending much love.

NHSF didn't know about the chat messages until LN came forward with them very recently during the tribunal, and nobody had reported SP for racism, so they (NHSF) can't use it as an excuse.

I'm not sure that the chats will be relevant when deciding whether SP has been discriminated against.
The case is:
Do NHS Fife have a legal duty to provide single-sex changing facilities?
Are they breaking the law by allowing men to use women's facilities?
If so, does a woman's reason for wanting a single-sex changing room matter? Was the botched, biased investigation unfair or harassment/victimisation?

We have to trust the exceptionally skilled NC to summarise and emphasise and represent what matters. And she will. Because she’s awesome.

I agree @myplace

The judge initially felt it may be tangentially relevant.

1. SP gave evidence in February denying these views, distancing herself from similar things her husband posted on FB etc. This evidence leads to questions about her credibility eg did she tell the truth before or did she mislead about anything?
2. The NHS stated multiple times that SP has strong views eg transphobic, homophobic, racist. Many NHS witnesses repeated this in their evidence at court, it was well-established gossip within the hospital. They did this in an attempt to say their approach of dealing with her was reasonable, colleagues were afraid of her etc. These unfounded allegations came across as a witch-hunt, which made SP’s claims of discrimination seem stronger. It seemed like fabricated, tacked on allegations. But now that those racism claims are evidenced and pre-date the issues with DU - it gives more merit to the NHS’s version of events.
3. Tribunals can make a deduction to compensation issued if they feel the claimant contributed to the issues. This has muddied the waters.

I have been taught so much in these parts. I am a wiser woman for hanging around here, despite how enraging it can be 🤣

I’m overtired and when I finish this glass of wine will also be emotional. What a long ride this has been.

Some people have wondered what JR is up to with some of her questioning. I think it is pretty obvious, especially if you look at what some TRAs have been pushing.

She is clearly going to argue that the SC judgement does not apply to changing rooms and that Fife were right to allow Upton to use the female changing room.

I believe she is going to argue that SP is a racist, homophobic, transphobic bigot. That she was not suffering from menstrual flooding at the time of the incident, but was seeking a confrontation with Upton and that, although they mishandled the process, Fife's action against her was correct.

Her attempts to get SP to reveal who was funding her suggests she may have bought into the TRA narrative that Sex Matters have been funding SP and encouraged her to provoke this confrontation. However, JR knows she is not allowed to ask that question, nor is she allowed to ask about SP's instructions to her legal team. More things that could be raised with the Bar Standards Board.

Thank you for this. So would there ever be a valid reason for a woman to not want a man in a sss? Who defines what a valid reason is? Is it taken on a case by case basis? Surely polices are put in place for all rather than the few (or even the individuals).

Are Fife suggesting that SP didn’t want DU in the CR because she’s a bigot, rather than because he’s actually a man?

This character assassination is one of the many reasons why women do not complain or challenge in the workplace. There are very few of us with flawless lives and backgrounds. I suspect some mud could be dug up on most of us which could cause us distress if read out in open court in a hostile environment.

How many sexual assaults and rapes go unreported due to the fear of not being believed or degraded in court. How many women do not challenge their employer for fear of being disciplined?

I am not an active feminist and most of my friendship circle have never heard of this case or deal with these situations in their life. However I applaud Sandi Peggie, whether her past makes me uncomfortable, whether she is not really that nice a person to know I am grateful that she was prepared to take this all of the way.

It is not without risk, she has been demoralised and disrespected and we cannot know how this has affected her health. I hope she is vindicated and I hope that her experience gives women the courage to speak out rather than be more afraid to.

JR's going to find it slightly tricky to argue that the SC judgment doesn't cover changing rooms, when paragraph 211 and 215 explicitly mention changing rooms, surely?

https://supremecourt.uk/uploads/uksc_2024_0042_judgment_aea6c48cee.pdf

I’m a bit gutted that the jubilant SP of last week may be a bit crestfallen now. She’s paid a heavy price.

The number is 13

Ok, that makes more sense. Fife can see that SP will win but their character assignation will mean reduced compensation.

What’s the likely outcome for DU in all of this? Once the dust has settled, will he still have the freedom of the women’s CR?

This character assassination is one of the many reasons why women do not complain or challenge in the workplace.

Yes. Thinking of being the next NHS whistle-blower? The message comes over loud and clear: you'd better have a very thick hide, deep pockets (or know someone that has), and, most of all, be squeaky-clean, with no skeletons in your closet.

I agree, it's been a positive education and I'm glad I found the threads.
No wine here, trying to catch up with work!

Does it matter why SP didn't want DU in the changing room ? The fact is, that as a man , he shouldn't have been there.

She will argue that it is obiter, i.e. not what the judgement is actually about so just something mentioned in passing rather than something the SC has seriously considered. I expect the tribunal to consider this argument and decide that it is wrong and that the law means exactly what it says - employers are required to provide single sex changing rooms and that sex means biological sex (and no, Upton is not a biological woman however much he thinks he is).

I think the last two witnesses yesterday were very much to act as a warning to all who many think about entering here...
Plus trying to set up a history of being intolerant to difference and diversity. It feels as though shiny ball syndrome was at play - distracting from the core purpose of why everyone was there in the first place.