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 #50

1000 replies

nauticant · 07/08/2025 21:44

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 was 29 July 2025. It will resume again over 1 to 2 September for closing submissions.

The hearing commenced with Sandie Peggie giving evidence. Dr Beth Upton gave evidence from Thursday 6 February to Wednesday 12 February 2025. Sandie Peggie returned to give more evidence on 29 July 2025.

Access to view the second part of 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
Thread 46: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/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
Thread 47: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5382102-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-47 29 July 2025 to 29 July 2025
Thread 48: 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 29 July 2025 to 31 July 2025
Thread 49: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5383443-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-49 31 July 2025 to 8 August 2025

OP posts:
Thread gallery
46
MyrtleLion · 01/09/2025 11:43

From TT

Next case - an attack on fundamental physics is a surprise departure even for them. They suggest that time runs forward and backward, the 1996 legislation could not impact the 1992 workplace regulations. The suggestion that unlike in the EA the 1992 regs speak of men and women

murasaki · 01/09/2025 11:44

MyrtleLion · 01/09/2025 11:42

From TT

It has attempted to smear her as a bigot and transphobe, to drive a wedge between her and her lesbian daughter, it has smeared her witnesses, it has told lies, it has attracted censure from the IC and the EHRC. This behaviour is repugnant.

Damning, and no word of a lie, that's exactly what they've tried to do.

ickky · 01/09/2025 11:44

PETE

CriticalCondition · 01/09/2025 11:44

Pete!!

Boiledbeetle · 01/09/2025 11:44

Pete

MyrtleLion · 01/09/2025 11:45

From TT

t actually means 'men' and 'women + men who feel like women'. Those terms have not been modified by a GRC. This is a much more radical suggestions in an earlier piece of legislation, sex doesn't mean certificated sex but self id. This interpretation would throw open the CR to

GCITC · 01/09/2025 11:47

Pete makes an appearance!

Keenovay · 01/09/2025 11:47

PETE'S HERE!

MyrtleLion · 01/09/2025 11:47

From TT

Pete. My hypothetical manly man. All he would have do is say 'I am a woman;.

Thank takes me to Copeland. Breach of 1992 regs are subject to crim penalties, the defs of men and women need to be clear. The C agrees. The only clear definitions are biological sex, or possibly

MyrtleLion · 01/09/2025 11:48

From TT

certificated sex. The Rs leap from no definition in the 1992 Regs to that must mean 'lived gender'. And none of the Rs witnesses were able to distinguish well between Pete and a transwoman. Finally, a reference to an ET in Croydon, the Tribunal is unlikely to be assisted by

crosstalk · 01/09/2025 11:48

I too follow people with whom I disagree, but find it disheartening when they block me when I comment politely.

Boiledbeetle · 01/09/2025 11:48

End of what NC wanted to say about ??

Asking to break now

MyrtleLion · 01/09/2025 11:49

From TT

by a first tier tribunal, in England. And I would say it is another example of the Rs substitution of ad hominem attacks for legal arguments by attacked a member of the Cs legal team.

nauticant · 01/09/2025 11:49

Lunch now?

I am OUTRAGED!

OP posts:
Boiledbeetle · 01/09/2025 11:49

Panel breaking

Back at 12.30

WandaSiri · 01/09/2025 11:50

MyrtleLion · 01/09/2025 11:49

From TT

by a first tier tribunal, in England. And I would say it is another example of the Rs substitution of ad hominem attacks for legal arguments by attacked a member of the Cs legal team.

🔥😂

MyrtleLion · 01/09/2025 11:51

From TT

I'm at the end of my authorities, it's early for lunch but I would be able to continue with the speaking note that I will provide.

J - what do you prefer

NC - a minor preference to break now.

J - we will break now, shorter lunch break, back at 12:30. End of morning part 2.

MyrtleLion · 01/09/2025 11:51

I will now catch up on this thread!

BouncyCastleNHSSquirrels · 01/09/2025 11:52

Thanks @MyrtleLion and @Chariothorses for c&p TT and Herald

Chariothorses · 01/09/2025 11:53

from herald
11:52am
Ms Cunningham is questioning a reference to Shabina Begum, a Muslim pupil at Denbigh High School in Luton, who challenged the school’s requirement that she wear its shalwar kameez-style uniform rather than a jilbāb. She argued the policy conflicted with Sharia law. Begum initially lost in the High Court, won on appeal, but ultimately lost in March 2006 when the House of Lords unanimously overturned the Court of Appeal’s decision.
Ms Cunningham says the respondents hope to use this to describe as the leadership role that employers in the public sector sector, should take when dealing with intolerance, particularly in a conflict of rights situation.
"So it would seem that what the respondents are saying here is that if schools have an obligation to take responsibility for the moral education of pupils, by analogy, the respondent has a similar obligation to see to the moral education of Sandie Peggie that appears to require her to get changed in front of men who say they're women in order to become less of a bigot, no doubt, for her own good and the good of her colleagues and society at large".
She adds: "The implication of that is that Sandie Peggy's disinclination to undress in front of one of her male colleagues is a matter of intolerance, bigotry.
"The respondent makes that suggestion despite having heard without challenging it her evidence that her personal feelings about physical modesty have been partly conditioned by being sexually assaulted on a number of occasions as a teenager.
"It says that a good employer like NHS Fife ought to be entitled to educate her out of that kind of intolerance.
"NHS Fife, the good employer in this talk, has subjected a nurse of 30 years unblemished service to a full blown witch hunt to punish her for standing up for her right not to undress in front of a male colleague, and then, in an attempt to evade the consequences of that conduct, it has attempted a shockingly spiteful public character assassination of her.
"It has subjected her supporting witnesses to groundless smears. It has attempted to drive a wedge between her and her lesbian daughter.
"It's subjected her to a protracted investigation of obviously false allegations of potentially career ending gravity.
"It's attacked the integrity of her legal team. It has defied tribunal orders. It has told countless lies.
"Its conduct in all of this has attracted, during the course of these proceedings, the censure of not one but two regulators, the ICO and the EHRC."
Ms Cunningham says in making this argument they have crossed the boundary from being "merely obviously wrong to being morally repugnant."

PrettyDamnCosmic · 01/09/2025 11:53

I was viewing the court about 15-20 minutes ago but now have been booted out & when I reconnect I only get the splash screen about it being an offence to record proceedings & WFTCHTJ. Are others seeing anything?

chilling19 · 01/09/2025 11:53

I find myself getting tearful when listening to NC stating explicitly what the harms have been to SP and by association all of us. It is upsetting that we have ended up having to defend our rights as women. Really upsetting.

PrettyDamnCosmic · 01/09/2025 11:57

PrettyDamnCosmic · 01/09/2025 11:53

I was viewing the court about 15-20 minutes ago but now have been booted out & when I reconnect I only get the splash screen about it being an offence to record proceedings & WFTCHTJ. Are others seeing anything?

Just caught up & see they have taken an early lunch. Previously they left the camera & microphone running during breaks so I'm not sure whether I have a problem or is everyone WFTCHTJ?

ickky · 01/09/2025 11:58

@PrettyDamnCosmic

Still in the court room, sound muted.

You can ring them

01382 221 578

Please create an account

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

This thread is not accepting new messages.