NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #51

[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 was 29 July 2025. It resumed 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 #50 can be found in this thread: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379717-sandie-peggie-list-of-threads-covering-employment-tribunal-and-afterwards

Thread 50: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5387893-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-50 7 August 2025 to 1 September 2025

Can someone confirm- is JR arguing here that women cannot have any basic human rights eg to privacy if men want to remove them eg watch them undress?

from herald

2:43pm
Ms Russell says that in discrimination, the discriminator takes away the ability of somebody to make those choices by treating somebody less well because of their protected characteristic.
"This is why all of these pieces of legislation aimed at protecting vulnerable groups were enacted.
"The result of this is that somebody's life is shaped not by the choices that they make, which are informed by their underlying values of dignity and autonomy, but by the prejudice of someone else.
"That is what is happening here. Dr Upton's life is being shaped not by the choices that she makes, but by the prejudices of somebody else."

It's

Like she's

Pract

ised

Hoow

Tosaya

sent

Ance

In as an ann

Oying way

As poss

Ible.

Unless as she's just done its Mayas surname then she quickly spits it out pronounced wrong.

😂

From TT

to human frailty. We do not insist on strict equality in all contexts. We make certain accommodations it situations where there is reason to do it. It's a balancing act and it was before and since FWS.

FWS does not impose a requirement to discriminate against trans people

It does permit discrimination within the exceptions in Sched 3, for service providers. The SC made it clear that they were not disadvantaging or removing protections for trans people. The SC affirmed that it agreed with Forstater EAT that a refusal to use preferred pronouns

JR FWS does not impose a requirement to discriminate against trans people.

I think that's exactly what it does, but 'to discriminate' is not necessarily a negative. Like in the case of single sex spaces.

It's not that there's an exception for doctors. It's that there is an exception for trans people because they are the sacred caste in our society.

Maya's surname has no H in it, she must be doing it vindictively.

Gender ideology: when you can't possibly know what sex people are but you absolutely must know which sex they're pretending to be, all while believing that sex doesn't exist in any definable way.

She's horrible! There is absolutely no need at all. It gives me the rage every time she does that! 😡

From TT

could constitute harassment. Accords with the ETBB for England and for Scotland.

EHRC statutory code of practice, says trans people should be treated as gender they present, it should always be a balancing act. It accords with the Luxembourg statue.

The C says that the Code of Practice was always wrong, it is wrong in the light of FWS. The only way in which the CoP conflicts with FWS is that is says 'should' treat trans people as acquired gender. They both identify carveouts. Only an inconsistency if you say they must exclude trans people.

Totally, I'm convinced she wants someone to correct her but no one will play her game!

Fucksake, Jane, Sandie wasn't discriminating cos Upton's trans, but cos Upton's male.

If Sandie had objected to a female claiming a trans identity, then it would have been discrimination on the basis of tran status.

But that's not what happened.

<tears hair out>

Yes I'm sure all SP's colleagues can't wait to receive the same treatment that she has endured.

What a tit.

from herald
2:50pm
Addressing the Supreme Court ruling in For Women Scotland v Scottish ministers, which said sex in the equality act meant biological sex, Jane Russell KC said the judgment "does not impose any obligation on any duty bearer to discriminate against trans. "
She adds that it was about the statutory interpretation of the Equality Act.
"It is not about toilet facilities, changing rooms or the workplace changing rooms and toilet facilities."
She adds: "We do not insist on strict equality in every circumstance because we make certain accommodations in particular contexts where there is a coherent reason for doing so, it's a balancing act, and it always has been, both pre and post For Women Scotland."

I've seen criminal barristers try to bore a jury to put distance between exciting evidence and their client.

I assume this is the same tactic for the panel.

JR EHRC statutory code of practice, says trans people should be treated as gender they present, it should always be a balancing act

I realise TT is just notes, so I'd love to see what she said in full, but it looks like she has just declared that whether or not trans people should be treated as the gender they present as, depends..
even JR isn't saying it's an absolute right!

It seems to me that JR is saying a whole load of things that are just plain false. Will there be any consequences for this? She seems to lose case after case after case yet still get elevated to KC and get more work.

This is stressing me out no end.

@Supporterofwomensrights wouldn't it be great if Dr Upton's salary was decreased by 30% (for example) in line with a gender pay gap! 😂

JFC!

The equality act 2010 says trans people can’t be denied services or work or housing because they are trans. It explicitly states that single sex services can exclude trans identified people for reasons of dignity privacy and safety, and gives examples.

This is about men in dresses not being sacked or given a council house or hotel room because they present as trans. It’s not about letting them into single sex spaces. It’s almost as if the people drafting the legislation thought it might be a bad idea to let the men into the women’s spaces.

I'm not observing but if she is doing this on purpose it is incredibly childish.

She's a barrister, a professional ... allegedly

Break for five mins

Judge leaps on an opportunity for a break.

Judge says its coming up to 5 o'clock. It certainly feels like that!

Judge said we'd have a break because "it's coming up to five o'clock". That's what they call a Freudian slip :-)

From TT

It doesn't say that. The Board clearly took the view that there was no coherent reason to exclude DU. Up until the complainant, no one has complained. And no one has complained since. Despite the media coverage which has been almost universally favourable of the C.

It should encourage like minded people to come forward. C has said that they are discouraged by the climate of fear, on the last day of the trial she said there were 13 people who shared her concerns. None of these people have come forward.

Not even the C said in chief, said that there was a climate of fear. No basis for that assertion. C said 'the board has been deliberately elaborating misled', refers to a submission made by Sex Matters about Stonewall. The implication is that Stonewall had the resources to organise an int'l conspiracy.