NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #55

[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]

The hearing was 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 51: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5402652-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-51 1 September 2025 to 2 September 2025
Thread 52: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5403218-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-52 2 September 2025 to 4 September 2025
Thread 53: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5404208-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-53 3 September to 1 October 2025
Thread 54: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5418690-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-54 from 28 September 2025

It wasn't a personal page - not sure I even know where to find one of those. It was a public listing. I am in 2 minds about the whole thing. On the one hand this person has a right to be referred to how they would like, but then on the other hand it's completely factually incorrect for a male to be called a lesbian, especially since the Supreme Court.... But the ban threatening was really over the top in my opinion. A second editor seemed to be called in and they reviewed and commented on my editing history - I was not impressed by their behaviour. I found it bullying and over the top

A personal page has a url something like en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Example and the page title would show as User:Example. The important bit is the "User:" part of the page name. That tells you it is someone's personal page.

If this person is not famous, you almost certainly edited their personal page.

If you want to identify the page concerned, I would be happy to take a look and say whether I think what happened was normal Wikipedia behaviour and, if so, why. Feel free to PM me if you don't want to post the information publicly.

I love this 😂

Hoping today may be judgment day!
C'mon Big Sond.

I really hope it is - if nothing else, it will give all parties a chance to digest his findings before Christmas. Much as I think some of them have behaved appallingly, I think it would be a shame to release the judgement a few days before Christmas.

It was agreed that the involved parties would get the judgement a week before it becomes public so even if it is published on Christmas Eve the main players will have had a few days to process it before Christmas.

Ah, the glorious internal mail envelopes that our non-London office carried on using well into the 90’s. I am not sure we were any less productive by not using email/instant messaging.

Then the Commodore computers turned up..,..

I hope it's good news from a case perspective as last Christmas couldn't have been at all pleasant for Sandie given her Dad's health situation and the start of this case early in the New Year.

10am has been and gone again <sighs>

I hear Big Sond hit a belter on the 7th at Falkland this morning tho, so there's that! Twa fit aff a hole in one.

I'm on tenderhooks now. C'mon big Sond!

I was more nervous prior to the Supreme court judgement but this is a close second.

I remember I was sat in my car refreshing on X and MN waiting for the news. The joy was overwhelming but then of course the morose, funereal tones of pricks like JOB on the radio nearly killed the vibes.

I was on a train into London and couldn't get a good enough signal to watch the livestream, so I was refreshing between here and TwiX. I started sobbing pathetically when I heard the result, I'm fairly sure the tourists opposite me thought I was bonkers.

I also rang my father when I got to London - just to tell someone before I actually burst - and he was politely baffled as to why the ruling was ever necessary because "Doesn't everyone know this already?" Well, you'd think...

Oh, and I also remember saying to Dad "It's finally OVER!".

Ah, how little the me of 16th April knew about the blowback and refusal to accept the ruling that was about to come... I look back now and realise it was more like the beginning of Philosopher's Stone where everyone is celebrating Voldemort's downfall but it's not quite over yet.

I always think of Churchill’s quote “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning”

Yes that's an excellent quote and very true. The supreme court ruling was such an overwhelming sense of relief but I was surprised (and probably shouldn't have been) at the grudging messages coming from all official organisations, including government. It proved to me that women's rights just don't matter whatsoever however much society pretends they do.

Interview with Andrea Egan, who is hoping to become the next leader of Unison, in Politics Home.

This is what she says about Sandie Peggie:

"Another is standing up for trans workers. I wonder what she makes of Sandie Peggie, the NHS nurse who complained about having to use the same hospital dressing room as a trans colleague. She has launched legal action against her trade union, alleging that the Royal College of Nursing failed to support her. How would Egan react if a similar case came to Unison?

“I haven’t followed that case. But what were the real issues within that? I have trans friends, trans women friends; my nephew is a trans man. I wouldn’t have an issue. I’d want to understand. Because the argument can then develop to anybody saying… ‘Well, I don’t want you there because you’ve got blonde hair’ or ‘I don’t want them there because they’ve got blue eyes’,” Egan says.

“We have members come to the union with all kinds of issues, and some of them are unreasonable, but you’ve got to unpick them.”

It sounds like she wouldn’t be comfortable with the union representing someone like Peggie? “I wouldn’t,” she agrees".

https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/unison-challenger-andrea-egan-labour-government-done-little-working-people

She claims not to have followed the case. And she said she would want to understand the issue, because apparently there could be some sort of leap from a women objecting to sharing a changing room with a man to someone objecting to sharing with someone because they have blue eyes 🙄🙄🙄

Speak your branes indeed.

"Siri, show me what happens when you are so open minded your brains fall out"

Fuck me and she is a SOCIAL WORKER!!!!!!

Comparing a woman complaining about the presence of man to a woman complaining about the presence of a blonde woman is crass, and deliberately obtuse.

Her trans-identifying niece is probably a major factor in her attitude.

A person having blue eyes is obviously not like a person having a penis, and no one is expecting all facilities to go mixed sex because of the privacy dignity issue but expecting some women to pretend there's a difference between that man with a penis and this other man with a penis, obediently basing her reality on what he says is going on in his head.

Followers of this religion have every right to believe, I wish them happiness and freedom in practicing their belief, but they really need to stop behaving like raving lunatics about the fact that not everyone is a believer like them. Live and let live for pete's sake, and have a bit of self awareness.

I keep hearing "live and let live" thrown about but they dont actually mean it. They just mean "do as we say".

Does anyone follow Naomi on LinkedIn? I’ve just noticed that she posted about GirlGuiding “slowly, slowly all at once”.
Please let her be talking about court cases too.

She was talking about the WI and posted a link to the Guardian article about the WI.

Slowly, then all at once...?

It was significant because her previous post of the same-day was the comment below and a link to the Telegraph article about GirlGuiding.

Good news, but a terrible headline. "Trans girls" here means boys.
Language matters.