Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #56

1000 replies

nauticant · 08/12/2025 13:52

Judgment was handed down on 8 December 2025:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6936ce28a6fc97b81e57436a/S_Peggie_v_Fife_Health_Board__Dr_Upton.pdf

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
Thread 55: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5447019-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-55

OP posts:
Thread gallery
34
Keeptoiletssafe · 09/12/2025 00:00

SionnachRuadh · 08/12/2025 23:55

But at least the direction of travel is clear. There are some ingenious lawyers sitting in our courts, but I think there's an obvious problem if the Supreme Court says "woman" means "biologically female" in respect of the provisions of the Equality Act 2010 (and, I suggest, directly related legislation like the Sex Discrimination (NI) Order 1976)...

...and then you try to argue that, when it comes to the 1992 Workplace Regulations, "woman" is a fuzzy category that includes male transvestites. The SC has explained quite exhaustively that you can't have provisions that bill themselves as single sex but which are de facto mixed sex.

Also, as noted, the Workplace Regs do not belong to the EHRC but to the HSE, so whatever Bridget Phillipson thinks she's playing at, there is nothing preventing Pat McFadden from clarifying what the Regs mean.

I got passed to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government of the United Kingdom. That’s Steve Reed.

FragilityOfCups · 09/12/2025 00:00

Some people have claimed that trans people should be allowed to make decisions about which toilets to use.

That cannot realistically happen if, for example, one female trans person wants to go in an all-female one and another male trans person wants to go in the female one, making it mixed-sex.

The trans person who wants single-sex loses out.

SionnachRuadh · 09/12/2025 00:01

MarieDeGournay · 08/12/2025 23:49

Right, we know what the problem is - logic tells us that if 'sex' means biological sex in one piece of legislation, it must mean biological sex in all other legislation and regulations.

However, logic doesn't count for much, obviously,

So please, can somebody explain what needs to be done to harmonise the definition across all legislation for once and for all?

The cleanest way is for Parliament to pass a Statutory Interpretation Act that says, when a piece of legislation uses these words, this is what it means.

That would be fairly simple procedurally but would require MPs to have some collective backbone.

Otherwise it just keeps getting kicked up to the Supreme Court as the experts in statutory interpretation. Remember a good chunk of the FWS judgment was taken up by explaining that the meanings of words have to be consistent within a single piece of legislation, and their meaning in one section doesn't mysteriously change in another section.

The Supremes will get pretty fed up having to adjudicate the same thing over and over again, but they're very unlikely to rule differently from how they've already ruled.

HildegardP · 09/12/2025 00:01

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

SionnachRuadh · 09/12/2025 00:02

Keeptoiletssafe · 09/12/2025 00:00

I got passed to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government of the United Kingdom. That’s Steve Reed.

Show quote history

Good grief. Is there no minister in this government who wants to take reponsibility for the Workplace Regs?

MarieDeGournay · 09/12/2025 00:02

FlirtsWithRhinos · 09/12/2025 00:00

It's the same old join the dots problem.

"These are the dots. I will die for these dots. Anyone who says there is a problem with these dots is a bigot".

"yeah, but if you join the dots, the picture you get is not good. These are not good dots"

"I do not understand this joining of dots. There are just the dots. Each dot stands alone. If there are consequences when the dots are joined, or if the dots contradict each other, that is not my problem. I just care for the dots."

Show quote history

Joining the dots! that reminds me of this...

NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #56
theilltemperedmaggotintheheartofthelaw · 09/12/2025 00:09

@SionnachRuadh

and then you try to argue that, when it comes to the 1992 Workplace Regulations, "woman" is a fuzzy category that includes male transvestites.

I think a better argument (devil's advocate here 🖐) is that in WR1992 sex does mean sex, but employers have a discretion to let a few men into the ladies' as a special exception. And it doesn't destroy a SSE because they don't need one in the first place (because of the 'other enactment' malarkey).

FlirtsWithRhinos · 09/12/2025 00:10

Also, appros of nothing, lying about what another poster said is a pretty dumb thing to do when the original post is there on the thread for all to see. I guess when your whole belief system depends on forcing others to accept a lie you forget other people don't think that way.

Hedgehogsrightsarehumanrights · 09/12/2025 00:11

puppymaddness · 08/12/2025 23:56

The SC has explained quite exhaustively that you can't have provisions that bill themselves as single sex but which are de facto mixed sex.

can you please reference the text of this?
And could you not just bill your facility as - eg - for women (trans inclusive)?

Edited
Show quote history

Go read the SC ruling it is there in black and white.

And as for your dismissive attitude to boiled Beatles experiences and that she bothered to expose herself to you.

and by the same token twaddle on about hurts feels of people who are told they are not the sex they claim to be. Beggars belief your views are something i cannot compute,

i have no further words that would be allowed,

RapidOnsetGenderCritic · 09/12/2025 00:12

Alpacajigsaw · 08/12/2025 17:06

But they may say too many women objected and they were bullying poor Rose. So then we will need to try and work out the optimum number of women complaining. 3 maybe?

Show quote history

I think 3 is too few and 4 is too many. I hope I'm being too cynical.

selffellatingouroborosofhate · 09/12/2025 00:12

KitWyn · 08/12/2025 20:01

Women seem to be much better than men, on average, at spotting a trans-identifying man. I suspect it's because the consequences of getting this wrong is so much greater for a woman. Men fear women will laugh at them. Women fear men will kill them.

So a woman, while still a girl, will carefully learn all the multiple tells of how men differ from women. She will become able to spot a man even at some distance in dim lighting, just by his gait and his stance.

She won't even need to see his height, large hands/feet, adam's apple, broad shoulders, narrow hips, jutting forehead/chin, stubble, receding hairline and all the other multiple typically male characteristics. Up close these all become very visible. In real-life rather than a photo, a trans-identifying man's true biological sex will be obvious to most women in virtually all cases.

Dr Upton looks like an adult human male who chooses to have long hair and wears make-up. Coupled with his height, deep voice and how he moves, I strongly believe the average woman, whether a colleague or a patient, would very quickly and correctly think that Dr Upton is male.

There is nothing wrong with looking like a man. There is a great deal wrong with being an adult human male and pushing your way into women-only spaces.

Show quote history

She will become able to spot a man even at some distance in dim lighting, just by his gait and his stance.

I could certainly tell the men approaching me when I was out running in twilight, around 4pm, today.

selffellatingouroborosofhate · 09/12/2025 00:16

MyrtleLion · 08/12/2025 20:17

As requested...

Show quote history

Please, make that an actual t-shirt.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 09/12/2025 00:16

Can we maybe keep this important thread focussed on Sandie Peggie and not the same old derails?

HildegardP · 09/12/2025 00:17

SionnachRuadh · 09/12/2025 00:02

Good grief. Is there no minister in this government who wants to take reponsibility for the Workplace Regs?

Show quote history

Given it was signed off by Michael Howard in '92, I can't see any reason why Alison McGovern isn't responsible for it now.
Good luck trying to get any factual points through her rubbery carapace of self-regarding "allyship" though.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 09/12/2025 00:18

SionnachRuadh · 08/12/2025 23:36

I'll just say, if I were Big Sond, I would have looked at the points of law under dispute and I'd have said, Feck this, my tribunal hisnae the competency to decide these questions, that's what we pay the judicial heidyins for.

I wouldn't have taken 300 pages to say it but.

Exactly what I’ve thought would happen from the start.

SionnachRuadh · 09/12/2025 00:20

HildegardP · 09/12/2025 00:17

Given it was signed off by Michael Howard in '92, I can't see any reason why Alison McGovern isn't responsible for it now.
Good luck trying to get any factual points through her rubbery carapace of self-regarding "allyship" though.

Show quote history

I have just had a disturbing vision of every minister in the government, one after another, denying that it's got anything to do with them, until the music stops and David Lammy is left holding the ball.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 09/12/2025 00:21

The point of contention was whether man identifying as a woman in the ladies changing room equals sexual harassment in and of itself. I didn’t think he would want to find that it did.

selffellatingouroborosofhate · 09/12/2025 00:22

Boiledbeetle · 08/12/2025 20:41

The non binary women one?

Show quote history

Yes, Heather "Haech" something vs Wirral and something-or-other NHS Trust. There was a thread recently.

Keeptoiletssafe · 09/12/2025 00:23

SionnachRuadh · 09/12/2025 00:20

I have just had a disturbing vision of every minister in the government, one after another, denying that it's got anything to do with them, until the music stops and David Lammy is left holding the ball.

Show quote history

Shadow Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government is James Cleverly.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 09/12/2025 00:24

ScrollingLeaves · 08/12/2025 23:27

In a written judgment on Monday, the tribunal upheld Peggie’s harassment claim against the health board but dismissed other claims. It also dismissed the nurse’s claim against Upton, whose evidence was held to be “more reliable and materially more cohesive in nature”.

I find this troubling. I have not listened to the tribunal but from experience generally I woukd say that of course a British doctor, with the likely education Upton would have had through school and university, would most likely be more fluent, able to plan coherent arguments set in an order which clearly expresses what he intends to convey, and be altogether more accomplished at speaking, than a nurse is likely to be.

It sound all sound more reliable.

She should not have had to speak at all. It should be so simple. TW need their own space, but TWANW. If a changing room is single sex an actual woman should not have to beg for it to be single sex, get speech and drama coaching, then need a £million court case about it. This is all so senseless.

I saw him give evidence and it doesn’t in any way reflect my experience of it.

HildegardP · 09/12/2025 00:27

@SionnachRuadh We're going to need a lot of dinosaur costumes.

CraftyRedBird · 09/12/2025 00:30

If there are no complaints or issues raised, that would be an indicator that the wishes of the trans person on which facility to use can be accommodated.

Even if said employer, as many including NHS Fife did, had told them that transgender employees had a right to use such facilities and unions refused to help...

Also I don't see how this can work in practice. Even if all staff were okay sharing, is a new joiner supposed to come in, wait until a man sees her in the nude, get very upset and then complain?

And then what, keep stripping off in front of a man around until alternative provisions are put in place? It's surely foreseeable than many won't be happy, and that employers have a duty of care.

CraftyRedBird · 09/12/2025 00:35

Ereshkigalangcleg · 09/12/2025 00:24

I saw him give evidence and it doesn’t in any way reflect my experience of it.

Show quote history

I agree, and this was before I became a TERF. I was expecting to see an unfortunate transwoman who happened to have been told they were okay using the changing facilities.

Dr. Upton was smug and awful, and avoided answering all and any questions. So manipulative. He seemed to think he was Dr. SmartyPants. Sandie seemed direct and truthful.

TheAutumnCrow · 09/12/2025 00:37

Ereshkigalangcleg · 09/12/2025 00:16

Can we maybe keep this important thread focussed on Sandie Peggie and not the same old derails?

Yes, agreed. I don’t think posters should give particular thread-hoarding derailers any more of their time and their thought processes. Just ain’t worf it.

MyAmpleSheep · 09/12/2025 00:42

CraftyRedBird · 09/12/2025 00:30

If there are no complaints or issues raised, that would be an indicator that the wishes of the trans person on which facility to use can be accommodated.

Even if said employer, as many including NHS Fife did, had told them that transgender employees had a right to use such facilities and unions refused to help...

Also I don't see how this can work in practice. Even if all staff were okay sharing, is a new joiner supposed to come in, wait until a man sees her in the nude, get very upset and then complain?

And then what, keep stripping off in front of a man around until alternative provisions are put in place? It's surely foreseeable than many won't be happy, and that employers have a duty of care.

Edited

Also I don't see how this can work in practice. Even if all staff were okay sharing, is a new joiner supposed to come in, wait until a man sees her in the nude, get very upset and then complain?

There's a set of rules for this. Every new female member of staff gets one point. If the new joiner wears a hijab, or is a religiously observant Jew, or has extra trauma (not just regular trauma) they get two points. Three if they have trauma and are observant. Once seven or more points are scored there's a new vote amongst all employees. Votes can only happen on Wednesdays, and not in August.

Please create an account

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

Join Mumsnet Log In
This thread is not accepting new messages.