Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Sandie Peggie: Employment Tribunal, associated legal claims, and related matters - thread #63

926 replies

nauticant · 24/09/2026 13:07

TLDR version: Sandie Peggie vs Royal College of Nursing is currently being heard. The hearing started on Wednesday 23 September 2026 and is scheduled to end on Thursday 1 October 2026.

Sandie Peggie, a nurse at Victoria Hospital in Kirkcaldy (VH), brought claims in the employment tribunal against her employer; Fife Health Board (the Board) and another employee, Dr B Upton. Ms Peggie’s claims were of sexual harassment, harassment related to a protected belief, indirect discrimination and victimisation. Dr Upton claimed 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 after a prolonged process judgment was handed down on 8 December 2025. That judgment is being appealed and an appeal hearing is expected to take place in 2027.

Additional legal claims have been raised. Sandie Peggie is taking action against the Royal College of Nursing, against three senior managers who were witnesses in the employment tribunal - Dr Kate Searle, Dr Maggie Currer and Esther Davidson, against Carol Potter, the chief executive of NHS Fife, for victimisation, against NHS Fife for discrimination, and against its director of people and culture David Miller for harassment. In addition, Sandie Peggie is being investigated by the Nursing and Midwifery Council over fitness to practice.

The past proceedings were live tweeted by www.x.com/tribunaltweets. Tribunal Tweets are likely to be providing coverage in current and future proceedings. There's additional information on Tribunal Tweets' substack: tribunaltweets.substack.com/.

Links to previous threads #1 to #60 can be found in this thread: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379717-sandie-peggie-list-of-threads-covering-employment-tribunal-and-afterwards

Thread 60: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5461133-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-following-employment-tribunal-judgment-thread-60 16 December 2025 to 8 January 2026

Thread 61: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5472628-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-following-employment-tribunal-judgment-thread-61 8 January 2026 to 3 August 2026

Thread 62: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5562302-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-following-employment-tribunal-judgment-thread-62 3 August 2026 to 24 September 2026

OP posts:
Thread gallery
21
Justabaker · 25/09/2026 16:04

@janeszebra

I like use of 'eternal' but suspect you meant external.

janeszebra · 25/09/2026 16:04

Perhaps RCN's lack of help and response to Sandie's initial call was the prompt for her to seek eternal help. These fucking idiots.

Justabaker · 25/09/2026 16:03

Fuck off.

And then keep fucking off.
And fuck off until you come to a gate with a sign that says 'no fucking off past this point'.

Then climb that gate, dream the impossible dream and keep fucking off forever.

YouCanCallMeMonster · 25/09/2026 16:03

JFC!!!!!

poor Sandie relying on getting advice from these clowns!

Boiledbeetle · 25/09/2026 16:02

I'm glad to see we are all of one mind!

JamesKirkupReviewWritersFund · 25/09/2026 16:02

I can't decide if i'm jealous when all the posters post in unison about something that isn't yet clear to me, or excited as to what may be about to happen!

Boiledbeetle · 25/09/2026 16:02

ickky · 25/09/2026 16:01

We could be the same person. 😂

Show quote history

😁

Sock Puppets GIF by Your Happy Workplace
SomewhatGlad · 25/09/2026 16:01

TT

(Glad: NC) - .you say the claim was part heard (she quotes) you seek to bolster your original decision nothing to do with your initial decision.

If you turn to p417, Mrs Peggie email 3 March sets out all reasons why your explanation makes no sense. She draws reasonable inference that she is refused because of her GC beliefs. Go to p320 SF note of original call

Hedgehogforshort · 25/09/2026 16:01

ickky · 25/09/2026 16:00

FUCKOFF

Interesting spot of legal analysis @😂

ickky · 25/09/2026 16:01

Boiledbeetle · 25/09/2026 16:00

Twins

Show quote history

We could be the same person. 😂

ProudWomanXX · 25/09/2026 16:01

Wow!

CriticalCondition · 25/09/2026 16:00

Oh fuck off.

Boiledbeetle · 25/09/2026 16:00

ickky · 25/09/2026 16:00

FUCKOFF

Twins

janeszebra · 25/09/2026 16:00

The facts are pretty damn clear.

Boiledbeetle · 25/09/2026 16:00

Currently going

Oh fuck off

To the screen.

ickky · 25/09/2026 16:00

FUCKOFF

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 25/09/2026 16:00

I saw the bit about the tree as well, it might have been better for SP if the union had had a real tree for her to ask, can't help thinking she'd have got a better decision from an actual tree than this plank.

SomewhatGlad · 25/09/2026 15:58

TT

NC - back to page 416, your second letter of explanation of refusal of assistance. You say we must decline as it would be impossible to separate from initial proceedings. This is a circular argument? NP it could be separated, but I saw them as linked.

NP - in my view they were linked. Based on the description of a case I described earlier, similar, my decision was based on that.

NC - it was perfectly possible to make a sep claim, as that is what is happening now.
NP - yes impossible too strong a word. My view was that it would be stronger to join them.

NC - The legal advice you took was based on almost no information?
NP - no clear from email correspondence, a three way conv between me, Stuart and external legal advice. Info was adequate.
NC - you gave a further reason 24 Feb email

Boiledbeetle · 25/09/2026 15:56

Naomi is making the union look like incompetent numpties.

I appreciate I may be biased!

DauntlessDamson · 25/09/2026 15:54

I'm off to the woods to find a decision-making tree and ask it what I should have for my tea........

SomewhatGlad · 25/09/2026 15:54

TT

NC - are you telling the tribunal if we replace the story with one of concerns about infection control and being suspended, then the rep would not make this urgent?
NP - it is highly unusual for officers to run a legal case that early.

There is discussion about time management of cases. Again sound poor

Boiledbeetle · 25/09/2026 15:54

janeszebra · 25/09/2026 15:53

SO at what point does a union start acting like a union when a person rings them for help?

Once they've been found guilty of something they didn't do and lost their job.

Unfortunately they'd then be unable to help as they should have waffle waffle waffle

janeszebra · 25/09/2026 15:53

SO at what point does a union start acting like a union when a person rings them for help?

CriticalCondition · 25/09/2026 15:52

WomanInnaWoods · 25/09/2026 15:48

Norman the clairvoyant, disagreeing with the take on the investigation report he didn't read

Yes, he didn't read the report, he didn't read the pleadings but 'morally' he really, really wanted to help. But his hands were tied.

SomewhatGlad · 25/09/2026 15:52

TT

NC - no, once she's talking to an officer, a trained officer, or she should have to do is tell the story, and it should be his job to advise?
NP - not at an early stage, maybe at a later stage.