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

[nauticant]

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

If RCN did take on a gender critical case, how much faith would a member have that it wouldn't be messed up?

NP talking through his arse here, there had to be a second claim to deal with events occurring around the first hearing one cannot just add additional claims once the boundaries have been set, and the hearing is underway.

In a sane world, a female nurse going to her union and saying 'my employer thinks i should be obliged to undress in front of my male colleague!' would get the response - 'crikey, I'll call the police!', never mind just legal advice...

Yep

If he did, Bethany Hutchison on Monday might be able to clarify.

DH ‘if after careful consideration we cannot provide’ how are people advised of that?
NP I would make the decision but the officer would tell them. Orally and by email.
DH template used?
NP no . Normally done by email.
DH Mr Fraser dealt?
NP yes
DH then you were written to by SP seeking further reasons 14.2.25.

DH email from Mr Fraser ‘Norman has asked me to discuss…’
NP a lot of correspondence was happening with SP lawyer MG. I thought it useful for someone to have a discussion with SP.
DH SP preferred to have a conversation after email. You’re in another email, had you changed the rationale?
NP I hadn’t changed my rationale

incompatible with policy position

important point, there. If the policy position is contra to a protected belief, that’s unlawful discrimination.

DH one aspect of this case is absence of assistance . Did you have any awareness of request for legal advice in advance.
NP not until a year later. ie early 2025.
DH did you continue to have conversations with SF about any other aspects? NP no
DH any indication of any difficulties from SFrase lr to provide support re SP CG or sex realist views?
NP No

The impression I got is that the defence in part is going to be that the decision-maker, NP, was not completely informed of the circumstances by the person dealing with Sandie Peggie, SF. This might be a fall-back if the defence based on the consistent rule about independent advice doesn't hold.

I'm reading Nick Wallis's x thread in tandem with this one and according to a reply on his feed, nurses can also join "Unison, Unite, GMB and Royal College of Midwives".

J let’s break for 10 minutes. Back at 1137.

Any of them shown any willingness to support gender-critical members recently? [laughs in hollow]

All of whom are just as captured and would not have helped SP either.

The term "early bath" for court finishing early - I don't recall having heard this before, perhaps because no other tribunal has been in danger of finishing business early! Is it specific to courts, or regional, or what, anyone know?

It's a football term isn't it.

"early bath" is I think sport related - player being sent off before the end of a game

I believe it's a sporting term m'Lord. Players are said to have 'an early bath' after being sent off.

It'll be interesting if they introduce yellow and red cards into ET proceedings.

I believe 'Rose' was an operating department practitioner rather than a nurse so probably not a member of the RCN. When I was a member back in the day, only registered nurses could be members IIRC.

I would pay to watch that! 😁

Iirc, didn't SF tell SP to treat her suspension as a holiday? Is that 'reframe her trauma' in the wild?

SP might lose because she didn't say the right words to get help at the right time and in the right order. A GC nurse who did jump through the right hoops could still expect to be supported. Personally, I think the procedures are being manipulated after the fact to try to legally cover for something they didn't want to do anyway. I hope the judge can see through it.

or VAR😂

Did the question from yesterday about a case being opened before SP had spoken to the RCN get resolved or have I misunderstood something as I dip in and out.

Or the people viewing started singing during the slow bits and doing Mexican waves.