Sandie Peggie: Employment Tribunal, associated legal claims, and related matters - thread #64

[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: www.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 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

Thread 63: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5581909-sandie-peggie-employment-tribunal-associated-legal-claims-and-related-matters-thread-63 24 September 2026 to 27 September 2026

Judge Kemp said that SP's attempts to distance herself from it being an obvious reference to IB were not credible.
It was one of the reasons given for not finding her a credible witness on all matters - unlike DrU, of course😒

😂😂😂

630. The second aspect was her evidence that when referring to “the prisons incident” during the Christmas Eve incident she was not aware that that involved a rapist, as a broad summary of her evidence. That we considered to be not credible. There was an admitted fact that “C referred to the “women’s prison incident”, that is the Isla Bryson/Adam Graham.
It is taken from the claimant’s pleadings, at paragraph 13 of the Response Table which the admitted fact cross references. In light of the circumstances of that case, which involved a person who as a man raped two women, who then commenced to transition to female including the change of name, and where an issue arose when initially placed in a women’s prison, which is a matter of particular concern, and of interest, to those with gender critical beliefs such as the claimant, that evidence seeking to distance herself from the remark which related to a rapist was we considered not credible.

Quite convenient that @Lacksie asked by @MyAmpleSheep if they had had their eyes opened off the back of this afternoon’s evidence by Stuart Fraser has suddenly been busy working and not had time to catch up/school run/working when they have been quite regularly posting on another thread

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womensrights/5581208-5581208-some-clarity-in-how-the-trans-movement-became-so-embedded-so-preeminent?page=21

It would seem when the light is shone on reality as was done this afternoon by NC @Lacksie is scrambling with reasons they have not followed. Call me cynical but I have experiences the ‘be kind’ ‘let trans people live their lives’ many times. When cold hard facts are used they are left with nothing to respond with other than they are busy being virtuous/working/school run/ususal word salad of nonsense.

Busted

It's usually a matter of where someone's sympathies primarily lie. If you tend to sympathise with trans people, you will tend to feel their distress and ignore the other person's distress. If your sympathy tends to be with women, you will feel their distress and tend to ignore the other person's distress.

With JM's situation, it's rather difficult for me to feel much sympathy with the violent man who racially abused her, even if he was genuine in his feeling hurt for being 'misgendered'. And it's very easy for me to feel sympathy for the nurse who was racially abused and attacked when she was doing her job to the best of her ability.

Sometimes I can see both sides of the story, but I do think it's important to analyse the different standpoints to see which is based in physical reality and which is incompatible with physical reality, or at least appears to be based on an attempt to justify feelings by building a tottering infrastructure of dubious arguments.

Wtaf. I've written a few posts on another thread and on this thread- replies in response to posts that have directly tagged me. that doesn't mean I've had time to read through and digest all the transcripts of evidence from this afternoon , embedded in the thread discussion . I simply haven't. I've also been working on a work presentation, having a meeting and picking my kids up from school. The thread moves fast. Yes that is the truth.

What is your issue exactly? Can you just please allow me to have a civilised discussion about the case, where I have time to participate . as everyone else does.

Thank you.

I must have got my TRAs mixed up, I thought Lacksie was in Australia yesterday.

I'm not a "TRA".

Google tells me an RCN rep (likely male) earns is paid £49-55k. A band 6 senior nurse (likely female) earns £39-47k. Well I never.

Whatever you are, when you have a minute have a look through SF's cross-examination and see if his evidence changes your mind about the two-part test.

You’ve decided to label everyone else here as gender critical, they’re entitled to regard you as a TRA.

I will

Answering my own q: Michael Foran writes "PS Those of you following Peggie v RCN, I managed to catch some of the proceedings and will give a run down of this on my next live, probably tomorrow or Wednesday."

No issue @Lacksie continue with your civilised discussion. It may well be useful to read up on today’s events. They were quite the eye opener - if nothing else at the lack of curiosity from SF who pretty much should have been there to listen to and offer support to SP but pretty much immediately adopted ‘she is the problem’ approach due to Dr Upton being a man presenting as a women in the CR. No professional curiosity, no candour in his approach at all. Pretty much blind panic because the sacred caste of trans was involved. Please continue. You do not need to list all the things you have been doing. My point was when asked by a poster if you had followed this afternoon, which glaringly opened up the madness of this whole situation-you chose to list what you had been busy doing as opposed to simply saying you would be catching up later and getting back to the thread.

When you have you may have a little more insight into how many of us are so fed up of pandering to trans. An overvalued belief if ever there was one.

Nick Wallis will do an update. He is good and concise.

To be fair, it's higher in NHS Scotland for a B6 nurse at the top of her/his scale at £52679. Still not as much as an RCN rep - especially ones who appear to know FA about things they are supposed to know about.

Nc: but aren’t women entitled to say they don’t want to get in changed of a man.
SF: GI access was a grey area at the time

Gosh, he’s making my skin crawl with his attempts to cop out of this. That wasn’t a ‘yes, women are entitled to say they don’t want to get changed in front of a man’.

And, he was a man who was receiving his salary from a majority female workforce. Women who are parting with their hard earned cash, and who probably thought that if needed, he would represent them fully, without prejudice, with respect, fairness and integrity. I’m not seeing that from his answers. I suppose NC is doing a public service to any woman who the RCN assigns him as her representation. She might find herself left up the creek without a paddle, if it involves a conflict with the wishes of a male man.

All I’m hearing is if some mentions women, he goes to ‘but what about the men, and what they want’.

I haven't called anyone "a gender critical". Most people on these threads refer to themselves as being gender critical / sex realist- I understood that as being the preferred/ community adopted label for the set of ideas people hold. Please correct me if that's not the case. I might historically use a different term but that's banned on mumsnet but for some reason everyone is allowed to call me a "TRA". I don't get it really:

Pay attention to the fact that as soon as SP told SF, her union rep, her version of what had happened, he immediately assumed that she was a) herself in the wrong and b) that she wanted union support in responding to an employer-led investigation (that he thought would find against her).

What's wrong with being a TRA?

He can't escape. He'd be called back to the witness box as soon as he's able and in the interim remain under oath and precluded from discussing the case with anyone. Short of unexpectedly falling into a coma, he's stuffed.

In fairness @Lacksie my view is you are most likely a really decent human being who unlike many of us has not been directly impacted by trans generally.

When you have been impacted it does make you quite cynical of the live and let live/be kind/TWAW/TMAM people.

you chose to list what you had been busy doing as opposed to simply saying you would be catching up later and getting back to the thread

I was just trying to be human . Sometimes I think that's helpful to remember.

The only bit I saw re SP's cross was the stuff about the "spelling error" which seemed very silly. At the same time I don't think making a choice to respect a person's pronouns is evidence of discrimination against someone else. But I didn't get the full context so maybe I am missing something

Not everyone who knows men aren’t women labels themselves as “gender critical”. It is the more rational position, after all. Most people just roll their eyes.

And that term is banned because it’s a slur associated with violent threats and abuse. TRA may or may not be accurate, but it’s hardly the same thing.