Sandie Peggie: Employment Tribunal, associated legal claims, and related matters - thread #65

[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

Thread 64: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5583133-sandie-peggie-employment-tribunal-associated-legal-claims-and-related-matters-thread-64 27 September 2026 to 29 September 2026

So the trap was for DH, not GT. Nice.

From TT:

GAC
GT In context a bad thing for person waiting for it.
NC Article quote c how important training for GPs in g dysphoria and needs easier access to blockers. Those are pbs?
GT not aware, not my article
NC Are you aware pbs now banned.
GT Not my area.
NC [ to doc] Search box and reads LGBTQ. Do you know what you find doing a search like that.
GT No. Haven't done that search.
NC Within RCN Uk you search within that site for that expression. That's a search on RCN UK for 'LGBTQ".
Top right of page is stats.

Exactly, if she was truly unaware she would easily answer those questions about bio sex and medicine and have no reason not to

Thank you.
I think.

From TT:

NC Agree search of RCN website returns c 60 results.
GT No reason to disagree
NC So quite a lot of material on site
NC Then search for TG. about 120 results. No time limitation again.
GT Yes
NC LGBTQ is itself q contentious, quite a lot of L and G people don't agree with
being inc with t
GT not v aware. My knowledge in area etc is minimal.
NC Another search for GC - looking for phrase - there are c 2 results. So you agree that results seem to show strikingly more interest shown by RCN in t rights and claims that for GC people concerns.

I mean, she said she agrees with FWS but I have no confidence she has a clue what that is or what she's just said she agrees to. I wonder if she was actually trying to say she agrees with whatever is the law? Like it would look bad if she said she didn't? Otherwise why all this fudging?

She'd be unwilling to state that black was black and white was white if asked by NC

From TT:

GT Seems to be more information re one. NC Any idea how many of your large membership may hold GC views GT Wouldn't be aware of numbers NC Not aware of numbers, but you hold roughly GC views GT Haven't really thought about it or in a position to look at this
NC You agree with SC
GT That a woman is a bio w, yes
NC And that a lot of reasoning of SC based on premise that a m or f body has real practical consequences for them and ppl around them.
GT Wouldn't go that far. Inc of all members as practising nurse.

She's finally got her to agree with something!😂

Is Colin the Covid Denier about to appear?

From TT:
NC Differences of bio body has real impact practically in the world.
GT don't understand
NC Medicine - dosing or recognising symptoms. Impt to now m or f.
GT Wide area. Difficult to say
NC IF patient has abdominal pain imp to know if m or f
GT Depends
NC If has f or m kit imps
cos may be pregnant
NC So you agree
GT Depends on the actual details event.
NC Proportion of your members who would hold broadly GC views - that being m or f is important
GT Wouldn't have details on that

This witness should go into politics. She will not answer a simple question.

Oh FFS!🤦‍♀️

Gillian!!!!!

I don't know how she thinks this way of responding is going to be helping the RCN in any way whatsoever.

And a pretty important thing ie that woman means bio women.
BUT can she say that she believed that at the time of the SP/DrU events?
that's more relevant than what she says she believes now.

Is Naomi saying the earth is NOT flat?

But it is!!!

(I'm back but I'm afraid I had an accident while out and am - though not badly hurt - shocked and banged up. I won't be doing any more c&p today, sorry.)

From TT:

NC R asked how many members were f or m / hold GR or hold GC beliefs. R didn't collect data on that cos didn't ask q on sex or re GR/GC.
GT Not in remit of my role
NC But common sense. Membership clinical profs. Know only w can get pregnant.
Pretty safe bet many members hold GC views
GT Don't know data
NC Not asking that. Your common sense. Members acquaintance with world - a large number would know sex real and matters
GT Can't say. Different members and beliefs, and an inc union. Difficult to say

That bloody word, ' inclusive' has done so much damage.

No witness statements in Scottish tribunals.

If the judge was going to view this in a sophisticated manner, she'd see GT giving evidence as looking like member of a cult terrified to give an answer she thinks she'll have to pay for later on.

Oh no! Hope you're ok x

From TT:

NC At least a large minority of
J She's given her evidence
NC Reasonable to think large no of your members are not flat earthers. And they believe in gravity.
GT Yes
NC And vaccine denial.
GT There would be members of public would think that
NC Not many members of RCN
GT Don't know member's personal views
NC Reasonable to think many of your members think sex is real and sometimes matters
GT Can't say
C You're uncomfortable with the q, cos RCN has adopted GI views
GT Don't agree

That's a novel position to take. "Woman means biological woman but it has no real practical consequences or implications. Because... inclusivity."

[ @fanOfBen oh no! Take it easy, glad you are not badly hurt! ]

I really hope the clear obfustication and refusal to answer the most basic questions is recognised by the judge. This witness is lying through her teeth and appears to be without integrity. Shocking.