Sandie Peggie: Employment Tribunal, associated legal claims, and related matters - thread #66

[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

Thread 65: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5583663-sandie-peggie-employment-tribunal-associated-legal-claims-and-related-matters-thread-65 29 September 2026 to 30 September 2026

Struggling to keep up with these threads

Thank you from the bottom of my gender critical, Terfy, lesbian heart 🩷💚🤍 to all of you who facilitate access to the tribunals.

Big Cwtch to @nauticant fot the new threads, that come around so quickly!

I keep forgetting to use this username for these threads, here I am now though.

On lunch until 1.50 then NC will be continuing with another 2 hours of questioning PM.

Bet PM is delighted at the prospect.

I can pick up c&p for a while @fanOfBen if nobody else does.

reposting - thanks for this. John Swinney said this morning that TWAW, so, the backdrop remains somewhat insane in Scotland x.com/theparty1sover/status/2105220754010747299?s=46

PM> No. says clarity, but in implementing in balancing rights of t ppl, w and m, and in practical terms not just toilets but also care
This balancing word needs to be binned generally. It's being taken far too much to mean 'women have to budge over and put up with'. It means parallel provision. Unfortunately it is going to have to be accepted that mixed sex does not work for all women, we are not going to burn women as witches for having needs and feelings and existences that inconvenience a man who wants to be treated as if he was a woman, and that he can have his needs met but not at the expense of hers. There must be women-only provision available, and he has to deal with that.
I understand it's hard, it involves facing that TWATW and not W, but this is the reality. Why should women be expected to bear the burden and pay the price of losing access so that he is spared this hard?

does naomi actually eat lunch? just watching her typing away every lunch break!

I may be mistaken but I think that tweet is misleading - I don't think he said it this morning, I think an old video has been connected with something he did say this morning.

Thanks for the new thread @nauticant

Thanks @RoseInAPot!

IV Tunnocks?

Utterly brazen that trans trumps everything. From a union perspective I can only assume this is a great route to get funding from organisations equally complicit in re engineering wider society.

Utterly brazen of Andrea Egan of Unison to be holding court at the Labour Party Conference giving her unwavering support to trans. Can these people not read the room or are we really living in a dystopian world.

And it is global. Utterly insane.

As someone with such authority PM not knowing or understanding the never ending acronym is surely a lack of awareness particularly with NC pointing out the dark side of this. Also as a nurse how has biology and reality been steam rollered over by the pernicious umbrella of ‘inclusive?’

Funding? Arrogance? Both? Or the desire to seem progressive and cool even if every bit of your instinct knows this is wrong, sees the massive Trojan Horse to re engineer society to keep being more tolerant. See Puberty Blocker Trial.

Why are we trialling anything on children. Red flags all over trans ideaology.

glares at Naomi
eat some food woman! preserve that takes-no-prisoners energy!

Balancing rights is used to mean one man gets what he wants at the expense of all women.

For the love of god, someone explain to me what the other right is that needs balancing!

It was one of the most twelling points so far when NC pointed out contrast between (a) PM stressing the need for sensitivity and care when implementing the renewed exclusion of TiMs from sss and (b) PM failing to even notice the similar need for sensitivity when they were first admitted to sss, let alone taking steps to actually consult/monitor/etc

I'm sure that PM must've thought oh, at that point.

Whether she cares enough to do anything about it, or just realised she'd been the victim of a massive gotcha, who knows

NC about to continue her questioning of PM

J: We'll take a break in about an hour

There have been public toilets since the mid 19th c., I believe.
They have been sex-segregated since then.
So 1850ish to very recently, women have been able to rely on safe private single sex spaces.

I don't think the 'official' sanctioning of men using women's single sex facilities has been going on for long enough for it to be so embedded that it couldn't be reversed with only a minor amount of temporary disturbance to a very small number of men.

Is this also a bit like when did you stop beating your wife? By answering the question about whether there was any consultation., etc., even if ‘don’t know’, she is underlining that it happened, so the RCN did take a side.

She was observed taking her Pret a Manger lunch in to the tribunal on previous cases. We lesser mortals have to leave food outside in a locker in the reception area, but then we don't work during the breaks so fair enough.

TT

This is the last witness for the Royal College of Nursing (RCN), the Respondent (R). RCN is represented by David Hay KC (DH).

[WE BEGIN]

NC: Want to pick up from your evidence in chief - you said RCN would never pick up a case part way through. However Stephen Grady of FSU said that RCN had done exactly that in a case FSU involved in. You were speaking generally not universally?
PM: Yes the general rule - we consider case by case

NC: The engagement sessions - two members wrote in to say they were shocked by the way the feedback was handled - and not the two witnesses we have heard, different ppl, so, at least 4 ppl unhappy?
PM: Yes

NC: p600. This is a transcript of some of that chat?
PM: Yes
NC: Were you aware the chat function was closed after Jenny Wlmot compared to a racist?
PM: Knew it closed, but not why.

Pret[e] a manger le témoin suivant
edited for better French!

TT

NC: Person referred to as 'woman A' - we don't know if a man or a woman - is doing exactly that, racism comparison, asks why platforming exclusionary ppl. Would you agree the word that's missing there in the gap is "TERF"? Where there is a Q-mark instead?

PM: Not sure I can answer - may well have been.

NC: In any event - this is comparing sex realist views to racists and homophobes. Very unpleasant for your GC members?
PM: Yes

NC: And it's shocking isn't it that the facilitator simply says "thank you Hazel" and appears to agree?
PM: Agree v disappointing how session was handled.
NC: Facilitators appear to be running session from one particular PoV?

PM: Disagree, but, not well handled.
NC: Facilitator shd have reprimanded surely?
PM: Yes very disappointingly managed. i think aim was to run session in inclusive way, but in the event it was not done well and v uncomfortable for JW and others.

NC: This is RCN taking sides again?
PM: No

Fucking hell.

I'm infuriated.