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

From TT:

It's not claimed they wished to punish C but rather because of their belief in GI it made it impossible to defend a member whose belief was in direct contravention to that institutional belief.

GI and GC are in direct opposition to TWAW v TWAM. Might be better say GC is an opposition or dissent from GI and saying its wrong. The expression of SR or GC belief is a curiosity; noone had heard of this before a couple of years ago. Not because its a recent notion

It's a shame that this isn't recorded for public viewing, as it would be an invaluable tool during the teaching of several GSCE/A level subjects, not limited to Law.

edit: GCSE Law may not exist any more, but it did earlier this century. A recording would still be useful for other GCSE subjects.

edit again: useful for anyone's general education, not limited to the subject area but, for example, how misinformation spreads.

Yes - I'm quite tearful for how brave she has been.

I presume NCs submission will be released, I hope it is as it will be an excellent read.

Wow

Is Naomi's uhmming a device to slow her down and to allow her audience to catch up with what she's saying - ie a deliberate presentation ploy?

From TT:

Because we just noticed that there are males and females and that this is significant and in all other mammals; only female can bear and males beget young. Noone thought they were GC until maybe 2017 because it was accepted. Like belief in round earth it was something we knew

GC belief only come into existence under heat and pressure of a new belief that has taken hold in or instutitions. As you have seen in evidence it has take hold with speed and not by argument and but by force and threat

Ironically, I am following this thread from an NHS Outpatients department. There's a sign up by the Reception desk saying " what are your pronouns".
The reception person however, seems incapable of amending a contact phone number on the patient's details. 🙄

from Nick Wallis for details

NC -GC or sex realism (SR) - no one had ever heard of GC belif before a few years ago. Not because it's only a recent notion that mammals come in two sexes,, can't change and have sig conseqs. Only F mammals can bear young and only M mammals can beget young

Until a few years ago knowing that and that it has prac consequences had to be described as a belief system - in the same way you didn't believe you were a round earther or believe in the nitrogent cycle or be aDarwinist. GC has only come into existence by being forged in the heat and pressure of the new ideology which has come into force in our institutions. It has taken hold with extraordinary speed partly because its not by argument or evidence, but by bullying, threats to livelihood and threats of violence

from Nick wallis

NC:WE are hear in Dundee because SP's first tribunal was meant to be in Edin but there was a threat against me for misgending DU and the judge for allowing me to. That new ideology promoted with bullying threats of violence cancelling smearing no-platforming - that's what gave rise to GC

From Nick W again ..NC
Bound up in GI is the idea that belief in imp of bio sex is bigoted and counter-factual. It is profoundly hostile to GC - you've seen exhortations to "kick the ever living fuck" out of people who disagree with EM and his "TERF stomping boots"

(nb if this is too confusing along with TT please advise- am only copying over detail)

Im heartened and encouraged by her podcasts. The private sector is definitely rolling back on T+ and the RCN might just might be the first Union that has to do “something” to support GC members - but they really dont want to be the first.

All the organisations that hurried to virtue signal on inclusivity (just for T+) dont want to be the first to roll back and face a loud backlash by a minority of activists and their handmaidens. That is why this case is so so important and other Unions are watching carefully.

From TT:

Recall we are in Dundee because there had been threats of citizens' arrest of me and J. It is that new ideology backed by threats, violence, smears, cancellation, that is GI. Not merely opposed to GC belief but it is profoundly hostile to it. 'Kick the ever living fuck out' of

NC That the respondents employees were unwilling to defend member accused of GC/SR -- it acted because of its own commitment to GI belief then it did so because of its belief in GI.

My work email says ‘add pronouns’… these men have taken Facebook’s motto to heart. Move fast and break things. They have indeed broken many institutions and most of the social contract rules.

Stunning stuff from NC. Everything I/we have been thinking in our deepest hearts and minds, and sometimes posting here, for a long time.

The transcript of this will be a very important document.

From TT:

They agreed that Progress Flag associated with GI. There is extensive evidence they have adopted GI beleif. Engagement sessions advertised, framing SC judgement as a concern, failing to see that many members may have been celebrating

Gilbraith Martin framed Jaguar Land Rover as providing vital protection. Her video at engagement sessions and claim that SC unclear, warning against hasty changes

It's completely on the money.

So thrilling to read what we all know in black and white, by a barrister

Please don't stop, two different views of what is being said gives a much rounder picture. 🙏

I'm particularly pleased that NC has highlighted the recentness of GI, all this handwringing about poor TWs having to cope with 'all of a sudden' after the SC judgement having to adapt to not being allowed to use the women's toilets...
when up to very recently, no men were allowed to use the women's toilets.

Nick Wallis for detail

NC
JGM's reading of the SC as confusing and somehow incomprehensible. It would only be incomprehensible to someone innocent of the impacts of GI. It's not remotely mystifying when you understand JGM was employed by an org in the grip of a GI which said TWAW and any one who said otherwise was bigoted and hateful. It had not and has not shaken free of that ideology. That's why they saw the SC ruling as extremely unwelcome - it would be to people who had adopted GI wholesale.

The RCN advice that it was the nurses job to affirm someone's declared ID with no indication it could be dangerous for clinicians not to know someone's sex or be told it. Assumption of affirmation all the way and making the contested assumption that the 'true gender ID' of someone was a thing, that it existed. (This is all from the Fair Care for Trans patients - which you can find on my website https://genderblog.net underneath the last three reports)

From TT:

Noone who understood law and read judgments could say this. JGM was employed by an organisation in the grip of TWAW and had not shaken free of that ideology. Once that falls into place a point was not situation unclear; but rather that it was unwelcome and uncert generated by those opposed

Fair Care Document: how shocking advice is to not disclose bio sex in a clinical setting. Trans patients should be accomodated as identify and "true identitty" acknowledged and children as well? Eunuch gender a i put to more than one witness implication is that RCN members advised that if a child ID as eunuch should be affirmed

I am really concerned that there's so much emphasis being placed on flying the progress flag and support for LGBT+ people as somehow evidence of discrimination in this case.

Is this where we are at now? that expressing support for trans people/ rights is now in itself evidence of discrimination against a protected belief?

You surely don't have to hold the same beliefs as someone in order not to discriminate against them?

You can tell it's riveting by the lack of us chatting shit!

I'm really not sure this eunuch stuff is as telling as NC thinks.