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

I think he is saying that the 'colourful' photos were after the SP case, and therefore not relevant.
However, the way he talks about them is inappropriate - 'colourful'?!

If you add this to the the RCN witness[es] [can't remember which] baulking at the idea of taking action against FW because of what he did in his spare time/not on the RCN network, it gives an impression of 'anything-goes as long as it's not GC'.

I think NC's questioning of 'eunich ID' did that too - they couldn't even bring themselves to say 'well no obviously not that!' when asked about the +++s at the end of LGBTQIA+++++.

If it has a letter and a flag, best not say anything bad about it, eh?

From TT:

Judge has returned. We begin.

NC in reply.
She is largely inaudible.

[not any more]

from Nick Wallis

NC...and R's witness's accepted the YouGov poll could be expected to share those concerns. So it's not clear where DH's attempt to cast doubt takes him. Also his claim in par 5 that SP didn't raise concerns to GT. GT had not done what C asked her to do and the q for you is why not?

Come now, the pictures were merely colourful., while Miss Melle's testimony was quite hyperbolic.

The hypothetical Bible-reading child could have come across many descriptions of people, including 'eunuch', but even if he wanted to play at pulling prophets out of a cistern or asking Philip about the resurrection, I don't think it likely that he would want to be castrated in order to add verisimilitude.

A young child fantasising about gender has been set up by an adult.

I know a rat shouldn’t look cute. This one does. Now I know it is a rat, though, I’m a bit conflicted in my feelings.

However, African Giant pouched rats are being used to do amazing work sniffing out land mines in Cambodia. They are too light to set them off, I think. After being located by the rat, the mines can then be removed carefully. One less landmine to blow a limb off a child. You can’t knock that.

from Nick Wallis
NC
DH says what seemed to be left by way of complaint was teh failure to copy in - my response to that is that C wasn't able to have abandoned her case as she was not able on the spot as a non-lawyer to construct a textual argument as to what GT had done. It's there in the evidence and you can make your decision on that.

GT's failure to make this public is wholly consistent with its adherence to GI and a partic detriment to SP who was isolated in being the only person to come forward, despite there being others who she says were too frightened to come

I 😍 Naomi

From TT:

Microphone repositioned.
NC - Rs witnesses accepted that the YouGov poll was valid and probably similar views across their membership. And referring to no complaint about GT not copying all Fife members of RCN - well why should she complain? It was obvious that what she asked

had not been done. And you cannot seriously find that the C has abandoned part of her claim because she could not do the textual analysis of a lawyer between the text she sent and the text GT sent when under the stress of cross examination.

And it is irrelevant how much RCNs treatment of LM contributed to her resignation. What is relevant is the reaction of RCN to a sober and scholarly article she had written.

Rats are clever, inquisitive and friendly. Guinea pigs are wheeking bundles of cuteness, and gerbils are sweet wee beasties with a talent for digging.

Hamsters are unfriendly, bitey little bastards with good PR.

from Nick Wallis
NC
....forward. And we should believe her on that. [rattles through time bar and DH's take on LM's evidence] DH said LM's incredulity at being asked to prep a reflection - single most important part of her evidence - she had been racially abused by a man because she used masc pronouns
he used the n-word at her repeatedly and the Rs response was to ask her to write a reflection ie manifest some contrition
BH was an entirely credible witness and her account of SD's rattled reaction when her letter was made public was telling of the R's adherence to GI

Oh yes I read about those wonderful mine-sweeping rats! one of them got a medal for it.
Husky Rats are a challenge to anyone's hate-fuelled bigotry conflicted feelings about rats.
I submit the following as further evidence:
and then stop derailing a serious thread by talking about cute rats rest my case.

From TT:

And dismissing JM's evidence of being asked to do a reflection and doing so with incredulity and that it called into question her motivations. This is the most important part of JM's evidence, that RCN considered her the aggressor in the interaction despite being repeatedly

called the n word.

And DH dealt shortly with BH's evidence because she was a completely credible witness. The fear exhibited when BH published the letter from RCN demonstrates that they lived in fear of public support of GC members and the reaction of activists.

from Nick Wallis
NC
And that's a thread which runs through this case - a willingness by R to try to do a good job behind the scenes but it comes to a "screeching halt" whenever it is ever asked to do anything public...
..For its GC members. That said the rep in BH's case was only willing to attend a meeting with management "in a listening capacity". - v strange way for a rep to behave. DH said NP did not contradict the on the case - NP said he had no discretion - it was clear he had discretion

From TT:

Another aspect of BH's evidence is that the RCN rep in a meeting said they were only there in a listening capacity. Even in this workplace meeting, the rep made it clear she was only prepared to attend in a listening capacity.

At para 27, DH says that nothing NP said was contradictory of the advice leaflet. NP said he had no discretion, when he did have discretion and that they regularly exercised that discretion when it suited them.

You don’t think it’s similar to identifying as a cat?

Absolutely only with no medical intervention, for cat or eunuch, though.

edit: I agree 100% with your point about adult intervention, though.

from Nick Wallis
NC
...and he and his colleagues regularly exercised that. in par 29 DH is talking about the suggestion to SF that it was obvs improper for DU to be present in the F CR and he says it entirely overlooks the Inner HOuse of the Court of Session construed sex had two meanings. That is true as far as it goes.

In FWS2 which considered the effect of a GRC - until SC handed down its judgment - a TiM who had a GRC would for EA would be a woman. DU did not have a GRC. DU's case was governed by FW1

Can I also say...

I 😍 For Women Scotland

Without them I dread to think where we'd be!

from Nick Wallis
NC
And FWS1 had made it quite clear that whatever the position of TiMs with GRCs - there was no q that TiMs without GRCs were anything but men.

From TT:

Para 28, in respect of analogy to pc disclosures, that a surprising suggestion, that a C might be willing to bank on an extension in a discrim case. Para 29, refer to Court of Session and definitions of man, woman etc. And that's correct as far as it goes. It is actually that

sex in that decision is certificated sex. It was never suggested that DU had a GRC. So DU's conduct was governed by FWS 1 - had made it quite clear that whatever the position to men with GRCs, men without GRCs were not considered to be women.

This is one long "Fuck you David" from Naomi.

No it's her dispassionate, objective contribution to the formalities of the legal system.
😏

That as well!

From TT:

DH quotes part of the head note in FWS 1, lets look at the rest of the headnote that DH quotes from. Held that those living as women without GRCs would conflate two categories, it actually expanded the category. Pause on the way,
J - I don't have it in front of me, need

para numbers
NC give, then reads out definition of a woman, from gender representation on public boards act. That was the question before the court - was it a reserved matter of was it within the legislative competence of Scottish Parliament to amend that definition.

On the other hand, if she offered to arrange for him to experience eunuch identity in a personal [in]capacity, that might veer just a tad away from the limits of lawyerly intercourse..
😄