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 haven't read the full thread but also don't understand the eunuch relevancy. Wasn't there a reference to paedophile identity in the same doc or did I misunderstand that? If she was going for sensationalist, wouldn't that be stronger?

Plus it would be nice, just for once, for Sandie to get it sorted at the first attempt.

I think it's fair to say that if the submissions were written in knitting, the scarf would be a more Green, White and Violet, than Pink and Blue.

Curious now: What's the flag colour for Eunuch?

She did the paedophile one as well, to great effect.

John Wesley Harding: cracking album, but it's not Hendrix.

This is such an important case became the gleeful abandonment of women by unions has been so egregious. I am still angry about that arsehole Steve North from Unison tweeting that the Darlington Nurses were bigots for wanting single sex changing rooms. If SP loses this case then the unions will feel even more emboldened, which doesn't bear thinking about.

I thought the main point of the Eunuch stuff was that the witnesses in the tribunal couldnt bring themselves to say it's wrong to affirm a eunuch and that is evidence of them being either indoctrinated by GI or too scared to offend TRAs

Strive mightily, but eat and drink as friends.

Haha!

I'm sure you can ask it to tweak so the left has green, white and purple and the right has pink, blue and the rest.

I see your point.

I think it did however highlight the er...gay abandon😏 with which organisations like the RCN will loudly and proudly support 'LGBTQI++' without interrogating what the +s are.
It exposed the shoddiness of their ethics - anything goes as long as it has a letter and a flag and it's currently cool...
Shoddy for any organisation, but for a medicine/science-related one, pretty shocking.

The focus on the eunuch point was that PM was explicitly questioned about this and seemed to resist that there should be cause for concern. This didn't happen over the paedophile point and it looked much more that PM didn't properly notice its significance so it could be argued she'd not taken any position, instead she'd been inattentive.

The apparently don't have one so use the hijra flag.

He did a lot of Dylan, very well IMHO

I have been quietly reading through these threads. Thanks to the copy and pasters.

We are all so keen for SP to win. But it is likely? It was compelling to those on her side, but how will the judge here it?

I learn the word adminical

Me too. Task for the day: use adminical in casual conversation.

Thank you for answering my question, @MarieDeGournay and @DauntlessDamson !

How come there has been no drama in this tribunal about the correct sex pronouns being used?

Because no trans/non-binary person is involved or present. In the real world it’s not an issue unless you are talking to believers and are specifically referring to TW, TM or NB etc. It’s actually a good example of how many people don’t even recognise it as an issue.

I am v. grateful to Naomi, and I am not a lawyer so will accept I am not best placed to have opinions, but I'm not sure this was the strongest point to bring back in her last few minutes. Things like changing he -> she in the statement seem more applicable to the actual case? Sometimes I think the more dramatic rhetoric (much as it makes for more interesting thread here!) doesn't help as much in front of judges. I always hope that is discussed with her claimants and they agree they are happy to take that approach.

Gosh, that was a marathon, wasn't it? I've done so much housework whilst watching/ listening to it. I've got a new man coming over for dinner on Saturday and I want him to not think I'm a total slattern...!😂

thanks to all contributions, this is a serious case but made all the more enjoyable by pp's astute analysis and great humour!😁

My Concise Oxford has it as 'adminicle'.
Thank heavens I checked before ordering ADMINICAL on a t-shirt😄

John Wesley Harding: cracking album, but it's not Hendrix.

Hendrix's version of Drifter's Escape was an outtake released posthumously.

I see from Apple Music that there are also versions by Joan Baez (unsurprisingly) plus George Thorogood & the Destroyers (more surprisingly).

I'm sure that if the child wanted to be made a eunuch because his reading the epistles had disturbed him and he thought that it would make him more ready for the second coming of Christ, citing Origen to support his plan, then social services would be very judgemental and interventionist.

Mind you, Origen's carry-on does make one thing there really is nothing new.

warning, illustrated article

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen

Adminicle apparently
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/adminicle

One to try whilst playing spelling bee.

Cross post 😃.. edited to say I quoted the wrong post! Aghhh

I’ve been glued to this, and echo thanks to the copy-and-posters.

From our point of view SP has such a compelling case, and it’s hard (especially for all of us who are NAL) to imagine how the judge is receiving it. But I suspect that’s why NC has to make such a highly coloured and powerful case. It’s because capture by GI across institutions has been so complete that NC has to show what the world looks like when your view isn’t completely coloured by it. She’s got to be more than twice as good as the opposing counsel. (Obviously I think she is.)

What we don’t and can’t know yet is whether the judge really heard what she had to say.