RCN denies gender beliefs influenced legal aid refusal

Sandie Peggie's deeply held views on sex and gender played no part in the Royal College of Nursing's (RCN) refusal to provide her with legal assistance, an employment tribunal was told. Norman Provan, an RCN associate director of employment relations, gave evidence on the third day of Ms Peggie's case against the union.

Mr Provan told the tribunal that Ms Peggie's request for legal aid was turned down because it did not satisfy the organisation's established guidelines for offering such services. He stated that the union can support members involved in disputes with their employers, but each application is assessed against specific criteria.

Previous Case Against NHS Fife

Ms Peggie, a nurse in Fife, brought the current legal action against the RCN, alleging direct discrimination based on her gender-critical beliefs. This follows a previous case she initiated against NHS Fife. That earlier tribunal awarded Ms Peggie a partial success, upholding claims of harassment by her employer but dismissing allegations of discrimination and victimisation. The dispute with NHS Fife originated from her sharing a changing room with a transgender medic at Kirkcaldy's Victoria Hospital.

The nurse claims the RCN failed to provide her with adequate support during the handling of a disciplinary investigation by NHS Fife. She is seeking a ruling that the union discriminated against her because of her gender-critical and sex realist convictions. The RCN denies these allegations.

Union's Rationale for Refusal

Mr Provan, the RCN's first witness, explained that a key rule for providing legal support is that members must not have already sought external legal advice. He stated that in Ms Peggie's situation, she had already consulted with her own solicitors and counsel, who had outlined a course of action. Consequently, he concluded, she did not qualify for RCN legal backing. 'I decided that we could not provide legal assistance in this case,' Mr Provan said. 'I was absolutely content with the decision I had made.'

He added that Ms Peggie's beliefs had no bearing on his decision, asserting that he applied the organisation's rules. He acknowledged that Ms Peggie's beliefs are protected. Mr Provan stated that apart from the application of the RCN's internal rules, there was no other reason why the union would have rejected her request.

The tribunal is being heard by employment judge Melanie Sangster in Dundee and is ongoing.