The Royal College of Nursing (RCN) “does not have a position” on the debate around gender ideology and biological sex, a senior executive has told a tribunal.
RCN England chief executive Patricia Marquis said the organisation seeks to balance the views of its 600,000-strong membership, which she said is “pretty reflective of society” and has “a range of views on many issues”.
Ms Marquis was giving evidence on Wednesday in Sandie Peggie’s employment tribunal against the organisation, in what is expected to be the final day of evidence.
Legal case over gender-critical beliefs
Ms Peggie has brought the legal case against the RCN over what she claims was direct discrimination over her gender-critical beliefs. The RCN denies the claims.
The nurse previously brought a case against NHS Fife after sharing a changing room with transgender medic Dr Beth Upton at Kirkcaldy’s Victoria Hospital in December 2023.
The first employment tribunal awarded Ms Peggie a partial victory against the health board in December last year, upholding claims of harassment against her employer, but dismissing allegations of discrimination, indirect discrimination and victimisation.
RCN’s position on gender ideology
At the start of Wednesday’s hearing, RCN lawyer David Hay KC asked Ms Marquis about the union’s view on the “dichotomy” between “gender ideology” and gender-critical views.
“To what extent does the RCN have any particular position on the debate between concepts of gender ideology as opposed to biological sex?” he asked her. She replied: “We have no position on those two concepts.”
This was challenged in cross-examination by Ms Peggie’s barrister Naomi Cunningham, who gave a number of examples of how she claimed the RCN had “picked a side” on the issue by adopting gender ideology.
She highlighted the fact the RCN sold badges featuring its logo and the Pride flag, which Ms Marquis agreed is “strongly associated with gender ideology”.
Ms Cunningham asked why, if the RCN was neutral on the issue, there were no RCN-branded badges expressing support for those with gender-critical beliefs – for example, she said, featuring the suffragette colours of purple, white and green.
“There is nothing here that supports any other beliefs,” Ms Cunningham said, looking at a page of RCN merchandise. The witness denied this was evidence the organisation was “taking sides”, and insisted the Pride badges were simply “expressing support for members who identify in different ways”.
Ms Marquis also told the tribunal the organisation’s use of Pride insignia, such as on merchandise or flags, was “absolutely” not intended to exclude anyone.
Supreme Court ruling response
Ms Cunningham went on to ask about the RCN’s response to the 2025 Supreme Court ruling that sex in the 2010 Equalities Act referred to biological sex.
She said one statement attributed to Ms Marquis, which was included in an announcement of an engagement session for RCN members soon after the ruling, was “mournful in tone”.
She said it presented the ruling as “bad news” that may be “upsetting” or concerning for members, with no acknowledgement that some RCN members may have been “rejoicing” at it.
Ms Marques said it was “not the intention” to present the ruling in a negative light, but agreed the statement made no refence to those members who may have welcomed it.
Ms Cunningham also pressed the witness on a particular line in the statement, which read: “Let me be clear – the RCN stands in support with our LGBTQIA+ members.” She asked what the “+” in the acronym meant, with Ms Marquis said it represented “people identifying in different ways”.
Ms Cunningham put it to her that “it is a bit worrying” to express support for “a group whose parameters you really can’t define”.
The tribunal, taking place before employment judge Melanie Sangster in Dundee, continues.
