The ruling follows nurse Sandie Peggie taking NHS Fife and Dr Beth Upton, a transgender woman, to a tribunal after Peggie was suspended following an exchange of words between Peggie and Upton on Christmas Eve in 2023.
After the suspension, Peggie claims that she was harassed, which NHS Fife stated was a vexatious claim.
Read more: Gender-critical teacher loses unfair dismissal claim in pronouns tribunal
The dispute started after Peggie said she felt intimidated and embarrassed at having to share a women’s changing room with Upton.
With the tribunal set to be heard next month, the judge rejected the plea of NHS Fife for Peggie to refer to Upton by female pronouns (the NHS claimed that any other pronoun use would amount to harassment), adding that forcing Peggie and her lawyers to use a term they consider inaccurate would be unfair.
The judge did add that “neutral terms” should be used in the tribunal, to avoid any accusation of bias. They also added that the misgendering of Upton is likely to be painful but was not itself unlawful harassment.
The judge said that if male pronouns are used “gratuitously and offensively on a repeated basis” then it might be harassment.
However, all such directions are non-binding, and pronouns may be used where considered appropriate.
With the case likely to have wider implications for the management of workspaces, it has, for HR practitioners at least, raised questions regarding how disputes over pronoun usage at work are managed.
According to Human Rights Campaign's Corporate Equality Index 2025, a benchmarking tool for corporate policies, practices, and benefits, 98% of employers have a non-discrimination plan with gender identity as part of their work. The index was published on 7 January.
Previous (2022) data from the Trades Union Congress (TUC) shows that, in the UK, one in five managers have an LGBTQ+ action plan.
But what if an employee was to disagree with a colleague’s chosen gender pronouns?
Read more: How HR can create a trans inclusion policy
Speaking to HR magazine, Kate Palmer, employment services director at HR consultancy Peninsula, said: “If an individual manifests their beliefs in ways that treat someone differently as a result, then employers can take action to prevent or rectify any potential discrimination or harassment in the workplace.”
A common way this manifests in professional workspaces is on emails, with many having their chosen or given pronouns in their signature. Palmer noted that this can be a vexed issue.
She added: “Pronouns in emails are positive for some people but others might feel pressured to comply.
“Offering this as an option for employees could be a better approach, allowing those who feel the need to, the opportunity to do so while maintaining an element of individual choice.”
She added this should all be laid out in well-communicated policies on dignity at work, harassment and discrimination. Learning and development opportunities could be offered, if necessary, and a zero-tolerance and swift approach to breaches should be communicated.
Allegra Chapman, co-founder of diversity and inclusion consultancy Watch this Sp_ce, added that HR may be contending with workplace pronoun disputes which are influenced by forces outside of their control.
She told HR magazine: “Hostility towards trans people occurs due to fear and lack of understanding, which has sadly been stoked and encouraged by the media.”
As Chapman explained, this doesn’t mean that employers have a mere bystander role. “Employers can do a lot to reduce antagonistic attitudes by educating staff about the reality of trans people’s experiences,” she said, adding that practical changes like fully gender-neutral floor-to-ceiling cubicles and changing spaces might also mitigate disputes such as the Peggie-Upton one.
Indeed, as Kevin Poulter, employment partner at law firm Freeths explained to HR magazine, the Equality Act 2010 means that employers likely already have policies to protect rights under the act.
But he adds such scenarios are still a “difficult tightrope to walk”.
“The Equality Act 2010 provides a framework for dealing with these protections, but little direction where a conflict arises,” he said.
Poulter continued: “Having a policy which predicts every possible scenario is impossible, so it will be essential to engage and educate employees in the importance of respecting other stakeholders, including colleagues.
“Being seen by all sides to take an impartial, equally respectful approach to different views and characteristics may prove the toughest challenge for HR professionals though, especially when emotions are heightened.”