What Recent Tribunal Decisions Mean for Health and Social Care Employers

Recent employment tribunal decisions have brought renewed focus on how employers manage access to single-sex facilities where legal protections relating to sex and gender reassignment intersect.

For health and social care providers, these issues are particularly acute. Large, diverse workforces, shared changing facilities, strict regulatory oversight, and high safeguarding expectations mean that disputes around single-sex spaces are more likely to arise—and more likely to escalate if not handled carefully.

With significant media coverage and strong public opinion on both sides, these issues are increasingly finding their way into workplace complaints, grievances, and formal disputes across the care sector.

Two recent tribunal cases illustrate just how challenging—and high-profile—this area has become.

Case 1: Hutchinson and Others v County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust

In this case, the Trust operated a policy allowing employees to use changing facilities in line with their self-declared gender identity. A trans woman employee began using the female changing rooms. Several female colleagues raised objections, but the Trust declined to amend its policy.

Applying the Equality Act 2010 in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in For Women Scotland (which confirmed that “sex” refers to biological sex), the tribunal found:

• Harassment related to sex and gender reassignment
  Requiring female employees to share changing facilities with a biological male, and failing to address their concerns, amounted to harassment.

• Indirect sex discrimination
  The tribunal identified two provisions, criteria or practices (PCPs):

  • Allowing access to single-sex changing rooms based on self-declared gender identity; and

  • Prioritising the perceived rights of transgender employees over women’s access to single-sex facilities.

Although these PCPs applied to all staff, the tribunal found they placed women at a particular disadvantage, causing distress, fear, or humiliation. The Trust failed to objectively justify its approach, and the indirect discrimination claim succeeded.

For NHS trusts and care providers, this case underlines the risks associated with blanket policies in environments where privacy, dignity, and safeguarding are critical.

Case 2: Peggie v Fife Health Board and Another

In this case, Ms Peggie, a nurse, objected to a trans woman doctor using the female changing room. Her objection was based on a belief that biological sex is immutable.

The tribunal found that:

• Allowing a trans woman to use female changing rooms is not inherently unlawful

• Once objections were raised, the employer should have taken interim steps, including temporarily revoking access while matters were investigated

• The failure to do so, combined with flaws in the investigation process, amounted to harassment

• Claims of sex discrimination, victimisation, and claims against the doctor personally were dismissed

This decision highlights the importance, particularly in clinical and care settings, of acting swiftly and proportionately once concerns are raised.

Why This Matters for Health and Social Care Employers

Health and social care organisations face additional complexity in this area. Staff often work in close physical proximity, facilities are frequently shared, and employers must consider not only employment law but also dignity, safeguarding, and regulatory expectations.

This makes balancing competing protected characteristics especially challenging—and increases the risk of legal exposure if issues are not managed carefully.

Key Takeaways for Care Sector Employers

• Genuinely held beliefs about sex may still attract legal protection

• Decisions affecting single-sex facilities must be objectively justified

• Policies may be lawful in principle but risky in day-to-day application

• Delay, inaction, or poor investigations can significantly increase legal and regulatory risk

What Health and Social Care Providers Should Do Now

• Review Equality, Diversity and Inclusion policies alongside Bullying and Harassment policies

• Avoid rigid, one-size-fits-all approaches and assess each situation on its specific facts

• Train managers and senior clinicians to identify issues early and manage difficult conversations

• Use interim measures where appropriate while concerns are investigated

How HLTH Compliance Can Help

These issues are evolving rapidly, and for health and social care providers the stakes are high—both legally and reputationally.

Speak with HLTH Compliance’s HR Director to understand how these developments affect your workforce, facilities, and policies in practice. If you are facing a live issue or would like to review your current approach, you are welcome to book a confidential consultation with us.