Skip to main content

News story

May 22, 2024

Why employers need a reflective response to employee beliefs

Recent tribunal judgments on the freedom to express gender-critical views highlight the growing challenge for employers in safely navigating discrimination in the workplace in the face of increasingly complex social attitudes.

a man and a woman assessing gener-critical views

In one victory for gender-critical views, an employment tribunal said that being branded transphobic for holding gender-critical opinions and expressing them was an insult.

Jo Phoenix, a criminology professor at the Open University, had established a network to undertake gender-critical research but was blocked from speaking on the topic. The tribunal ruled she had suffered victimisation, harassment and direct discrimination due to the university’s failure to protect her from ill-treatment arising from her gender-critical beliefs.

This decision followed hard on the heels of a discrimination ruling in favour of Rachel Meade, a social worker in Westminster City Council, who posted feminist views about the gender debate on her private Facebook page. A transgender colleague, connected on Facebook, complained the views were transphobic, and Social Work England responded by initiating a fitness to practise investigation, which triggered Meade’s suspension by her employer.

Criticising the action, the tribunal judgment said this was “indicative of a lack of rigour in the investigation, and an apparent willingness to accept a complaint from one side of the gender self-identification/gender critical debate without appropriate objective balance of the potential validity of different views in what is a highly polarised debate”.

Religion or belief is one of nine protected characteristics covered by the Equality Act 2010 (EQA). The others are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race and sex and sexual orientation. The EQA prohibits discrimination and harassment related to a protected characteristic.

Harassment is unlawful and occurs when someone subjects a worker to unwanted conduct related to a protected characteristic that violates their dignity or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. Examples include making offensive sexual comments or abusing someone for their race, religion or sexual orientation. Notably, harassment does not need to be targeted at any individual but can consist of a general culture that, for example, tolerates the telling of religious jokes.

It means all employers have a duty of care to protect their workers and may be liable for discrimination or harassment in the workplace if they have not taken reasonable steps to prevent it.

Employment partner Karen Cole of West End Law Firm, RIAA Barker Gillette, said:

“These tribunal cases highlight the growing need for employers to keep pace with both the law and changing attitudes across society.

Employers are undoubtedly finding it increasingly difficult to deal with complaints where an employee’s beliefs conflict with those of their organisation, other staff or customers, and are searching for clear guidelines. It’s not possible to clearly define the terms as each case is fact-sensitive. Having up-to-date equal opportunities policies is essential, but more important, is to ensure a reasonable and fair balance of everyone’s rights and for employers to undertake a full review and investigation where a complaint is made.

The most straightforward takeaway is to reflect carefully on any situation and recognise that when people voice beliefs, they may not fit neatly into a perceived right or wrong category, even though others may find them distasteful or distressing. The act of holding and manifesting a gender-critical belief, for example, is not in itself harassment. Professor Phoenix’s view was valid and was not the same as transphobia.”

Speak to Karen Cole today if you have questions about an employee’s gender-critical views.

Note: This article is not legal advice; it provides information of general interest about current legal issues.

Stay in touch

Subscribe to our newsletter

Stay in touch

By completing your details and submitting this form you confirm you are happy for us to send you marketing communications and that you agree to our Website Privacy Policy and Legal Notice and to us using Mailchimp to process your data.


Sending

News/Insight

  • Neuroinclusion in the workplace
    With a varied workforce, businesses in the UK need to provide inclusive policies and practices. One key area that employers must address is neuroinclusion.


    Read more
  • RIAA Barker Gillette (UK) appoints Brinda Granthrai as Partner and Head of Commercial Real Estate
    London, May 2025


    Read more
  • Strategic lifetime gifting
    How to minimise your IHT liability during your lifetime.


    Read more
  • Navigating directors’ duties
    Legal responsibilities and risks for UK company directors


    Read more
  • Preparing a business-lasting power of attorney
    In this article, private client solicitor Herman Cheung of West End law firm RIAA Barker Gillette (UK) considers the advantages, needs and practical examples of creating a bu


    Read more

What they say...

  • Michael, May 2025
    “Very pleased with the services provided by Charlotte Barbaroussis. Particularly found her quick and effective to reply to any queries.”

  • Malcolm & Sheila Blackmore, May 2025
    “My wife and I engaged RIAA Barker Gillette to prepare our wills and LPOA’s. James McMullan and Charlotte Barbaroussis were the epitome of professionalism – responding quickly, talking us through the legalese, clearly answering any

  • Ian, April 2025
    “Martin and his team at Barker Gillette acted for us in our purchase and sale of property. The chain was lengthy and elements of the work became complex. Martin was tenacious and resolved to answer our queries as they arose. He handled all aspe

  • Henry, April 2025
    “We have purchased flats before with 2 different solicitors who were unable to help us this time. Martin came highly recommended and are we glad. He was very professional in every way: knowledgeable, approachable, he has a friendly manner, very

  • Megan Purcell-Jones, April 2025
    “Charlotte was extremely diligent and thorough. She talked us through the process of making our wills and listened to and understood our needs and the complexities involved. Extremely patient and very clear.”

Read more
Send this to a friend