Rachel Meade ‘Gender Critical’ Social Worker Wins Harassment Claim
JUDGMENT OF 8TH JANUARY 2024
WIN IN THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL – MS R MEADE V WESTMINSTER CITY COUNCIL AND SOCIAL WORK ENGLAND
Ms R Meade v Westminster City Council and Social Work England (Case No: 2201792/2022 & 2211483/2022)
Social worker Rachel Meade has won a claim against her employer, Westminster City Council, (WCC) and professional regulatory body, Social Work England (SWE), in an employment tribunal for discrimination on the basis of her protected beliefs under the Equality Act 2010.
The Tribunal Panel Judge Nicolle sitting with Non-Legal Members Ms Sandler and Ms Breslin found that both Ms Meade’s regulator and her employer had subjected her to harassment related to her gender-critical belief when SWE threatened her with fitness to practise proceedings and sanctioned her for misconduct, and then WCC suspended her on charges of gross misconduct before issuing a final written warning. By the time the case was heard, both the regulator’s sanction and the employer’s warning had been withdrawn, but Ms Meade had been suspended from work for a year and bullied into silence on the subject of proposed reforms of the Gender Recognition Act, the importance of safe single-sex spaces for women and related subjects.
This is a landmark decision. It is the first time a Regulator and an Employer have together been found to have been liable for discrimination relating to gender critical beliefs.
The claim has been listed for a two-day remedy hearing in February to determine the amount of compensation Ms Meade should be awarded, and whether the tribunal should make recommendations as to the future conduct of Social Work England and Westminster City Council.
Summary of claim
The claim relates to the debate surrounding potential reforms to the Gender Recognition Act, and the developing law as to the manifestation of protected beliefs, and in particular, ‘gender critical’ beliefs.
Rachel Meade a social worker of over 20 years standing shared gender critical posts on social media. Her regulator, SWE, received a complaint about her posts upon which she was subjected to a lengthy Fitness to Practise (“FtP”) investigation.
The FtP process culminated in a formal sanction, later withdrawn. When her employer learned of the sanction, Ms Meade was suspended on charges of gross misconduct. After a year’s suspension, a final written warning and an appeal, WCC finally reversed the finding of gross misconduct and withdrew the sanction.
Findings of the Employment Tribunal
In a 51-page Judgment the Panel held:
“All of the Claimant’s Facebook posts and other communications fell within her protected rights for freedom of thought and freedom to manifest her beliefs as protected under Articles 9 and 10.”
“We do not consider that any of her manifestations of her beliefs were of a nature that they aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms of others contrary to Article 17.”
“In particular we do not consider that the Respondents struck a fair balance between the Claimant’s right to freedom of expression and the interests of those who they perceived may be offended by her Facebook posts”.
“The continuation of the disciplinary process from 6 November 2021 onwards constituted harassment of the Claimant, given that the overarching view taken by the First Respondent and its representatives, was that the Claimant, in the expression of her gender critical beliefs, had behaved in a manner which warranted a suspension and a disciplinary process.”
“Context is important and merely accepting at face value a complainant’s subjective perception of offence is not the appropriate test, but rather that an objective evaluation should be undertaken.”
“[Social Work England’s] failure to check if Mr Woolton’s complaint could be malicious, and not checking his previous social media history, is 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.”
The Tribunal found that the Claimant, Ms Meade, succeeds in the majority of her complaints of harassment:
As against her employer, WCC:
1. Being subjected to a disciplinary process;
2. The refusal to postpone the disciplinary process when informed that the Claimant was seeking a review of the SWE’s decision;
3. The on-going refusal to lift the Claimant’s suspension in August and September 2021, in January 2022 and in February 2022 or at any time thereafter and despite requests from the Claimant to do so;
4. An investigation report which was hostile in tone and content, served on the Claimant on 6 December 2021;
5. Being instructed to attend a disciplinary hearing on 6 January 2021;
6. the refusal, until the day before the scheduled hearing, to postpone the disciplinary hearing despite being informed in early December 2021 that SWE had referred the matter back to its Case Examiners;
7. A letter dated 20 January 2022 in which it refused to lift the Claimant’s suspension;
8. An addendum dated 3 February 2022 to [the] investigation report which maintained that four of the Claimant’s Facebook posts were “transphobic”;
9. A letter of 25 February 2022 confirming the continuation of the Claimant’s suspension;
10. A disciplinary hearing on 28 June 2022;
11. A two-year final written warning issued on 8 July 2022;
12. A continuing restraint on her freedom of expression at return-to-work meetings on 14 and 25 July 2022;
13. A letter of 15 November 2022 withdrawing the final written warning but implying continuing disapproval of her conduct and continuing the restraint on her freedom of expression.
As against her Regulator, SWE:
1. Being the subject of a prolonged investigation into her beliefs from November 2020 to June 2021;
2. Being sanctioned by SWE’s Case Examiners on 8 July 2021;
3. The failure of SWE to set aside the Case Managers’ decision in September 2021 when presented with the evidence in support of the Claimant’s application for a review;
4. The consequences of the failure of SWE to train its Case Examiners to respect protected beliefs.
5. SWE failing, when requested to do so, on 16 and 24 December 2021, to remove the flawed Case Managers’ Report from its website.
6. SWE referring the complaint against the Claimant to a Fitness to Practise hearing, communicated to her on 31 January 2022.
7. SWE putting forward a statement of case dated 6 July for the FtP hearing.
Quote
Rachel Meade said:
“It’s a huge relief to be so completely vindicated after all this time. It has been a horrendous experience. This ruling makes it clear that I was entitled to contribute to the important public debate on sex and gender. I hope it will make it easier for other regulated professionals to speak up without threats to their career and reputation.”
Ms Meade’s solicitor, Shazia Khan, Founding Partner of Cole Khan Solicitors said:
“This is a landmark victory for common sense and free speech in the culture war on gender issues. The Tribunal found that my client was subjected to sustained and prolonged harassment by her employer Westminster City Council and her Regulator Social Work England for merely expressing her gender critical beliefs. This judgment sounds an alarm for all regulators — and all employers of regulated professionals — that they must not let their processes be weaponised by activists bent on silencing the debate on freedom of speech on gender. We demand apologies from Westminster City Council and Social Work England who have to date failed to acknowledge and accept their breaches of the Equality Act 2010 and the harrowing impact of their actions upon my client. We now call for urgent root and branch reform from the top down of both organisations to mitigate against further unlawful discrimination of employees and registrants”.
Watch Rachel tell her story via the link below:
You Tube Video - Crowd Funder Appeal
Donations towards Rachel Meade’s campaign and remedy hearing can be made via CrowdJustice via the link below:
Help defend freedom of speech: Sanctioned by Social Work England (crowdjustice.com)
Link to the Judgment below:
NOTES TO EDITORS
Cole Khan Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership, regulated by the Solicitors Regulatory Authority.
Cole Khan is dedicated to fighting discrimination in the workplace, in the belief that Equality at work is a right we are all entitled to.
Website: www.colekhan.co.uk
Please direct all press enquiries to:
Shazia Khan: 0207 406 7440 shaziakhan@colekhan.co.uk
Rachel Meade was represented by Naomi Cunningham of Outer Temple Chambers.
Naomi.Cunningham@outertemple.com