In a landmark judgment for workplace free speech, a social worker who was helped by the FSU has been awarded £58,000 in damages from Westminster city council and Social Work England (Mail, Times).
Rachel Meade, from Dartford, Kent, brought a case against the council and Social Work England in 2022 for harassment and sex discrimination after she was suspended for posting gender critical views on her private Facebook account.
The dedicated social worker with an unblemished 20-year record was suspended from her job at Westminster city council after a single complaint was made by a Mr Aedan Wolton, then a colleague of hers and now Sport England’s ‘Diversity Champion’, about allegedly “transphobic” posts on her private Facebook page.
According to Mr Wolton, Rachel’s “transphobia” was evidenced by the fact that she shared links to news articles, including one from the Mail on Sunday, about transgender issues, as well as to blogs and petitions relating to the national debate over whether it should be made easier for people to legally change their gender.
Mr Wolton’s single complaint to the regulator led to what Rachel describes as a year-long “Orwellian nightmare” (Mail).
An investigation by the regulator found Rachel’s posts to be “potentially discriminatory to members of the transgender community”, and said her “fitness to practice was impaired by way of misconduct”.
Having concluded that Rachel’s actions had the potential to undermine public confidence in social workers – even though there was no evidence her work had been affected – Social Work England sanctioned Meade for 12 months under a disposal agreement. She was also referred to a fitness to practise hearing (Times).
Despite Meade subsequently [feeling pressured into] expressing regret for any “unintentional upset” caused and agreeing to additional training, Westminster city council suspended her and threatened her with the sack for misconduct.
However, in what lawyers have described as an unprecedented move, the employment tribunal has now awarded almost £58,000 in damages, including £40,000 for injury to feelings against both organisations. (The Remedy Judgment is available here).
Addressing the responsibility of Westminster city council, the judge said that a decision by officials to suspend the social worker would have “had a very profound effect on her, and would inevitably have fundamentally eroded her dignity, given that her career was very important to her”. The ruling on damages went on to say that Meade “would have felt ostracised and stigmatised. She was precluded from having any contact with her colleagues and thereby increasing her sense of isolation.”
The panel was particularly scathing in its verdict on Social Work England, noting that during its investigation it had “not considered matters from an objective perspective”. Why had it erred in this way? Because staff had a “pre-ordained view” that Mead’s beliefs were “less worthy of respect than the opposite side of the debate, i.e., an employee promoting gender self-identification rights”.
Having concluded that the investigatory process had been “subverted to punish and suppress [Rachel Meade’s] lawful political speech, and to do so on the grounds of her protected speech”, the panel ordered the regulator to pay additional exemplary damages of £5,363.56.
“Exemplary damages,” as the written ruling makes clear, are “designed to punish conduct that is oppressive, arbitrary or unconstitutional” and “reserved for the most serious abuses of governmental power.” It is believed to be the first time that a regulator has been ordered to pay exemplary damages because of the manner in which it performed its regulatory functions.
The panel also recommended that within six months of the promulgation of the judgment both organisations should train their staff on freedom of expression and protected belief. In Westminster city council’s case, the panel also recommended that “details of the trainer and any slides, handouts etc [are] to be shared with the Claimant”.
Following the hearing, Meade said she was “delighted with such a positive judgment after a such a long and dreadful experience. It’s been a hard fight, but I feel relieved and liberated that justice and freedom of speech has prevailed.”
Commenting on the damages award, Meade said she hoped “that the recommendations for training on freedom of expression and legal right of expressing protected beliefs serves as a stepping stone for positive change”.
Her lawyer, Shazia Khan, described the judgement as “a damning indictment of Social Work England and Westminster City Council’s prolonged and oppressive treatment of my client. An award of exemplary damages against a regulator for the manner in which it has carried out its function is unprecedented.
Everyone at the FSU is delighted for Rachel – we supported her case during its early stages, helping to promote her legal crowdfunder.
It’s also worth pointing out that Rachel’s “Orwellian Nightmare” demonstrates exactly why one strand of the FSU’s Parliamentary and lobbying work is now focused on persuading ministers and senior officials to amend the Employment Rights Act 1996 to make it impossible for companies to discipline staff for saying entirely lawful but contentious things outside the workplace. (You can watch FSU General Secretary Toby Young make the case for this amendment on GB News here.)
