Council ‘wrong’ to suspend social worker for her views on transgender debate

By Ben Lynch, Local Democracy Reporter

A social worker who was suspended after sharing and liking gender-critical views on Facebook has won a ‘landmark case’ against her employer.

Westminster council and Social Work England (SWE) were found by a tribunal to have subjected Rachel Meade to harassment, after a colleague complained about posts including a link to magazine Private Eye content.

Ms Meade, who has worked as a social worker for more than 20 years, was sanctioned by SWE in 2021 for misconduct after complaints that posts she shared online were offensive to the transgender community.

These included a link to a petition to the International Olympic Committee stating male athletes should not compete in female sports, and a Private Eye satirical post stating: “Boys that identify as girls to go to Girl Guides. Girls that identify as boys to go to Boy Scouts. Men that identify as paedophiles go to either.”

Following her sanction, which included SWE publishing the decision on its website, Westminster council suspended Ms Meade on gross misconduct charges and began a disciplinary investigation.

According to the tribunal’s judgement, the council’s interim director of family services, Helen Farrell, expressed in a subsequent disciplinary report ‘the view that [Ms Meade] had acted in a discriminatory manner’.

Ms Meade’s legal representation said the SWE sanction and council’s warning were later withdrawn, though the social worker continued to file her claim with the Employment Tribunal arguing her beliefs were protected under the Equality Act 2010.

In its judgement sent to parties earlier this week, the tribunal found both organisations had subjected Ms Meade to harassment.

All of her Facebook posts were deemed to have fallen within her “protected rights for freedom of thought and freedom to manifest her beliefs”, with the report adding the two bodies failed to strike “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”.

Following the judgement, Ms 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 said the judgement “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”.

Ms Meade’s legal team add this is believed to be the first time a regulator and an employer have been found liable for discrimination relating to gender critical beliefs.

A Westminster  council spokesman said the local authority apologises to Ms Meade and acknowledges the findings of the tribunal.

He said: “As recent landmark cases have shown and the tribunal noted, the issues and policy making involving gender recognition and rights is a fast-evolving area.

“We will be carefully studying the points made in the judgement and considering what changes we need to make.”

Colum Conway, chief executive of SWE, said: “Following the judgement, all parties have the opportunity to consider the decision and their options. As such, we do not intend to provide further comment at this time.”

Pictured top: Rachel Meade (far left) and friends (Picture: Rachel Meade)