Analysis: recent cases strengthen protections for debate, but questions remain around workplace conflicts
The decision, on Wednesday, that LGB Alliance founder and barrister Allison Bailey had suffered direct discrimination and victimisation was the second highly anticipated ruling in less than a month – after the Maya Forstater case – concerning gender-critical women in the workplace.
With both women being allies of JK Rowling, and both of their cases turning on their tweets criticising beliefs of supporters of transgender rights, they attracted an unusual amount of attention for employment tribunals and experts say they have important implications.
The most significant ruling came in the Forstater case when, in June last year a panel led by the president of the employment appeal tribunal (EAT) held that gender-critical views were a protected philosophical belief under the Equality Act.
The decision paved the way not just for Forstater winning her case, which was then sent back to an employment tribunal to be heard in full, but also Bailey’s victory against her chambers, Garden Court.
Lucy Lewis, employment partner at Lewis Silkin, said: “If you want to engage in public debate, if you are clear you are doing that in your personal capacity, then I think that there is now much stronger protection as a result of these two cases in your ability to do that.”
Bosses at Garden Court Chambers (GCC) argued that Bailey’s tweets, one of which spoke of “intimidation, fear &...
Daily Fact Check from NewsGuard AI Did Ukrainian security forces kill 11 protesters on President Zelensky’s orders? Commentary: Why ‘False Flag’ Has Become the Internet’s Default, All-Purpose Consp...