8 June 2011

Discrimination because of belief

Discrimination because of belief

This is a cautionary note to highlight that tribunals are taking a generally "employee friendly" broad approach to what is a "belief" for purposes of the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003.

Those regulations (now replaced by similar provisions in Equality Act 2010) give employees protection against dismissal or other detrimental treatment because of their religion or belief.

Originally the belief had to be "similar" to a religious belief. That limitation was removed in 2007 and since then a motley selection of "beliefs" have been held by various tribunals to qualify for protection.

The latest example is that a BBC producer's belief that "public service broadcasting has the higher purpose of promoting cultural interchange and social interchange and social cohesion" has been held to qualify for protection under the regulations. Other recent examples of beliefs qualifying for protection have included beliefs in spiritualism, in animal rights (specifically opposition to hunting) and protection of the environment.

However not all beliefs qualify. Case law shows that to qualify for protection, apart from being genuine, a belief must be more than an opinion or viewpoint, must be related to "a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour", must "attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance" and must be "worthy of respect in a democratic society, be not incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others". Further, a distinction must be drawn between discriminating against an employee because of their "belief" (which is unlawful) and discriminating against an employee because of the manner in which he expresses a belief (which may be lawful).

All in all, the question of whether or not an employee's "belief" will attract the protection of the law is clearly far from having a black and white answer. The best advice to employers is to be very cautious before imposing any particular requirement on an employee which might be construed as being because of a "belief" - but that being said, the rulings from the EAT noted above show that protection is far from being automatic in all cases. Expert advice should be taken in any case where the problem might arise.

For further information please click link to personnel On Line: http://www.britishprint.com/page.asp?node=550&sec=Equality_Issues__NEW_Equality_Act_2010