School Administrator Wins Unfair Dismissal Claim

Overview: The Court of Appeal ruled that dismissing an employee for comments on her personal social media account—reflecting her beliefs about gender fluidity and same-sex marriage—was not objectively justified and amounted to unlawful discrimination by her employer under the Equality Act 2010.

Case Background

Kristie Higgs was employed as a school administrator who won an unfair dismissal claim over social media posts. A committed Christian, she made several Facebook posts criticizing relationship and sex education—specifically concerns that pupils would be taught “same-sex marriage is exactly the same as traditional marriage” and that “gender is a matter of choice, not biology.” A parent complained of “homophobic and prejudiced views against the LGBT community,” triggering an investigation, suspension, and ultimately dismissal for gross misconduct.

Employment Tribunal (ET) and Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) Decisions

The Employment Tribunal found that Mrs Higgs was dismissed due to potential reputational damage—not because of her beliefs. On appeal, the Employment Appeal Tribunal emphasised the need for a proportionality assessment under the European Convention on Human Rights, concluding that the school’s actions required closer scrutiny. The EAT remitted the case to the ET, but Mrs Higgs appealed, arguing that no objectively justifiable response to her personal posts existed.

Court of Appeal Decision

The Court of Appeal allowed Mrs Higgs’s appeal. Although the school could object to her “gratuitously offensive” language—described by the court as “stupidly rhetorical exaggeration”—dismissal was disproportionate. Key factors included:

• Posts made on a private account in her maiden name with no reference to the school.
• No evidence of actual reputational harm or complaints about her work.
• Her conduct, while unwise, did not justify the severity of dismissal for a long-serving employee.

Key Implications for Employers

• Balancing Beliefs: Employers must navigate competing philosophical and religious beliefs. The Equality Act 2010 protects a wide range of beliefs—even those some find offensive.
• Objective Justification: Any limitation on the manifestation of belief must be objectively justified and proportionate. Disciplinary action cannot rest solely on potential reputational damage.
• Social Media Caution: Be cautious when addressing social media posts made on private accounts with no employer link. Actual harm must be demonstrable before dismissal.