Blog

New case highlights implications for employers on employee social media and beliefs


New case has important implications for employers when considering social media posts of employees and the expression of their beliefs


The Court of Appeal has delivered its key judgment in the case of Higgs v Farmor’s School, providing employers with guidance on how to act when an employee expresses views to which others object.

The case involved Mrs. Higgs reposting gender-critical views and opposition to same-sex marriage on her personal Facebook page. A parent of a pupil at the School complained about the views expressed in the posts, and the School, concerned about the potential impact on its reputation, dismissed Mrs. Higgs for gross misconduct.

Mrs. Higgs brought a claim for discrimination due to her religion or belief. The claim initially failed in the Employment Tribunal, but an appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal partially succeeded. Mrs. Higgs appealed to the Court of Appeal, believing that her dismissal should have been considered direct discrimination.

The Court of Appeal found that while employees have the right to set out their beliefs, this right is qualified. If the way the employee expresses their beliefs is inappropriate or objectionable, and the employer takes action as a result, the treatment is due to how the employee expressed themselves, not the beliefs themselves. The employer must objectively assess whether the language used is inappropriate or objectionable, and any disciplinary action must be proportionate.

In this case, the Court of Appeal found that while the School was entitled to investigate the complaint from the parent, their decision to dismiss was not proportionate and therefore amounted to direct discrimination. While the School had a legitimate interest in protecting its reputation, there was no evidence that reputational damage had actually occurred. As with all cases, they are often fact-specific, and other factors that impacted this case included:

  • The language used was not grossly offensive
    • Mrs Higgs had simply re-posted items and not drafted them herself
      • The comments were on her personal Facebook page, in her maiden name, and made no reference to the School
      • This important judgment highlights the need to protect employees’ rights to express their beliefs, even if controversial or unpopular. It clarifies that while employers have the right to maintain a respectful and inclusive workplace, any restrictions on employees’ expression of beliefs—especially through social media posts—must be necessary and proportionate. Therefore, if an employee issues posts on social media or expresses opinions that may be controversial, the employer needs to carefully consider the language used and whether what has been said impacts their ability to perform their job before making any decisions about their employment.

        To discuss the implications for employers on social media posts of employees further or for assistance with any employment-related matters, please fill in the contact form below to get in touch with a member of our employment team. We’re here to help.

        Author


        Required
        Required
        Required