Protection from discrimination may be afforded to certain, genuine beliefs
Strongly held environmental beliefs may be protected against discrimination in the same way as religious or other philosophical beliefs, a tribunal has held.
In Grainger plc v Nicholson, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that a belief in man-made climate change is capable of being a “philosophical belief” for the purpose of the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003.
Tim Nicholson, who claims he was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against because of his philosophical belief about climate change and the environment, will now bring his claim before a tribunal.
Nicholson claims he was obstructed in his attempts to encourage the firm to take a more environmentally responsible approach. He claimed the firm used “some of the most highly polluting cars on the road”, and flew a member of the IT team out to Ireland to deliver the chief executive’s BlackBerry.
Grainger plc disputes the claims of unfair dismissal and discrimination. It had argued that Nicholson’s views on climate change and the environment could not amount to a philosophical belief because they were based on fact and science.
However, Mr Justice Burton disagreed. He set out the limitations of “philosophical belief”: the belief must be genuinely held; it must be a belief and not an opinion or viewpoint based on the information available; it must be a belief as to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour; it must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance; and it must be worthy of respect in a democratic society, not incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others.
A belief in the supreme nature of the Jedi Knights, or belief in a racist or homophobic political philosophy would fail the test, he said. However, a genuine belief in socialism, communism or free market capitalism might qualify.
“In my judgment, if a person can establish that he holds a philosophical belief which is based on science, as opposed, for example, to religion, then there is no reason to disqualify it from protection by the Regulations,” he said.
