The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) considered an unfair dismissal case involving the issue of political neutrality.
Polly Jones was Head of Membership and Policy at Scottish Federation of Housing Associations (SFHA) from April 2019.
SFHA required Ms Jones to remain politically neutral. Her employment contract said that she must not have a formal political role.
In October 2019, Ms Jones informed SFHA that she wished to stand for Scottish Labour in the Argyll and Bute constituency at the next general election. SFHA informed Ms Jones that it did not consent, and Ms Jones withdrew her candidature.
Ms Jones was dismissed in November 2019. SFHA gave a variety of reasons for dismissal but did not rely on her request for permission to stand for Scottish Labour.
Ms Jones did not have the requisite 2 years’ service to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim, but nonetheless argued that she had been unfairly dismissed because of, or in relation to, her political opinions or affiliation. Such claims can be brought by dismissed employees with any length of service.
Ms Jones also argued that she had been dismissed because of her philosophical belief that “those with the relevant skills, ability and passion should participate in the democratic process”, and that this was discrimination.
The case reached the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). The EAT held that the relevant legislation does not apply where “the content of the employee’s opinions or the identity of the party she wishes to stand for do not form part of the reasoning leading to dismissal”. The legislation did not apply where, as alleged in this case, an employee is dismissed “because they lack [political] neutrality” or “propose to act in a way that threatens their political neutrality”.
However, the EAT accepted that Ms Jones’ belief in participatory democracy was protected by equality laws.
Read the full judgment here.
