Thursday 4 May 2023

Employers, Not Masters Or Parents...

Maureen Martin was accused of gross misconduct after her employer, a housing association, claimed her campaign pledge to promote 'natural marriage' was discriminatory and would offend gay and trans people.
Ms Martin sued London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) for unfair dismissal, discrimination and harassment in a case called 'an attack on democracy'. Last night she told The Mail on Sunday she was happy with the out-of-court settlement but described her treatment as chilling.

It seems the fact you are employed by a company to perform a role during work time gives some of them the right to assume control over every aspect of your life, as Longrider points out.  

'I should have had a right to express my own Christian beliefs in my own private time and should not have been required to self-censor my beliefs or be forced out of my job.
'I will be standing again as mayoral candidate in 2024. My message will not have changed. You can fire me, but you cannot silence me.'

Good for her. But where do these companies get the bare-faced cheek to imagine they can control every aspect of our lives? They pay us for our time, and that's all. 

Perhaps Ms Martin should have simply billed them for every hour she worked on her campaign instead?

4 comments:

decnine said...

It's long established in Employment Law that activities during non-working time may not bring the employer into disrepute. If the terms of her employment requires her to treat all applicants equally, stridently proclaiming her opposition to what she terms 'un-natural' marriage could cause some applicants to fear that the employer's support for equal treatment was insincere.

Andrew said...

Perhaps the converse should apply too; employers can bring my reputation into disrepute from their public pronouncements?

decnine said...

Well, Andrew, if that were to happen, you could sue them. Or maybe find employment with a more congenial company. Or both.

JuliaM said...

"...could cause some applicants to fear that the employer's support for equal treatment was insincere."

Then they could always ask to be dealt with by another employee, couldn't they? If it's good enough for Muslim checkout operators...

"Perhaps the converse should apply too; employers can bring my reputation into disrepute from their public pronouncements?"

Heh! That, I would like to see!