Equality Tribunal awards €70,000 to Evangelical Christian

Equality Tribunal awards €70,000 to Evangelical Christian

The Equality Tribunal has awarded €70,000 to an Evangelical Christian, finding that he had been discriminated against on grounds of his religious beliefs, in circumstances where he was dismissed by South Tipperary County Council for failing to comply with a direction from his employer that he refrain from talking about religion during the working day.

Background

The Complainant is an Evangelical, or Born Again Christian, since 1990, and was employed by the Respondent as a Civil Engineer between December 2007 and July 2010. One of the tenets of his religion requires him to speak about Jesus, and share the Gospel with them. He described his religious beliefs as 'a passion, and he had a compulsion to share his faith and it was like someone having a passion for a football team.'

In April 2008, the Complainant was informed that a complaint had been made about him sharing his faith in the office, and he was asked to stop doing so. In his evidence to the Tribunal, the Complainant said that he gave an undertaking to desist from talking about his religion during the working day or during his lunch period, but found it ‘particularly difficult, given his need to practice his religion’. Following a disciplinary process, the Complainant was issued with a written warning. After a further incident in August 2008, the Complainant was issued with a final written warning.

In February 2009, the Complainant was called to a disciplinary meeting in connection with an incident when he was observed by a Council staff member talking to a man outside a coffee shop. The staff member had approached the man, who confirmed that the Complainant had been speaking to him about religion. During the disciplinary meeting, the Complainant accepted that he had been speaking about religion. The Complainant was found guilty of gross misconduct, suspended without pay for two months, and was compelled to seek professional help to control his compulsion to speak to people about his religious beliefs. The Complainant attended a number of counselling sessions and a report was furnished to the Respondent. He returned to work after his suspension.

In May 2010, the Complainant was suspended on full pay following a further incident in which it was alleged that he had engaged in the promotion of his beliefs with a Council sub-contractor. An investigation was conducted, leading to a recommendation that the Complainant be dismissed and his subsequent dismissal. The Complainant filed a complaint with the Equality Tribunal, claiming that he had been discriminated against in relation to his conditions of employment and dismissed because the respondent had zero tolerance of his religious belief and the manifestation of that belief.

The Decision

At the outset, the Equality Officer considered whether the right to hold a religious belief, which is covered by the Employment Equality Acts, also protects a right to manifest that religion or belief. Considering this question, the Equality Officer noted that both the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights covers the right to manifest one’s religion or belief. She was therefore satisfied that such a right is covered within the Religion ground in the Employment Equality Acts.

Direct Discrimination

The Equality Officer considered whether the Complainant had been directly discriminated against in relation to his conditions of employment. She stated that 'from the evidence, it appears that a significant number of Council staff were apprised of the complainant's religious beliefs and the fact that he could not speak about his beliefs to anybody during the working day including the lunch period. It is clear that these staff were asked to monitor him given the number of staff who reported to management that they saw the complainant speaking to a member of the public.’ The Equality Officer was satisfied that the treatment of the complainant and the monitoring of him by Council staff were directly related to his religious beliefs and the manifestation of those beliefs. She also noted that there was no evidence that any other staff members had their conversations monitored as the Complainant did, and that the complainant was compelled to attend counselling because the Respondent “believed that his passion for speaking about his religion was a form of addiction”. She was satisfied that the Complainant had been treated less favourably than a person of a different religion/no religion would have been in similar circumstances, and found that he had been directly discriminated against.

Indirect Discrimination

The Equality Officer also considered whether the Complainant had been indirectly discriminated against. Indirect discrimination occurs where an apparently neutral provision puts a person of a particular religion at a particular disadvantage when compared with other persons, unless the provision is objectively justified by a legitimate aim and the means of achieving that aim are appropriate and necessary. The policy that the Complainant had to comply with was that he was not to engage in conversation about religion with either members of staff or members of the public during normal working hours, including lunch time. She found that as the Complainant was an Evangelical Christian, and as one of the fundamental tenets of his religion is the sharing of his faith with others, the ban imposed on him had a greater impact on Evangelical Christians than on people of other religions or no religion. This led the Equality Officer to find that the Complainant had established a prima facia case of indirect discrimination.

The Respondent sought to objectively justify the indirect discrimination, arguing inter alia that the purpose of the policy was to prevent the Complainant from bringing the Council into disrepute by the inappropriate promotion of his religion. The Equality Officer rejected this argument, stating that ‘it is difficult to see how the Complainant’s activities in manifesting his religion had the potential to bring the Council into disrepute... Approaching people the Complainant was seen having a conversation with and prying into the content of that conversation with a view to catching out the Complainant was wholly inappropriate and unnecessary.' Accordingly, in the view of the Equality Officer, the means chosen to realise the Council’s policy were ‘wholly inappropriate and unnecessary’

Finding in favour of the Complainant, the Equality Officer awarded him €70,000 in compensation for the effects of the discriminatory treatment. We understand that this decision will be appealed.

Implications

This decision highlights the difficult and challenging issues that are occurring with increasing frequency in employment equality law. While the right to manifest one’s religion has already been the subject of decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights, employers should take note of this decision as being one of the few Irish decisions dealing with the right to manifest one’s religion.

If you have any queries, please contact Michelle Ní Longáin or Donal Hamilton in our Employment Law Department.