Social worker wins harassment case over gender critical views
Rachel Meade had been sanctioned after a colleague complained that posts she shared online were offensive to the transgender community
Friday, 12th January 2024 — By Ben Lynch LDRS

Rachel Meade [Rachel Meade]
A SOCIAL worker who was suspended after sharing and liking gender critical views on Facebook has won a “landmark case” against her employer and regulatory body.
Westminster City Council and Social Work England (SWE) were found by an employment tribunal to have subjected Rachel Meade to harassment after a colleague complained about posts including a link to Private Eye content.
Ms Meade, who has been a social worker for more than 20 years, was sanctioned by SWE in 2021 for misconduct after complaints that posts she shared online were offensive to the transgender community.
These included a link to a petition to the International Olympic Committee stating male athletes should not compete in female sports, and a Private Eye satirical post stating: “Boys that identify as girls go to Girl Guides. Girls that identify as boys go to Boy Scouts. Men that identify as paedophiles go to either.”
Ms Meade however said she was “naively unaware” that any of the posts that she had liked / shared, or petitions she had signed, were discriminatory.
Following her sanction, which included SWE publishing the decision on its website, Westminster City Council suspended Ms Meade on gross misconduct charges and began a disciplinary investigation.
According to the tribunal’s judgment, the council’s interim director of family services Helen Farrell had said in an early report, “there was a case to answer in that the claimant had used social media to share posts that were discriminatory in nature, had signed petitions and donated funds to organisations that discriminate against specific groups and had acted in a discriminatory manner”.
Ms Meade’s legal representation said both the SWE sanction and council’s warning were later withdrawn, though the social worker continued to file her claim with the employment tribunal arguing her beliefs were protected under the Equality Act 2010.
In its judgment, sent to parties earlier this week, the tribunal found both organisations had subjected Ms Meade to harassment.
All of her Facebook posts were deemed to have fallen within her “protected rights for freedom of thought and freedom to manifest her beliefs”, with the report adding the two bodies failed to strike “a fair balance between the claimant’s right to freedom of expression and the interests of those who they perceived may be offended by her Facebook posts”.
Following the judgment, Ms Meade said: “It’s a huge relief to be so completely vindicated after all this time.
“It has been a horrendous experience.
“This ruling makes it clear that I was entitled to contribute to the important public debate on sex and gender.
“I hope it will make it easier for other regulated professionals to speak up without threats to their career and reputation.”
Ms Meade’s solicitor, Shazia Khan, founding partner of Cole Khan Solicitors, said the judgment “sounds an alarm for all regulators – and all employers of regulated professionals – that they must not let their processes be weaponised by activists bent on silencing the debate on freedom of speech on gender”.
Ms Meade’s legal team added that this is believed to be the first time a regulator and an employer have been found liable for discrimination relating to gender critical beliefs.
A city council spokesperson said the local authority apologises to Ms Meade and acknowledges the findings of the tribunal.
“As recent landmark cases have shown, and the tribunal noted, the issues and policy-making involving gender recognition and rights is a fast-evolving area,” they said.
“We will be carefully studying the points made in the judgment and considering what changes we need to make at Westminster City Council to ensure the best balance we can to support our staff, service users and our partners.”
Colum Conway, chief executive of Social Work England, said the organisation also acknowledged the finding, and added: “Following the judgment, all parties have the opportunity to consider the decision and their options. As such, we do not intend to provide further comment at this time.
“Any further updates will be published on our website.”