“I kept a pet goat that followed me like an unpaid bill.” Myrtle Reed
Confessions of a Goat Herder
Following on from my last blog, it’s time to reveal my second ‘quirky’ job that I had before I became a solicitor. Many moons ago, I spent a summer being a goat herder in the Loire valley in France. Sounds idyllic, doesn’t it?
The truth is that I might have been a bit economical with the truth (about my previous farming experience) to the farmer who hired me. I’d never worked on a farm in my life, and that soon became apparent as I spent most of the first week chasing escaping goats around the French countryside.
At least my French improved – although it mainly involved learning how to swear and shout, ‘come here!’.
On with the law….
Pronoun Showdown
In this week’s case of Orwin v East Riding of Yorkshire Council, the employment tribunal considered whether an employee had been directly discriminated against for his gender critical beliefs when he was dismissed for refusing to remove an email signature using preferred pronouns that were intentionally provocative.
The Facts
The Claimant was employed as an ICT Project Officer by East Riding of Yorkshire Council. In 2022, the Council introduced a new policy which invited employees to add pronouns to their email signature. The policy did not set out a list of acceptable pronouns and the employees could also choose not to add any pronouns.
The Claimant, who held strong gender-critical beliefs, objected to the Council’s policy on the basis that it promoted a political ideology of self-identification, a concept with which he disagreed.
Viewing the use of pronouns in email signatures as a "gesture designed to intimidate anyone who does not embrace the contested ideology of gender identity," the Claimant chose to modify his email signature to include the phrase “XY-chromosome-guy/adult-human-male.”
Following several management instructions by the Council to remove the signature, the Claimant was eventually dismissed.
The Tribunal's Decision
The Claimant subsequently brought claims of unfair dismissal and discrimination on the grounds of philosophical belief against the Council.
The tribunal rejected the claimant’s argument that his dismissal was because of the legitimate manifestation of his beliefs. In the judgment, the tribunal recognized that the Claimant’s gender-critical beliefs constituted a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010.
However, it found that there was not a sufficiently close causal link between the email signature and the Claimant’s gender critical beliefs. Instead, the tribunal concluded that the Claimant’s use of the signature was seen as an act of protest rather than a genuine expression of his beliefs. The tribunal noted that it appeared that the Claimant was "mocking the idea of gender self-identification" and that his actions were designed to challenge the Council’s policy. Ultimately, this did not amount to discrimination and the decision to dismiss the Claimant was fair.
Cosmic Overtime
We've all been there - starting a job that sounds straightforward, only to discover that it's way more complicated than advertised. But while most of us deal with surprise overtime or extra tasks, astronauts Barry “Butch” Wilmore and Sunita Williams got a whole new level of job description shock: their 8-day space mission has turned into a cosmic marathon.
Last month, Butch and Suni blasted off on what was supposed to be a quick trip to the International Space Station to test a new spacecraft, say a quick hello to the ISS crew, and be back home in no time. But as with many job descriptions, what was promised and what happened were light-years apart.
The spacecraft decided to throw in a few surprises - leaks in the propulsion system and thrusters that didn’t feel like working. Instead of being home in a week, they’re now looking at staying up there for 8 months, possibly hitching a ride back with SpaceX’s Crew Dragon in February 2025.
The moral of the story – always read the job description carefully!
Until next time.
Darren
