A UK Employment Tribunal has found that an NHS health charity ‘directly discriminated’ against a Christian social worker, but then ruled that the charity did not discriminate against him by its failure to employ him. The judge found that Touchstone Leeds was entitled not to hire 46-year-old Cameroonian immigrant Felix Ngole because of his devout faith and beliefs.
Mr. Ngole was initially recruited as a hospital discharge mental health support worker at Wakefield, near Leeds in 2022 after Touchstone agreed he was the best-qualified candidate for the role. The job offer was withdrawn after it emerged he had previously won a landmark freedom of speech case against Sheffield University which had wanted to prevent him from completing his social work degree after it became aware of a social media exchange on his personal page over Biblical teaching on marriage, sexual ethics and homosexuality.
He was removed from his course in 2016 because his posted comments “may have caused offence to some individuals” and had “transgressed boundaries which are not deemed appropriate for someone entering the Social Work profession.” His case raised doubt over whether Christians in regulated professions enjoy free speech protections. In a landmark judgment in 2019, the Court of Appeal overturned a previous High Court ruling, making it clear that Christians do have the legal right to express Biblical views on social media and elsewhere in public without fear for their professional careers.
In 2022, when he questioned the withdrawal of his job offer, Mr. Ngole was invited back for a ‘second interview’ where he said he was interrogated about his beliefs. He was told by Touchstone bosses that unless he could demonstrate how he would embrace and promote homosexual rights, the job offer would remain withdrawn. He was told he would be expected to attend LGBT and Transgender awareness training, but would not be free to share his views despite others being free to share their LGBT affirming views.
During the Employment Tribunal hearing earlier this year, Touchstone had argued that vulnerable LGBT service-users, requiring mental health support, could be more likely to harm themselves if they found out Mr. Ngole’s Biblical views about homosexuality. The grandfather argued that his religious views would not prevent him from looking after an LGBT service-user.
The hearing also heard evidence that even Mother Teresa would not qualify for the job because of her Christian views and that any mention of John 3:16 would be “triggering” for service users.
In his written judgment, Judge Jonathan Brain agreed that Mr. Ngole was directly discriminated against when Touchstone rescinded the initial job offer, but rejected further claims of discrimination around the second interview and the final decision not to give him the job, writing: “The expression of his beliefs rooted in his religion was a material reason for the decision taken by Touchstone to withdraw the conditional job offer. The direct discrimination claim must therefore succeed.”
“Offering a second meeting or interview was the least intrusive way of proceeding [and] it is difficult to see how being properly questioned about that suitability once his orthodox Christian views had come to light reasonably could be considered a violation of his dignity or to create an intimidating environment for him,” the judge continued.
“They (Touchstone) simply could not take the risk of the discovery by a vulnerable service-user of the claimant’s views. The effect upon such an individual may be potentially devastating. Balancing the interests of the respondent in preserving the mental health of their service-users against the wishes of the claimant to work for the respondent and his ability to work elsewhere gives of only one answer. The balance favours the respondent, and their actions were therefore proportionate and are justified,” the judgement concluded.
Mr. Ngole said: ‘I am pleased that the tribunal found that I was discriminated against, but there are so many disturbing comments and conclusions in it [the judgement] as well which leaves me with no choice but to appeal. The ruling ultimately sets a dangerous precedent as it gives employers the freedom to block Christians, and anyone who doesn’t promote LGBTQI+ ideology, from employment.”
“I have never been accused of forcing my beliefs on anyone. I have supported vulnerable individuals from all backgrounds, including LGBT. If we get to the point where if you don’t celebrate and support LGBT you can’t have a job, then every Christian out there doesn’t have a future. The UK is no longer the country I heard about all those years ago when fleeing Cameroon. The UK then was a bastion of free speech and expression. I have no choice but to pursue justice again because if this is happening to me it will be happening to Christians and individuals from all beliefs and backgrounds across the country.”
The Christian Legal Centre, which supported him, said the judgment “includes mixed and chilling conclusions for Christian freedoms and free speech.” Chief executive Andrea Williams called the judge’s reasoning “contorted,” adding: “This ruling opens up the reality of employers discriminating against and denying employment to anyone who does not celebrate and promote complete LGBT affirmation. We are creating a society where social workers, doctors, nurses and psychologists, for example, have to be silent or face accusations that merely holding their protected beliefs could lead to patients coming to harm.”
