Bu Niall McCrae
It always comes as a nasty surprise. You are called into the manager’s office and on entering you find a serious-looking person sitting there with a file open. It’s the HR officer, and you are in trouble. As you discover, it’s not that you did anything wrong at work, but something that you wrote to friends on Facebook. Someone – you are not told who – was offended. Now you are to be investigated for breach of the social media policy and failing to follow your employer’s ‘values’.
Perhaps you made a critical comment about male ‘trans’ use of female spaces, or about illegal immigrants crossing the English Channel and being accommodated in four-star hotels, or about Keir Starmer not being the greatest prime minister in modern history. It really doesn’t take much to be caught in the crosshairs of the puritanical discipline created by Woke identity politics. You are shown a Facebook post and asked to confirm that you wrote it. Then, to your shock, you are suspended and sent home, under order not to contact anyone at work.
Don’t expect the likes of Unison, Unite or GMB to defend you properly. Their shop stewards are likely to be saddened or angered by realising that you are not the nice person they had thought you were, but a harbour of bigoted attitude. They will tell you to admit your misdeed, show deep remorse for the impact on colleagues, and in the hearing your union rep might plea on mitigation (stress or undiagnosed ADHD, for example). If you appeal to the panel’s sympathy you might get a warning, but thought crime is often punished severely – because it is harder to change your beliefs than your behaviour.
Workers regard trade union membership as insurance, but in political cases the larger unions are no better than a chocolate teapot. For robust defence of rights inside and outside the workplace, critical thinkers should join the Workers of England Union. As a WEU officer I have represented countless members in ‘cancel culture’ cases.
The WEU is a generic trade union, covering any occupation. It’s independent in two ways. First, we have no shop stewards in the workplace. Although it may seem an advantage of the established unions, such provision is problematic because the shop steward is under the same management as the member, and participates in joint consultation (tea and biscuits with the bosses).
Secondly the WEU is not politically aligned. Unknowingly perhaps, members of large unions are paying for ‘refugees welcome’ and ‘drag queen story time’ protests or counter-protests, and a proportion of monthly fees is sent to the Labour Party. Our reps are committed to freedom of speech on principle, rather than favouring any political opinion or group.
Ordinary people often remark on how Woke ideology and policies don’t make sense (for example, nurses expected to ask all patients if they might be pregnant). The path of least resistance is silent compliance, but for workers with a higher level of integrity, this is intolerable. They ask questions, and are penalised for doing so.
There is no privacy for social media users. Last year I represented someone who posted forthright messages on Facebook following the Southport killings, thinking that only her friends and family would see her messages. She was dismissed for gross misconduct. Another member was sacked for remarks to a colleague, after they had been drinking in a pub. He had merely stated that some of the ‘refugees’ entering the country were Albanian drug gangsters. Sometimes our rigorous defence of the member results in a lesser sanction or the case being dropped, but whatever the outcome, the member can be sure that we confronted the employer for encroaching on fundamental rights.
You shouldn’t wait for protection. Workers often seek help after they have attended an investigation meeting, but that is too late. They may have admitted the allegations, or unwittingly incriminated themselves.
An investigation meeting will often be presented by a manager as a friendly chat. It is anything but. If a HR officer is present, that makes it a formal meeting, and you will need representation. Although you have no legal right to a rep in an investigation meeting, it is good employment practice for management to allow this. Our golden rule: no rep, no meeting.
For a disciplinary hearing, I suggest relevant articles for the member to submit to the panel, which should be included in the pack for the hearing. The purpose is to present a clear argument in tune with whatever the member may have expressed in a less sophisticated manner. At the hearing I check that the panellists have read these articles.
Social media policy is increasingly being used for disciplinary action. I ask the panel in such cases whether the policy is objectively or subjectively applied. This is difficult to answer, because of course there is nothing specific in the policy, and no line drawn on acceptability. Ideological judgment is made. Employees were not disciplined for supporting the divisive Black Lives Matter campaign. Employers themselves engage in racial politics; for example on the notion of ‘white privilege’.
In hearings for offending opinion, the middle-class values and ‘luxury beliefs’ of the senior manager and HR officer are often apparent. Some consolation for a doomed member is in watching the discomfort of such people when confronted by a WEU rep. They are not normally challenged in their outlook, which has served their career well. After a recent hearing the member commented to me on the look of mental and physical exhaustion of the panellists on leaving the room.
I don’t provoke unnecessarily. My goal is always the best (or rather the least worst) outcome for the member. A convivial exchange tends to get a more favourable outcome than a feisty struggle.
Sometimes, if a lost cause, I will seek a meeting without prejudice, under Section 111A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It may be possible to extricate a member from disciplinary process and likely dismissal, with a confidential settlement agreement.
A member who is unfairly dismissed should appeal. While submitting the appeal, the member may also begin the process leading to an employment tribunal. The ACAS early conciliation form should be submitted before the appeal hearing, so that the employer is aware that the dismissed worker is pursuing redress.
We use the Equality Act to fight for our members in political cases. Philosophical belief has as much statutory protection as religion. But the member should be able to present this lucidly. It doesn’t need big words or intellectual rigour. The WEU can help a member to prepare such a defence. Of interest here is David Fleming’s philosophy of continuism, which embraces all that is human in an increasingly technocratic environment – this includes debate and freedom of speech. Fleming will present continuism at the forthcoming WEU annual general meeting, advising on how this could qualify as a protected belief under the Equality Act.
Critical thinkers who join the Workers of England Union are contributing to the overturning of a malevolent ideological regime that has made workplaces a minefield.
