Christian social employee to appeal tribunal ruling in discrimination case

A Christian social employee is to appeal against a part of an employment tribunal ruling concluding that he was discriminated against by an NHS provider over the withdrawal of a job offer due to his same-sex marraige beliefs.

Felix Ngole, 46, brought the case against Touchstone Leeds with the support of the Christian Legal Centre (CLC). 

He was offered the job of a mental health support employee but it surely was withdrawn after Touchstone discovered through a Google search that Ngole had won a landmark legal case against Sheffield University in 2019 for being faraway from a social work training course over his traditional marriage beliefs.

CLC said that Touchstone told Mr Ngole his beliefs didn’t “align” with their ethos as an “inclusive employer” and that he posed a risk to the organisation’s status and repair users. 

Mr Ngole was called back for a second interview where he says he was interrogated about his religious beliefs and told by Touchstone bosses that unless he could show how he would “embrace and promote homosexual rights”, the job offer wouldn’t be reinstated. 

The judgment handed down this week by employment Judge Jonathan Brain says that Touchstone’s “approach had a severe effect upon Mr Ngole’s right to freedom of expression”.

“It had a major impact upon him as he really wanted the job. While the target being pursued by Touchstone was in fact very essential, simply withdrawing the conditional job offer without giving him that chance went further than was reasonably essential towards Touchstone’s objective,” the judgment reads.

“[Mr Ngole] was simply not in post and subsequently there was no or little risk of a service user finding him through a web search. He would simply not have been on the radar of any service user at that time.”

It continues, “The reason why [Touchstone] acted as they did cannot subsequently be on the grounds of objectionable expression but somewhat to the legitimate expression of his views. These were rooted in his religion. That is the explanation why he was treated as he was. The reason why is obvious.”

However, Judge Brain also ruled that Touchstone’s decision to not reinstate the job offer after the second interview was “proportionate” and “justified” due to its concerns for the welfare of LGBTQ service users.

“Balancing the interests of [Touchstone] in preserving the mental health of their service users against the needs of [Mr Ngole] to work for [Touchstone] and his ability to work elsewhere gives of just one answer. The balance favours [Touchstone], and their actions were subsequently proportionate and are justified,” the judgement said.

Responding to the judgment, Mr Ngole said that he had “no alternative” but to appeal. 

“The ruling ultimately sets a dangerous precedent because it gives employers the liberty to dam Christians, and anyone who doesn’t promote LGBTQI+ ideology, from employment,” he said. 

“If I used to be discriminated against once they withdrew the job offer then I do not see how I used to be not also discriminated against once they refused to reinstate me after the ‘second interview.'”

He continued, “It is untenable for employers to be allowed to discriminate against Christian beliefs in this fashion and to force individuals to advertise an ideology that goes against their conscience within the workplace.” 

CLC chief executive Andrea Williams called the reasoning within the judgment “contorted”. 

“Judge Brain had to seek out that Felix Ngole had been directly discriminated against for his Christian beliefs since the evidence permitted no other conclusion. This is where the case must have ended and Felix exonerated and reinstated,” she said.

“This ruling opens up the fact of employers discriminating against and denying employment to anyone who doesn’t rejoice and promote complete LGBT affirmation.

“We are making a society where social employees, doctors, nurses andpsychologists, for instance, need to be silent or face accusations that merely holding their protected beliefs could lead on to patients coming to harm.”

She continued, “The Court of Appeal found that Felix had not and was unlikely to discriminate against anybody. However, this ruling concludes that just the knowledge that he holds Christian beliefs on human sexuality means he’s unsuitable for employment within the NHS.

“This ruling cannot stand and it’s deeply discriminatory. We will fight for Felix until he receives justice.”