Dismissal for political belief or affiliation

No service is needed for an unfair dismissal claim where the reason (or if more than one, the principal reason) for the dismissal “is or relates to the employee’s political opinions or affiliation” (section 108 of the ERA 96). This reflects a change to the law made in July 2013, following a ruling of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Redfearn v The United Kingdom [2012] ECHR 1878. The ECHR found the UK in breach of Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to freedom of association) for failing to provide a proper remedy for individuals dismissed because of their political beliefs. The case involved a BNP councillor dismissed for his extreme views on immigration. He did not have enough service to claim unfair dismissal. The ECHR ruled that the need for continuous service in cases where someone is dismissed for holding political beliefs breached Article 11. The law should have allowed Redfearn a hearing in which to make his case, however odious, before deciding whether or not to dismiss.

The UK government has responded by adding an extra category to the list of reasons for dismissal which require no qualifying service. This new category is dismissal where the reason (or principal reason) for the dismissal is, or relates to, the employee’s “political opinions or affiliation”.

A dismissal for political affiliation is not automatically unfair. Rather, dismissal for holding political beliefs can be fair, applying normal principles of unfair dismissal law and depending on all the circumstances. For example, it is likely to be fair to dismiss an employee who holds odious political views, such as a belief in white supremacy, after a fair hearing.

(See also page 157, Chapter 6: Discrimination, Political belief).