Bloodied but unbowed

The concept of philosophical belief is under the spotlight again after a hunt saboteur was allegedly dismissed from his employment because of his philosophical objection to blood sports.

Philosophical belief is a tough concept to define. In the original legislation, the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003, it was described as a profound belief akin to a religious belief. Political and single platform beliefs were specifically exlcuded, but in 2006 the definition was amended and philosophical beliefs no longer have to be akin to a religious belief. The new definition, "belief means any religious or philosophical belief" greatly broadens the scope of the definition and any genuine philosophical belief, including political beliefs, will be covered. There’s little in the way of further definition and the ACAS guidance is silent on the point. At the time the Government said that the courts will determine what philosophical belief is on a case-by-case basis. That’s what’s happening, leading to an expensive and very unsatisfactory way of determining employers’ and employees’ rights and responsibilities.

Earlier this year the EAT ruled that environmental beliefs can constitute a philosophical belief (Nicholson v Grainger plc). Now former gardener Joe Hashman is arguing that his anti-hunting beliefs should merit the same protections.

Mr Hashman has a long history of involvement in animal protection. He is vegan and began attending animal’s rights demos at the age of 14. In 1984 he joined the Hunt Saboteurs Association. He is also a consultant on hunting issues for the International Fund for Animal Welfare, and has written extensively on the subject.

Mr Hashman had gathered video evidence of TV chef Clarissa Dickson-Wight attending a hare coursing event in North Yorkshire in 2007 which was later used to prosecute her.

The day after this, Mr Hashman alleges that his employers, Orchard Park Garden Centre, of Gillingham, Dorset, dismissed him because they support hunting and have engaged in fox hunting. Mr Hashman worked on a vegetable garden at the centre and says his employers had not previously raised any concerns about his work. Mr Hashman’s former employers have said that he dismissed because the vegetable plot was not financially viable and it had no connection with his beliefs.

It remains for the court to determine whether his beliefs about animal rights, in particular, his opposition to hunting, amount to a philosophical belief, providing protection under the Employment Equality (Religion and Belief) Regulations 2003.

Russell HR Consulting provides expert knowledge in the practical application of employment law as well as providing employment law training and HR support services. For more information, visit our website at www.russellhrconsulting.co.uk or call a member of the team on 0845 644 8955.

Russell HR Consulting offers HR services to businesses nationwide, including Buckinghamshire (covering Aylesbury, High Wycombe, Milton Keynes, Bedford, Banbury, Northampton, Towcester and surrounding areas), Nottinghamshire (covering Chesterfield, Mansfield, Nottingham, Sheffield, Worksop and surrounding areas) and Hampshire (covering Aldershot, Basingstoke, Reading, Farnborough, Fareham, Portsmouth, Southampton and surrounding areas).