Manchester Council sacked equality manager over two X posts

Manchester City Council (MCC) dismissed its former Equality Team Manager, Lorna Young, after nearly two decades’ service following an investigation into four items on an anonymous X account: two posts she wrote and two she liked.

The case was heard largely in May, but resumed this week after the council’s final witness had been unable to attend because of ill health. The tribunal heard from Jenny Osborne, MCC’s Assistant Director for Population Health, on Monday, before final submissions on Tuesday. Judgment has been reserved.

Young, a Catholic who holds gender critical beliefs, has brought claims of unfair dismissal, direct discrimination and harassment related to religion or belief, and discrimination arising from and harassment related to disability.

MCC says it dismissed Young because of the way she expressed her views online and the resulting breakdown in trust and confidence, not because she held gender critical beliefs. Young’s counsel says the distinction collapses on inspection.

In 2022, MCC passed a “Trans Rights Are Human Rights” motion stating that trans women are women, trans men are men and non-binary people are non-binary. Young’s counsel says the resolution governed the council’s treatment of her.

Late disclosure has been a feature of the case. More than 300 pages arrived in batches during the May hearing, followed by further documents before Osborne gave evidence this week.

Young’s barrister, Nathan Roberts, said the GalwayGirl X account did not identify Young as an MCC employee and that, until she admitted running it in her witness statement, MCC had not established she was behind it.

Osborne said that did not settle the matter. Someone outside MCC might have known who was behind the account and associated its views with the council.

Roberts said Osborne’s investigation was a foregone conclusion, pointing to a briefing which said: “It is felt that gender critical views are incompatible with employment in the EDI department.”

Osborne said “felt” meant this was an expression rather than a conclusion, and accepted that gender critical beliefs alone could not make someone unsuitable for an equality role. She also said with hindsight she would change her decision letter’s statement that such beliefs were not “necessarily” compatible with employment at MCC.

Young had repeatedly asked MCC to explain what was objectionable about the four items and why they justified dismissal. The council referred generally to “offensive and derogatory material” and said the tweets should be considered as a whole. Osborne accepted that it was fair to tell Young what was alleged against her.

One post concerned a teacher who told primary-school children that medication had made him a girl. Young commented: “People like this should not be teachers.”

Osborne initially understood that to mean transgender people should not be teachers. When Roberts put the context to her, she accepted that it could reasonably be read as criticism of adults telling children that medication changes sex.

Another post concerned Bingo Allison, a vicar who identifies as non-binary. Osborne accepted she had not read the linked article or watched the linked video before deciding Young’s reference to the devil was offensive. She accepted that a Catholic might take the opposite view to Allison’s claim to have been guided by God, but maintained that Young had not expressed her disagreement reasonably or respectfully.

One of the items Young had liked referred to “grooming our children”. Osborne said she understood it to imply that trans people generally were paedophiles. Yet she accepted she had not watched the linked video, relied on a poor transcript and did not know what a drag-queen story hour was. Roberts said that interpretation had never been put to Young before her dismissal.

MCC’s case was the Bananarama defence: Young could hold gender critical beliefs, but not express them in a way the council judged offensive or disrespectful.

When Judge Dunlop asked how somebody could say gender identity ideology was misogynistic and homophobic without using those words, Osborne accepted that they could articulate it in precisely those terms. But she said that, at the time, saying “transwomen are not women” cut across MCC policy and motions.

Roberts put to Osborne that MCC had identified no past or future harm from Young remaining in employment, and had not considered her long service, clean record or work with trans organisations and colleagues. Osborne accepted she had not considered those matters, but stood by the dismissal.

Young’s counsel said MCC’s position left no language sufficiently moderate for a gender critical employee to disagree with council orthodoxy. In final submissions, MCC argued that it was entitled to act over Young’s social-media activity and the resulting breakdown in trust and confidence.

Judge Dunlop reserved judgment after the hearing concluded on 22 September. A provisional remedy hearing has been pencilled in for 22 January.