Covid-19 vaccine beliefs held to be religious in nature
In Wierowska v HC-One Oval Limited, the Employment Tribunal had to determine whether the Claimant’s beliefs in relation to Covid-19 vaccines amounted to religious beliefs for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010.
In Wierowska v HC-One Oval Limited, the Employment Tribunal had to determine whether the Claimant’s beliefs in relation to Covid-19 vaccines amounted to religious beliefs for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010. The Claimant, a Roman Catholic care worker, asserted that one of the reasons for her dismissal was that she refused on religious grounds to take a Covid-19 vaccine. At a preliminary hearing to consider the issue, the Claimant’s beliefs were explored in more detail, including the fact that the Vatican had previously issued a statement to the effect that the vaccines were “morally acceptable”.
The Respondent asserted that the views held by the Claimant were not religious beliefs but rather opinions based on the fact that she was unconvinced by the current evidence available as to the safety (or effects) of the vaccines available. The Employment Judge disagreed, finding that the concerns held by some members of the Catholic community about Covid-19 vaccines were “closely linked to the longstanding Catholic position on abortion and to the resulting opposition to the use of stem cells or foetal material in medical experiments of any sort. They are therefore part and parcel of a fundamental view about the sanctity of human life.” As a result, the Claimant’s views about the vaccine were held to be “intimately connected with her religious faith”, entitling her to rely on that religious faith as a protected characteristic.
It should be of no surprise that certain religious beliefs can affect an individual’s views on vaccination. However, the decision does highlight the difficulties that some employers have faced where asserted beliefs do not appear to align with the orthodox principles of that religion, and/or run contrary to scientific evidence available. In this case, the fact that the Vatican had issued a statement taking a contrary stance did not affect the finding that the Claimant’s beliefs still amounted to religious beliefs. And the Claimant’s resistance to scientific evidence and “stubbornness” was taken by the Tribunal to support the strength of the Claimant’s beliefs.
Contact
Mark Hickson
Head of Business Development
onlineteaminbox@brownejacobson.com
+44 (0)370 270 6000
You may be interested in...
Legal Update
Employment Healthcare Briefing - December 2023
Opinion
Autumn statement 2023 – key take outs for employers
Opinion
Collective bargaining rights
In Person Event
Mock Employment Tribunal: for NHS and independent health
Legal Update
Failure to prevent fraud: how can my organisation prepare?
Opinion
Agency cover and strike action
Published Article
Infrastructure and social value in public contracts – making it concrete
Opinion
Overcoming barriers: Building leadership resilience in MATs
Opinion
Updates in equality – An overview of new regulations
Opinion
Minimum Service Levels and reasonable steps – consultation response
Legal Update
Holiday entitlement and pay: Reforms ahead
Legal Update
A positive duty to prevent sexual harassment
Press Release
Browne Jacobson advises Care Fertility Group on acquisition of CRGW
Legal Update
The FPPT framework – New Guidance and what NHS organisations need to know
Opinion
Bonus clawback provisions: Clear and reasonable
Opinion
Third party intervention did not break the chain of causation in whistleblowing detriment claim
Opinion
Holiday pay claims: A series of deductions
Opinion
Monitoring workers – ICO guidance
Press Release
Browne Jacobson strengthens employment team with key partner hire
Legal Update
Greater predictability over terms for workers
Guide
Transforming EDI practices in UK insurance
Opinion
Minimum service levels and reasonable steps
Opinion
New framework to support flexible working in the NHS
Opinion
Modern slavery in the care sector – how employers can manage risks
Legal Update
MHPS disciplinary processes: Dr’s application for interim injunction refused
Legal Update
Defending equal pay claims: Equal pay for equal work?
Opinion
£600m funding unveiled to boost social care workforce
Opinion
Government response to Pregnancy Loss Review recommends actions for NHS employers
Legal Update - Maternity services
The NHS Long Term Workforce Plan 2023
Opinion
Right to request flexible working – changes ahead for employers
Legal Update
Employment Healthcare Briefing - July 2023
Opinion
Are teacher strikes coming to an end?
Opinion
Further consultants strike announced following government pay offer
Opinion
Watering down workplace harassment proposals
Opinion
Agency worker cover during strikes
Press Release
Law firm advises on MBO of insolvency and restructuring firm Bridgewood backed by DSW Capital
Legal Update
Glass ceilings and workplaces
Opinion
EU standstill provisions maintained allowing the NHS to retain and employ healthcare workers
Legal Update
School leaders survey – the results are in!
