Gscene - James Ledward's - Blog

The General Teaching Council ruled last month that a former education, training and employment manager at Brighton & Hove City Council was guilty of discriminating against and victimising a teacher who is transgender. The manager, Philip Morgan, had secretly sent a fax to an employment agency that revealed the teacher was transgender, which led to her being blacklisted.

This was the latest event in a case that has dragged on for five years. In 2006, an employment tribunal ruled in the teacher’s favour and later ordered the council to pay her £35,000 for loss of earnings and injury to feelings. The victim, Natasha Thoday (left), feels it is still not over. She wants to know why the council allowed an estimated £100,000 of public money to be spent fighting the case.

In 2001, Natasha started a teaching placement at Telscombe Cliffs Community Primary School in Brighton. She was asked to leave after just two lessons. “When I phoned the head teacher and asked why, he said that parents had complained – because they didn’t want a trans teacher,” Natasha told Gscene. “He said professionally I was excellent, but could not have me back as [there were] ‘problems with being transgender.’”

Natasha went to an employment tribunal, and the case was settled out of court in her favour. But when she went to the press with the story, she was attacked on the letters pages of both The Argus and the Times Educational Supplement. According to Andy Baldwin, the former Co-ordinator of Brighton’s LGBT Community Safety Forum who helped fight her case: “The school organised a witchhunt.”

Natasha decided to let the dust settle. “I was going to have a rest, not try and get back to teaching. In 2002, I tried to go back with Teaching Personnel – they’re a recruitment agency I’d signed up with who gave me the Telscombe Cliffs job – but they basically wouldn’t give me any work. After being phoned up and offered two or three jobs a day in 2001, the phone wouldn’t ring. I tried to sign with four other agencies, but it turned out they were all talking to each other.”

“It became fishy because there was no work,” Andy adds. “Previously she’d been headhunted, because she has special skills with children with emotional, behavioural and learning difficulties.”

Natasha found out a year and a half later, when she asked for a copy of her reference under the Data Protection Act, that Teaching Personnel had blacklisted her. “We made a request to Hays Educational Personnel [another recruitment agency],” Andy says. “They had a certain amount of time in which to respond and that expired, and it transpired that the reason they were delaying was because they were having to ask Brighton & Hove City Council for permission to disclose that information. The council did not disclose the information that we eventually found out – this secret reference.”

In order to be eligible to be offered work by employment agencies, Natasha needed an official reference from the council, her previous employer. Philip Morgan had sent two. “One was a pro-forma tick-box that was sent to us and the agency, which was all about how great Natasha was,” says Andy. “The second piece of paper, which was completely separate on Brighton & Hove City Council headed notepaper, talked about Natasha as ‘him’ and ‘her’. It used her old name, and talked about the previous proceedings being a problem and this sort of thing.”

Their legal advisers called this second fax “the smoking gun”. “So this was what led to the first tribunal application,” Andy explains. “And some time later, once the council had decided to defend Morgan, we approached him again for a reference – for a different position. It was our right to be provided with a reference that didn’t disclose Natasha being transgender.”

When Morgan refused they lodged a second employment tribunal application. The two actions were heard together.

In a rare move, the Equalities and Human Rights Commission agreed to take up both cases, believing they would set a legal precedent on discrimination against trans people. “The QC, Stephanie Harrison, who defended the two cases says this goes right to the heart of what it is to be either male or female,” Natasha says. “There is no ‘third sex’, as was found by the European Parliament in 1996. For a start it reveals my old name, then it talks about problems with teaching when it should be talking about skills and experience. Thirdly it talks about gender as ‘he’ or ‘she’.”

Morgan told the General Teaching Council [GTC] committee hearing that he had been misadvised by both the council’s then head of personnel Mark Lamb and its employment lawyer Ian Yonge. “It’s not just that it’s discriminatory, but that the Brighton & Hove legal team and other sin the council advised Morgan this was OK. Now Morgan is saying things like, ‘I apologise, I was wrong, I’ve learnt a lot from the tribunal.’ So effectively he was being led beyond a certain point by the council, who wanted to promote a certain course of argument. It’s clear that the impetus was coming from the council.”

“Natasha feels it is still not over. She wants to know why the council spent an estimated £100,000 fighting the case”

The GTC found Morgan guilty of six separate counts of discrimination. The disciplinary panel concluded he had “brought the reputation and standing of the profession into serious disrepute.” He has been ordered to undergo diversity training.

“One way of looking at it is that it’s taken well over £100,000 of public cash to force one old man into three hours of diversity training – that he will never pass on, as he’s retired,“ Natasha says. “He’s also never apologised to me. Had we never taken him to the GTC he never would have. He still gets a pension and uninterrupted access to employment – unlike me. I think I’ve been shortchanged terribly. Everyone else is still working and still has their reputation intact.”

Natasha and Andy are still trying to get the council to disclose why they were so adamant they should fight the case – and how much it cost. “You don’t think about that happening in Brighton, the LGBT capital of the country,” Andy says. “My key motivation is about trying to send out a message to people: you don’t need to tolerate discrimination or bullying. However, with the warning that it is very stressful, it’s very long-winded, and you can expect the other side to use whatever methods they can to try to vindicate themselves – even if it involves lying or deceiving. Nevertheless, with determination it’s possible to have positive outcomes.”

Track their efforts here
Andy Baldwin's web site here

After careful consideration and with the agreement of the ‘victim’ we have decided to break the restrictive reporting order and identify the teacher in the case 'Brighton Council discriminates against transgender teacher' (see this blog post). Natasha Thoday (left) has been treated disgracefully by Brighton & Hove City Council, bullied and threatened with further legal action.

Despite asking councillors for help, none was forthcoming because our elected officials were not prepared to fall out of favour with senior Council officers.

Despite repeated requests, the Council has failed to satisfy Miss Thoday as to why they chose to appeal the original tribunal decision and justify the financial costs of doing so. Leader of the Council Mary Mears has admitted that this was done to ‘protect the Council’s position.’ The Council’s legal team in effect directed a Council employee to break the law and not provide Miss Thoday with a reference for over four years.

This is not the first case involving trans employees to hit the headlines. Andy Baldwin, who co-wrote Miss Thoday’s recent tribunal case, is a former Brighton Council employee. He was the Co-ordinator of the LGBT Community Safety Forum. Andy Baldwin took the Council to tribunal in 2005. I was a witness myself in the case, having been on the interview panel that had appointed Mr Baldwin to his post in the Council. The Council’s defence to the claim of transphobia at the time was that they did not know Mr. Baldwin was in transition so in effect there was no case to answer.

I have no doubt that while the reporting restrictions on this case helped Miss Thoday get a positive result, had the reporting restriction been imposed on Mr. Baldwin’s tribunal, I have no doubt there would have been a different outcome.

For a variety of reasons at the time of Mr. Baldwin’s case, it went unreported that the then gay Chief Executive’s partner, a police officer, intended to undergo gender reassignment. Within a month the gay Chief Executive David Panter (left) had given his notice and taken an appointment in the health service in Australia. I think it is reasonable to ask the question, did he go or was he pushed? Institutional transphobia is particularly difficult to challenge.

Everyone involved with trying to cover up Miss Thoday’s plight within Brighton Council should hang their heads in shame.

The General Teaching Council for England has ruled that a former Education, Training and Employment Manager at Brighton & Hove City Council was guilty of discriminating against a teacher because she was transgender.

In 2003, Philip Morgan had secretly sent a fax to an employment agency that revealed the teacher was transgender, despite a request not to do so. After this had been discovered, he refused to write a new reference. The tribunal heard that the male-to-female teacher had lost the opportunity to find work after Morgan revealed her change of gender. Morgan claimed he was misadvised by the Council’s then head of personnel and lawyer Ian Yonge. The GTC committee found Morgan guilty of six separate counts of discrimination, and said that he had “brought the reputation and standing of the profession into serious disrepute.” He has been ordered to undergo formal equality and diversity-awareness training – although he has now retired.

Nigel Tart, the Green Party spokesperson on lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans issues, and a gay teacher, welcomed the latest ruling. “It’s disgraceful that a council that prides itself on being a top LGBT-friendly employer should practise such bigotry against a trans worker.” Tart called on local authorities to provide training for all head teachers, governors and education managers on how to support LGBT workers.

In June 2007, Brighton & Hove City Council was ordered to pay the teacher £35,000 after being found guilty of victimising and discriminating against the teacher. The payment was awarded for loss of earnings and injury to feelings. It has been estimated that the council spent more than £100,000 fighting the employment tribunal. The Council has not disclosed how much was spent, and has failed to respond to questions as to why it decided to fight the case. The Sex Discrimination (Gender Reassignment) Regulations 1999 made it unlawful to discriminate on the grounds of gender reassignment in employment or vocational training. Only around six cases have been raised. The Equal Opportunities Commission agreed to back the case against Brighton Council, believing it would set a legal precedent on discrimination against transgender people.