To think this sets a dangerous precedent? Ethical veganism is philosophical belief and is protected by law.

[AlternativePerspective]

Ethical veganism is 'philosophical belief' www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50981359

Now, I’m not saying that how someone lives their life shouldn’t be protected. But in this instance the man was dismissed because he found out the pension funds his employers invested in supported animal testing, and then started to spread the word about them.

That was why he was dismissed and that shouldn’t be supported.

After all where does it end? Someone who is a philosophical vegan objects to workmates eating ham sandwiches at their desks so their belief trumps others’ right? Should they be able to demand that someone who needs an assistance dog not be allowed to bring it into work on the basis their beliefs state that it is unethical to keep any animal for any purpose?

Isn’t it just time people lived out their own beliefs for themselves without feeling they should have the right to make others compensate for their beliefs? And I would apply that to any kind of belief system....

This guy definitely practices what he preaches, and yep, I think he would be hard work to be around. However, he did only inform his colleagues of the truth. He “may” have influenced colleagues to change their pension arrangements? Surely his colleagues can decide that for themselves. Does seem odd that the League Against Cruel Sports would support pension funds involved with companies doing animal testing though.

You can believe in something that others do not, you can be the most annoying colleague, but that DOES NOT mean your employer EVER has the right to dismiss you unfairly.

Whether or not we agree with this guy or not about how he lives, he deserves to have his employment rights respected.

When will everyone and their dog stop expecting to be compensated for everything in life that doesn’t suit them. This is ridiculous and not progressive in any way. What a waste of time and money to pursue this nonsense. Life style and ideals change over time, protection of lifestyle choice is laughable.

I don't think he's asking for special treatment. His defence is that he finds it unethical to invest his pension funds like that. He works for an animal advocacy organisation and therefore informed his colleagues.

Frankly if I'd been a colleague of his I'd have been spitting mad too. There's no suggestion in any of the articles I've read that he's evangelical about his beliefs or demanding that people around him don't eat ham sandwiches.