Rachel Meade, Social Worker, being suspended for 'transphobic' Facebook postss

[MidCenturyClegs]

A social worker, Rachel Meade, is in the process of challenging Social Work England - their professional regulatory body - as she believes she may have discriminated against her due to gender critical beliefs.

This is because during the GRA consultation, she shared posts on her private FB page, from FPFW, WPUK & Standing for Women, among others. These were being secretly screenshot by an ex colleague who then sent these to Social Work England, claiming that the posts were from groups who were discriminatory in nature, transphobic and who wanted to remove trans rights.

SWE decided that this was the case and sanctioned her, leading her employer to investigate her for gross misconduct. They placed a public Fitness to practice warning sanction on her record for a year. She has been suspended by her employer as a result of Social Work England's decision and will be facing a disciplinary process which she has been told may end in her dismissal.

She is taking both Social Work England and her employer to a tribunal; this is a really important case as if she wins, it will clarify in law that not only are employers bound to protect gender critical beliefs under EA2010, but Regulatory bodies are bound by it too.

This will mean that all regulatory bodies will have to recognise that the gender critical beliefs of their registrants/members are protected in law. This will cover social work, healthcare & law as well as any other areas covered by regulatory bodies so will have far reaching effects.

I have heard that she may be setting up a crowdfunder but obviously this is not the place to advertise that, but if people wish to donate should be easy to find.
Just saw that the Times have covered this too.

twitter.com/EmilieCCole/status/1481638709724270593?s=20

One of the things established in Maya Forstater's tribunal was that we are also protected in manifesting or expressing those beliefs, which have been found worthy of respect in a democratic society.

Thanks for prompting a reminder of that important fact, Marge!

Have just planted a few winter cabbages. Delicious.

And here's a funny thing, Margarita. Gender-critical people generally express their views politely or, at worst, robustly.

Trans activists express their views through grotesque and vile threats of murder, sexual violence and torture. They express their views by attempting to have meetings closed down and shouting misogynistic abuse outside meetings of women. They express their views by reporting women to Twitter or their employer or the police for the most innocuous beliefs.

And yet, mysteriously, none of these people ever seem to get cancelled, disciplined or sacked for their abhorrent behaviour.

Why is that, do you think?

<puts garden tools away>
<washes hands>

People can believe anything they want, I think that's always been well established. It's how people go about expressing their beliefs I believe is the problem.

It's heartening to see you write this, MP. I was rather pleased for the sign of your personal growth when you accepted that you had mistakenly chosen to amplify the non-authentic Mr Blobby Twitter account as a sound source for something or other. (We shall set aside the issue that you believed yourself to be promoting the official Mr Blobby account as an appropriate source of safeguarding guidance.)

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4443308-Sean-Gunn-tells-JKR-to-STFU?page=3&reply=113898461

On your behalf, I hope for the day when you recognise and even acknowledge many of your other mistaken instances of confidence in your general competence or interpretation and comprehension skills.

Yes, of course you are free to believe what you want, even when the story to which you link contradicts your interpretation. This story is one example:

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4523725--1k-fine-for-attack-on-a-17-year-old-girl?reply=116439830

I wonder if it's appropriate, however, for you to present your commentary as something that has value for others beyond serving your drive to float misinformation and contrarianism (at best).

You're a MN regular on FWR, of course. I sometimes wonder how you represent that to yourself given some of the generalisations that you promote about putative alignments and degrees of association.

Agree. And this snooping and reporting from people social media is shocking. There is something very very wrong about all this.

Bumping. She needs some winter planting.

I saw something on twitter saying SWE had dropped a case against a social worker. I cant find the original tweet again but was it this case?

Yes - update posted on EBSW www.ebswa.org/post/social-work-england-withdraws-case-against-gender-critical-social-worker

Great, it came up earlier but MN was down so my twitter feed had updated by the time it came back!

I absolutely agree with Maggie Mellon thought that the case should be heard in full. I have concerns that SWE allowed themselves to become captured by an ideology without using critical thinking skills.

I'm not on twitter but it came up on FB via Filia.

Yes, if Rachel wants to she should absolutely have the opportunity to expose the ideology and how its driving decision making

The social worker concerned is unable to use her name as she is subject to a warning from her employer not to comment publicly. She will now be asking her local authority employer to remove the warning from her file and acknowledge that she has been the victim of an unfair process.

WTF that's a gagging order - how dare they, this really needs to be exposed by maximum publicity. (No pressure on the social worker though)

I wonder if the posts earlier in the thread had any bearing on the decision 🤔

Can she used the money raised to take this to an employment tribunal? She was right about Mermaids and this really needs to be forced home.

Wow!

This rant is amazing -

www.ebswa.org/post/a-reply-to-eric-banks-mischaracterisation-of-the-gender-critical-position

Excellent!

Oh this sanity, expressed so well, gives me faith again!

I meant this one!

Looks like there is still going to be a hearing. Just a significantly reduced one. So I suspect the money will be still be put to good cause.

mobile.twitter.com/tribunaltweets/status/1580550924388356098

It is really heartwarming to see such coherent, clear and professionally considerate statements.

Forget right side/wrong side. I like being on the side that can write thoughtful, intelligent, legal and comprehensible statements like this!

Yes.

So "kill terfs" expressed misogynistically & violently on a t-shirt at a pride march or on twitter = all good.

Facts about which sex of humans commit over 90% of sexual offences expressed truthfully on stickers or on twitter = visit from the bros in blue /twitter ban from the silicon valley bros.

So pleased there will still be a hearing

Although SWE now wants to withdraw from the review, it has not acknowledged the case made in the submissions that the views expressed are entirely legitimate and necessary to be publicly expressed by a registered social worker

I'll bet they fucking wanted to withdraw