What a few weeks for Angela Gibbins. She must surely be regretting commenting on a Facebook post that stated a certain three-year-old prince looked like a “f****** d***head” on his birthday.
Of course this statement didn't come from Gibbins herself. According to The Sun, Gibbins posted a message beneath this saying: "White privilege. That cheeky grin is the innate knowledge he's royal, rich, advantages and will never know ANY difficulties or hardships in life".
I wonder if she foresaw though the sensation it would cause or that she might lose her job because of it? The British Council has even issued a statement: "This comment was made on a private social media account. It has absolutely no connection to the British Council and does not represent our views and values."
So should Gibbins expect that what happens on her Facebook page is of no concern to her employer? It seems not. The other part of the British Council’s statement reads: "The British Council expects the highest standards of our staff and in accordance with our code of conduct we have started disciplinary procedures with the individual concerned."
Was the matter work related?
If the employer was not a well-known public-facing body and charity, with its patron the grandmother of the young prince she lambasted, then the matter might not have been work related.
However, Gibbins did work for such a charity with such a patron. And the Code of Conduct cited in the British Council’s statement does state that its employees 'should never behave, at work or in public, in a manner that may damage the British Council’s reputation.' The Code of Conduct even has a 'being sensible online' section to deal with these types of situations – though it is stated as being relevant where the employee is "online and [has] clearly identified [their] association with the British Council by discussing [its] work, using [their] British Council email address or other means…"
The 'other means' wording is helpfully wide for the British Council. If it can show that many of those on Facebook, including her friends, who saw her comments knew or could easily have worked out from an online search that she worked at the British Council, then it could argue that as a senior employee she should have known that such people could have found her statements highly controversial- particularly given that a large emphasis of the charity seems to be work involving children, not to mention the close connection between her employer and the child in question.
Were her comments misconduct?
To make reasoned arguments against the monarchy and the privilege of the upper class is unlikely to be misconduct in itself. The main aim of most charities is to help the less fortunate and so her statements “I have a multi-faceted political opinion. That's not hate, and I hate no human being on this planet as an individual. But I do disagree with the system that creates privilege of any sort. And I have a dedication to calling that out for what it is”, is unlikely to damage any charity’s reputation. But to make such an emphatic statement that a child would never know any hardships in life is likely not a statement a charity would want to be associated with, so she might have a case to answer.
Is Gibbins being treated less favourably because of her beliefs?
The Equality Act protects against less favourable treatment because of a philosophical belief. Having strong socialist and republican beliefs would likely, in light of recent case law like The General Municipal and Boilermakers Union v Henderson, pass the test of being a coherent and serious philosophical belief capable of protecting the holder against discrimination. So the British Council needs to be careful that the misconduct is framed as bringing the charity into disrepute as opposed to the act of criticising the monarchy and privilege. The British Council may actually play down the royal family connection and focus on the point that she made potentially inappropriate comments about a young child to a public audience under a picture of said child with a highly controversial caption. If so, that might make it harder to claim discrimination.
There is lots to consider and keep an eye on with this case. But the main takeaway for us all... can you really trust people on Facebook?!
Declan Bradly is an employment lawyer at Doyle Clayton
Correction statement: This article originally stated that Angela Gibbins made the initial comments about the prince. The piece has now been amended.
