Allison Bailey tribunal: Stonewall 'not a criminal protection racket'

A former Stonewall employee has rejected a claim that the LGBTQ charity operated like a "criminal protection racket" in relation to its workplace inclusivity training.

Zainab Al-Farabi was giving evidence at an employment tribunal brought by barrister Allison Bailey.

Ms Bailey is taking action against her chambers, Garden Court Chambers (GCC), and Stonewall.

She argues that both discriminated against her gender-critical beliefs.

In 2019, Ms Bailey, who is a lesbian, founded the LGB Alliance group, which argues there is a conflict between the rights of homosexual and bisexual people, and transgender people. The alliance opposes many Stonewall policies.

Last week at the tribunal, Ms Bailey said: "The inducement that Stonewall offers with its (Diversity Champions) scheme is reputational protection or reputational harm; it's like a criminal protection racket."

However, Ms Al-Farabi, a former client account manager at Stonewall who worked with GCC in 2019 - some months after it had become a Diversity Champion - rejected Ms Bailey's claim.

She told the tribunal that GCC had been "really inactive" when it came to the Diversity Champions programme, which she said aimed to make workplaces more LGBT-inclusive.

Ms Al-Farabi dismissed any suggestion there would have been consequences threatened when GCC decided not to renew its membership of the scheme in 2020.

Andrew Hochhauser QC, representing GCC, said it had been suggested during the course of the tribunal "in rather graphic terms that Stonewall was running a protection racket".

He said Ms Bailey had described it as "a criminal protection racket whereby there could be reputational consequences if you didn't toe the Stonewall line", and he asked if that was something that had happened, in Ms Al-Farabi's experience.

She replied: "Lots of Diversity Champions would not renew."

Asked by the barrister if there were any repercussions for not renewing membership and whether Stonewall ever threatened any consequences for not renewing, she said the charity did no such thing.

When asked if, to her knowledge, anybody else within Stonewall ever threatened organisations with consequences if they did not renew their membership of the programme, Ms Al-Farabi said: "No, we would just tell them if they wanted to get in touch and join again at some point in the future then we'd be happy to engage with them."

The tribunal heard that when GCC's renewal came around in November 2020, the chambers informed Stonewall that, due to the pandemic, it was considering its spending and had decided not to renew the membership, which at the time cost £2,500 a year.

Ms Al-Farabi agreed it was fair to say the chambers were "not very enthusiastic Stonewall Diversity Champions".

In a written witness statement, she said a meeting with GCC in July 2019 had been "difficult" as the chambers did not appear to be happy with the service it had been receiving and expressed concerns about the cost of membership.

Ms Bailey alleges she lost work and income due to GCC's involvement with the Diversity Champions scheme.

GCC has said there is "not one shred of evidence" to suggest she was deprived of work.

The hearing, being held at Central London Employment Tribunal at Victory House, continues.