Church sacked accountant for being non-Catholic
University of Cambridge-educated Janet Parker argued with her female boss after she asked for leave to care for her newly adopted daughter.
When the 55-year-old's request for flexible working was refused, she complained, observing that 'the Catholic Church does not have a blemish-free history when it comes to adopted children or children in care'.
Ms Parker was then subjected to a 'witch hunt' investigation for alleged professional negligence, which led to her dismissal from her £60,000-a-year role.
She has now won claims against Clifton Diocese after a tribunal ruled it discriminated against her, harassed her and then unfairly sacked her because she was not religious.
Ms Parker, who later told a reporter that she was an atheist, claimed the diocese's approach to her flexible working request was 'tainted by negative views of adoption, emanating from the religious beliefs of its staff'.
Disapproval of adoption leave
Details of her tribunal claim emerged at a disciplinary hearing, conducted by the Institute of Chartered Accountants (ICAEW), into abusive messages she sent to Lyn Murray, the diocese chief operating officer, after her dismissal.
According to the full judgment – which has not been made public – the hearing in Bristol was told that she had worked at the diocese, which covers the west of England, from February 2015 until her dismissal in October 2021.
Ms Parker, described by the tribunal as a 'very intelligent, articulate, and able woman', had been a chartered accountant since 1998 and worked in London at Deloittes and Credit Suisse before moving to the charity sector in 2009.
In 2019, her application to adopt a baby girl was approved and in January 2020 she informed Mrs Murray, who she said had previously been supportive, of her intention to take 52 weeks of adoption leave.
The tribunal was told: 'Mrs Murray did not react well, arguing that she did not believe that [Ms Parker] could 'go on leave with no notice,' as she described it, and expressed dissatisfaction that [she] would 'do that to her'.'
Ms Parker began her leave in September 2020 but the tribunal heard that during her absence, her replacement flagged potential financial irregularities in the accounts for which she had been responsible.
Church launched disciplinary investigation
In July 2021, Ms Parker had a conversation with Mrs Murray about reducing hours and working from home because she was struggling to find childcare for her daughter.
However, her request was refused, and the following month the diocese launched disciplinary proceedings against her before putting her on suspension.
Ms Parker responded by issuing a grievance against Mrs Murray, she said: 'This behaviour is not in accordance with the professed beliefs of the Catholic Church.
'I know that the Catholic Church does not have a blemish-free history when it comes to adopted children or children in care, but I hoped that this kind of prejudice had been eradicated long ago. Maybe I am wrong.'
The hearing was told that the ICAEW was asked to investigate the allegations against her and eventually found there was insufficient evidence to support the complaints. However, at the conclusion of its investigation, the diocese decided to dismiss her for gross misconduct.
The tribunal heard this led to Ms Parker sending an email to Mrs Murray saying: 'There is one thing I always wanted to say to you. Now I can. F--- OFF YOU B---H.' and 'Your god might forgive you but I never will. B---h.'
She then put out Facebook posts saying: 'You asked for it and I'm coming for you,' and 'Nolite te bastardes carborundorum, b----es,' – meaning 'don't let the bastards grind you down, b----es' in Latin.
'Witch hunt'
Employment Judge Adam Midgley said Ms Parker, as a non Catholic, had been religiously discriminated against.
He said: '[She] has argued that from the moment she challenged the [diocese], particularly from the point at which she referenced the Catholic Church's treatment of vulnerable children, her card was marked, and [it] closed ranks to protect itself and dismiss her.'
'Those are very serious allegations. The claimant is required to produce some evidence from which we could, properly directing ourselves, conclude that the reason for the matters she complains of was her religion or belief – ie that she was a non-Catholic.'
He described the investigation that led to her dismissal as appearing like 'witch hunt' and said it was 'derisory in its depth, unbalanced and focused on establishing fault'.
Ms Parker has yet to receive compensation following the judgment as the diocese is understood to have launched an appeal.
Speaking after the ICAEW issued her a caution over the abusive messages, Ms Parker said: 'I wasn't happy with the ICAEW outcome but I suppose it was the best outcome given the situation. I don't think what I did was wrong and I think I just did what probably millions of people around the country want to do when they leave their jobs.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
The government must ensure the promise of free childcare is delivered
Takeup of the government's offer of free childcare has been one-quarter higher than predicted, which has prompted some voices in the sector to warn of its imminent 'collapse', because it is unclear how the planned expansion of the scheme in September will be funded. Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, in an exclusive interview with The Independent, says the unexpectedly high numbers signing up for the scheme is a 'good problem to have'. There is no doubt that there is a problem, however. The higher takeup meant that the Department for Education spent £2bn on the scheme in the last financial year, covering most of the first year of the Labour government, rather than the planned £1.6bn. That gap was covered by additional funding announced in the spending review in March, but as we report today, the Institute for Fiscal Studies estimates that the gap will continue to widen as the scheme expands. The next expansion will happen in September, when working parents with children aged nine months and older will be offered 30 hours a week of 'free' childcare. Of course, the care is not 'free' in that it has to be paid for by taxpayers generally – on the grounds that helping the parents of young children to work is a public good. As Ms Phillipson puts it: 'If people are able to work, or work a few more hours, that helps us all as a society as well and it gets economic growth going.' The funding of the scheme will continue to be under pressure, but the most important fact about the scheme so far is that it has not collapsed. The Independent was among those voices warning that it had been underfunded by the Conservative government, but to its credit the new government has increased the money available. The finances of the scheme may be stretched, and many childcare providers continue to say that they cannot recruit enough staff at the wages they can afford, but the gloomier warnings of chaos and thousands of parents left without places have not yet been borne out. It is crucial to remain vigilant as the scheme expands so that remains the case. At the insistence of Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor in the previous government, the scheme was designed to start small, with a limited offer of free hours to older children, before expanding gradually to provide full coverage. This September's expansion is the final stage of that planned rollout, which so far has gone more smoothly than we expected. If the last stage is a stretch too far and some parents cannot immediately find the places they want, that would be a blow to the government's ambitions. Ms Phillipson is right that the problem facing the scheme in its final phase is the problem of success. The higher-than-expected demand means additional pressure on the public finances in the later years of this parliament – pressure that coincides with other increased demands on Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, from slow growth, higher interest rates and a government U-turn on disability benefits spending. Providing greater access to free childcare is a good policy that will help working families. Its success and ambition should be applauded. The government must now make sure that its expansion is a success.
The Sun
13 minutes ago
- The Sun
Asylum seekers are still getting money on taxpayer-funded credit cards after being granted refugee status
ASYLUM seekers are still receiving money on taxpayer-funded credit cards even after being granted refugee status. A probe has been launched after we uncovered cases of migrants saying they were still getting the handouts - despite rules stating payments must stop once leave to remain is granted. It piles fresh pressure on the Home Office, which is already facing questions over the ASPEN card scheme after it emerged thousands of attempts were made to spend the cash in gambling venues. 1 One migrant wrote in a Facebook group: 'I was granted refugee status in January 2025. I'm still getting money on my ASPEN card… do I need to inform the Home Office or will it stop automatically?' Another user replied: 'I know someone else this happened to. But he had payments for a whole year. 'He did not touch the money as the Home Office could ask you to refund if you are not entitled to this.' Another admitted they are getting payments for dependants who have gone home. When asylum seekers arrive in the UK, they are typically housed in fully catered hotels and receive £9.95 a week on their ASPEN card, rising to £49.18 a week if they are later moved to self-catered accommodation. A Home Office spokesperson said: 'The Home Office rules state that – when an individual ceases to qualify for support – their subsistence payments will automatically end, and their card will be cancelled, after a short transitional period. 'As part of our investigation into the functioning of Aspen cards, we will look into any instances where cards have not been cancelled as intended, and take whatever action is necessary to correct any faults.' The Tories last night insisted it was 'further evidence' Labour has 'lost control of the immigration system'. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: 'We have seen luxury hotels provided for illegal immigrants, record ever numbers crossing the channel, rapes and sex offences being committed by asylum seekers, taxpayers' money being used to fund gambling by illegal immigrants and now we find they can't even switch the payment cards off when they should. 'This system has become a complete farce. No wonder it costs billions each year. It is an insult to taxpayers that illegal immigrants get better treatment than they do.' Reform UK's Richard Tice also let rip: 'We keep being told that there is no waste in government yet it's clear to see taxpayers are being taken for a ride by asylum seekers. 'The solution to this is simple. If you stop the boats, you stop the benefits and the enormous costs that are associated with illegal crossings. Only Reform will do this.' The wider investigation into ASPEN card misuse began earlier this week, after a Freedom of Information request by PoliticsHome revealed more than 6,500 gambling-related transactions had been attempted by asylum seekers in the past year. Although online gambling was blocked, migrants were able to use the cards in physical sites such as casinos, slot machine arcades and lottery retailers. In some cases, they withdrew cash in or near gambling venues. There are currently around 80,000 ASPEN card users in the UK.
Daily Mail
13 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Woman in Union Jack dress was turned away from Wetherspoons during anti-migrants protest
A woman wearing a Union Jack dress was turned away from a Wetherspoons so as 'not to increase tensions' after an anti-migrant protest in the area. Tanya Ostolski, 54, from Sutton-in-Ashfield, Nottinghamshire, says she was knocked back from The Picture House last night, despite being a regular in the pub. Dozens of protestors had gathered in the town centre from around 4.30pm after Reform MP Lee Anderson went against police advice to make an unverified claim that a local man charged with rape was an asylum seeker. It followed similar anti-migrant demonstrations outside The Bell Hotel in Epping, near Essex, and the Britannia Hotel in Canary Wharf in central London, in recent weeks. Last night's protests in Sutton-in-Ashfield had ended at around 7pm when protestors made their way back to the where the gathering began, around 50 metres from the pub. Many of those who took to the streets were waving Union flags or were wrapped in the St George's Cross flag and had sought to get into the pub after the demonstrations were over. But clashes with bouncers outside the pub quickly ensued when they were denied access due to a 'no-flag' policy deployed by Wetherspoons in their establishments. Ms Ostolski says she was holding a St George's Cross flag when she was first refused entry by bouncers on the door, before putting it in her bag in the hope that would allow her access. But the 54-year-old said she was 'absolutely disgusted' when she was told by those on the doors that she still wasn't allowed in because of her dress. She said: 'I go in there all the time and they refused entry. They didn't let me in with my flag, the flag is the English flag, so why shouldn't I be allowed to have an English flag? 'It's our flag, it's our nation's flag. I wasn't being aggressive or anything I didn't get lairy or anything. I put the flag back in my bag, and they said I can't come in because of my dress. 'They kept refusing me. I'm probably going to get barred now. They just said Tanya, you're not coming in. I feel absolutely disgusted, why should I be refused entry for wearing a dress or a flag?' The spokesman for Wetherspoons, Eddie Gershon, said the decision was made to ensure calm in the area and 'as a matter of common sense'. He said: 'Pub managers have a duty under the licensing laws, and as a matter of common sense, to judge every situation on its particular circumstances. 'In this case, the pub manager felt that it was important not to increase tensions. Therefore, on this occasion the manager asked customers not to enter with flags or any placards.' Ms Ostolski's knockback comes just days after a schoolgirl was put into isolation for wearing a similar Union Jack dress to celebrate being British at her school's culture day. 'Straight A' student Courtney Wright, 12, wore a Spice Girls-esque dress and wrote a speech about history and traditions as part of the celebrations on July 11. But the Year 7 pupil was told the dress was 'unacceptable' before being hauled out of lessons and made to sit in reception until her father collected her. Downing Street would go on to condemn that decision, with a spokesperson for the Prime Minister saying: 'The PM has always been clear that being British is something to be celebrated. 'You can see that from everything this government has done. We are a tolerant, diverse, open country, proud of being British.'
