header-logo header-logo

Workplace censorship: the silent tweetment

122341
Are employers entitled to restrict their employees’ private expression of opinions online or elsewhere? Charles Pigott examines freedom of speech & workplace censorship
  • Gary Lineker’s dispute with the BBC over comments on his personal twitter account raises broader questions about freedom of speech in an employment context.

Most clashes between employers and workers over the use of private social media accounts—at least those that have reached the courts—have concerned comments which either clearly bring the employer into disrepute, or which interfere with the rights of others. What was unusual about the Gary Lineker affair was that he had sought to take part, in a private capacity, in a debate on a matter of considerable public interest—the government’s immigration policy (see ‘The BBC: under (political) pressure?’, NLJ, 7 & 14 April 2023, pp15-16).

Most (though not all) employers don’t have to demonstrate neutrality like the BBC, but will often take a public stance on certain issues of political controversy which they won’t want undermined by the comments

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Leeds office strengthened with triple partner hire

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Corporate lawyer joins as partner in London office

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll