Social media is an enormous part of many people’s lives, and for many businesses and institutions it is also a key pillar of their marketing and public relations strategies. It is perhaps unsurprising then that employers are increasingly conscious of what their employees are posting online – both inside and outside work.

Is this overstepping into the realm of an employee’s personal life? Or just a prudent measure to protect an employer’s reputation in the opinion-fuelled landscape of the modern web? There are many arguments which can be made on either side, but what is important to understand is how UK law handles the subject.

Can I be dismissed from my job for a social media post?

The short answer is yes, it is possible.

Social media posts and comments that are seen as inappropriate or unacceptable could result in your dismissal, on the basis that they are examples of misconduct.

Under 98 Employment Rights Act 1996, misconduct is one ‘potentially fair’ reason for an employer to dismiss an employee. This means that an unfair dismissal claim against the employer will not succeed if the employer can prove that:

  • there was misconduct; and
  • their decision to dismiss on that basis was reasonable in the circumstances.

When will a social media post constitute misconduct?

This will depend greatly on the circumstances of the case.

If your employer has raised a serious concern with a social media post you have made, they should investigate the situation thoroughly before coming to a decision on whether to dismiss you. As noted above, if you were to challenge the dismissal as unfair, one of the aspects your employer must demonstrate is that their decision was reasonable.

In a recent case, Higgs v Farmors School and others [2025], the Court of Appeal examined an employee’s dismissal for making several social media posts. These expressed controversial views on gender and same-sex marriage. The court looked at several factors in reaching their judgment, and these are indicative of how Employment Tribunals and other courts would approach similar cases in future. The most significant considerations are:

  • Harm to reputation – Did the post cause, or risk, harm to the employer’s reputation? If there is no evidence that any harm was caused by the post, a decision to dismiss an employee because of it could be seen as disproportionate.

The actual content of the post – What message would the post convey to a reasonable reader? The Court of Appeal emphasised the need to look at what is written and necessarily implied by the post, rather than what other views might be inferred from it. The tone of the post will also have a bearing, with the court distinguishing between posts full of hate and abuse, and those with more ‘neutrally put’ opinions (which even so might contain controversial views).

  • The employee’s work and their position – Did the subject matter of the post relate to the employee’s work? And was their employer identifiable from it? In Higgs, the employee was in a student supervisor role, and her posts complained about the government’s educational policy on same-sex relationships. So there was a close link between her work and the content of the posts. Another connected consideration, however, is the employee’s position in their organisation. Posts from a senior figure in an organisation, for example, could be seen as more apparently representative of the views of the organisation itself.
  • Alternatives to dismissal – Were there reasonable alternative courses of action open to the employer instead of dismissal? Connected to this is whether the employee shows any remorse for the posts they have made, or any understanding of the harm they may have caused. If so, the risks of it happening again may be seen as much smaller, and so dismissal may be seen as a disproportionately severe response.

What about my right to freedom of expression?

“Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative … Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having … ” Sedley LJ in Redmond-Bate v Director of Public Prosecutions [1999]

Your employer cannot lawfully dismiss you based on a social media post solely because they disagree with your opinion.

Article 10 of the ECHR (through the Human Rights Act 1998) protects the freedom of expression. But it is not an unqualified right. It may be restricted in certain situations, including for the protection of the reputation or the rights of others. This is why assessing if there has been any reputational damage to the employer is such a key consideration.

Additionally, depending on the type of views expressed in the social media post, being dismissed because of it may represent discrimination at work. However, to claim for discrimination, the views must fall under one of the protected characteristics listed in 4 Equality Act 2010.

In the case of Higgs, her opinions were found to be part of her religious beliefs, which are a protected characteristic. The Court of Appeal found her dismissal to be discriminatory.

Think twice before posting!

Social media, almost by definition, is not private. Certain platforms may allow you to restrict who can see your posts and comments but these cannot be relied upon.

Once a post or comment is out in the world, it can be extremely difficult to control who sees it. And it may also persist for much longer than you intend.

You should always check whether your employer has a social media policy. This can help you to understand what they consider acceptable behaviour for employees on social media, and avoid any allegations of misconduct arising. If you do post something which clearly goes against this policy, your employer will have stronger grounds to demonstrate misconduct on your part.

If you’ve been dismissed, or could be, how can Ison Harrison help?

If you need expert employment law advice about your situation, we can help.

Whether you feel you have been unfairly dismissed or discriminated against, our specialist solicitors can guide you through this difficult time. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you need advice and legal support.