A CONTRACTOR has lost a claim of discrimination by two firms because he was a Rangers fan after a judge ruled that being a football supporter is not a religion.
Edward McClung, 51, has failed in his bid to sue two firms for £80,000 after he claimed he allegedly lost out on work due to his support for the Ibrox club.
An employment tribunal judge has dismissed his claim that support for Rangers was a a philosophical belief and a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010.
Employment judge Lucy Wiseman was unconvinced the "vast majority" of fans held views that Mr McClung referred to - caring passionately about the UK and with an allegiance to the Queen. And she compared being a Rangers fan to being a member of a political party.
Mr McClung, a Rangers fan for 42 years standing from Bonnybridge, near Falkirk, launched his claim of discrimination under the Equality Act after his company McClung Strategy and Projects Ltd lost out on business with Doosan Babcock and NRL.
He argued that supporting Rangers was a way of life and that it was as important to him as it was for religious people to go to church.
He told an employment tribunal that if you watched your team weekly for decades and participated in other relatedactivities, like Rangers Foundation or other charitable work then you are doing as much as a protected religious group member does.
He referred to Rangers fans having other “strong beliefs” such as “allegiance to the Queen", "being strong Unionists", “some Orange Order involvement or attendance and were traditionnaly described as Protestant Christians.
Mr McClung acknowledged that support for the Queen or being a Unionist were not prerequisites of being a fan, but suggested 95% of fans were both.
The judge said that while some of the world's greatest players such as Pele and Diego Maradona claimed their devotion to the game put it on a par with religion. she did not think that was the case.
"I considered support for a football club to be akin to a lifestyle choice, rather than relating to a substantial aspect of human life and behaviour," she said while ruling that being a Rangers fan was not an philosophical belief.
She added: "[Mr McClung] told the tribunal he cared passionately about the UK (in terms of being a strong Unionist) and had allegiance to the Queen. He submitted the “vast majority” of Rangers fans held these views, also participated in some Orange Order involvement/marching and were traditionally described as Protestant Christians.
None
"I did not doubt the claimant held these views, but I was not persuaded, in the absence of any evidence, to find/accept that the 'vast majority' of Rangers fans hold these views. I acknowledged some supporters will hold those views, but there will equally be many, many supporters who do not hold those views.
"I considered the 'Everyone – Anyone Rangers FC Charter' emphasises the fact that everyone and anyone is a welcome supporter of the club, and that the views referred to by [Mr McClung] are not a part of being a supporter; they do not define supporters and are not in any way a prerequisite of being a supporter. The claimant himself acknowledged that support for the Queen and being a strong Unionist were not prerequisites of being a fan.
None
Popular Rangers pub, the Bristol Bar on Duke Street, Glasgow was launched under a new name to celebrate the Queen's Platinum Jubilee.
"I concluded that whilst the above matters were important to the claimant, they were not matters which underpinned or explained what the belief in being a Rangers fan was about: they are not a component part, or a prerequisite, of being a Rangers fan."
She said compared being a supporter of Rangers to being active members of a political party.
"They wish their team (or party) to be successful; they enjoy reading about and informing themselves about their team (or party); they enjoy being a member of their club (or party) and they enjoy attending matches (or events).
"[Mr McClung's] support for Rangers was akin to support for a political party which the cases referred to make clear does not constitute a philosophical belief."
She indicated that any belief as defined in the Equality Act had to attain a "certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance".
"I acknowledge that for the claimant his support of Rangers was a serious and important matter: he described it as a way of life and that he strived to be the best, as Rangers did," she said.
"I did not doubt the claimant’s evidence regarding the build-up to match days and his habits on the day of a match, or the fact it is a way of life for him, but these are all personal matters detailing what he does and how he likes to enjoy the pre-match, match and post-match.
"here was nothing to suggest fans had to behave, or did behave, in a similar way. The only common factor linking fans would be the fact they wanted their team to do well/win.
"[Mr McClung]did refer in his evidence to support for the Union and loyalty to the Queen but those factors are not prerequisites of being a supporter of Rangers."
She said that however "fanatical" Mr McClung's support for Rangers was, it lacked the "required characteristics of cogency, cohesion and importance".
She added: "I say that because support for Rangers has no larger consequences for humanity as a whole, nothing underpinning it beyond a desire for the team to do well/win and no impact on how people lived their lives."
Mr McClung had alleged Doosan Babcock manager Donald Ross didn’t offer him work due to the team he supports.
He also claimed he was discriminated against when an unnamed worker said to Mr McClung that Doosan Babcock worker Ian Chisholm was ‘unusually OK for a Rangers fan’.