Is There ‘No Place in the Work Context’ for Religious Proselytism?

The proposition that employers are right to prevent absolutely employees from proselytising their religious beliefs at work has been mooted by AG Sharpston, now retired Advocate General of the Court of Justice of the European Union, in her Opinion in Bougnaoui and Association de défense des droits de l’homme (ADDH) v Micropole SA. She argued this on three bases: that proselytism is not core to a person’s religious beliefs (and therefore not a manifestation of religion); that working time is used for the purposes of business rather than proselytism; and because proselytism creates disharmony among the workforce. It is contended in this article that such a proposition is controversial as each of these statements is deserving of challenge. Proselytism has been recognised as a bona fide manifestation of religion by the European Court of Human Rights and not only facilitates a proselytiser’s religious rights but also those of the potential proselyte (to have the opportunity to change religion). Working time is not exclusively spent in the relentless pursuit of business; there is a social dimension and an exchange of ideas would be commonplace. Disharmony, and even harassment, may result from proselytism, but this may be mitigated by moderation (on behalf of the proselytiser) and the judicious use of restriction (by the employer).