An employment tribunal in Manchester this month heard the claimant refused to return to her workplace in July 2020 “on the grounds of health and safety”, due to a “genuine fear” of Covid. They claimed their employer’s refusal to accept this was a reasonable belief amounted to “discrimination”.

       The claim was made by a woman who has not been named.

       In a statement, she said: “My belief is a philosophical belief and it is genuinely held by myself…

       “I had a genuine fear of getting the virus myself, and a fear of passing it on to my partner.”

       She claimed that her partner was at high risk of getting “seriously unwell” from Covid.

       Asked what her belief was, she said: “A fear of catching Covid and a need to protect myself and others.”

       The judge ruled this did not amount to a “philosophical belief” that would be protected under the Equality Act 2010.

       Fears about the harm caused by Covid were, they said, “weighty and substantial”.

       But to receive the status of “philosophical belief”, they would have to equate to a “belief” and not merely a “viewpoint” based on available information, according to the ‘Nicholson criteria’.

       READ MORE: M1 traffic chaos as multi-vehicle crash causes huge delays

       The judge ruled that this criteria was not met.

       They said: “I do not find that the claimant’s fear amounts to a belief.

       “Rather, it is a reaction to a threat of physical harm and the need to take steps to avoid or reduce that threat.

       DON'T MISS:

       Macron has the most to lose from his Brexit 'vendetta' [OPINION]

       EU researchers lash out at bloc's ￡80bn project funding 'obstacles' [REPORT]

       Nexit calls erupt as 'desperate' EU begs Switzerland for talks [REVEAL]

       “Most (if not all) people, instinctively react to perceived or real threats of physical harm in one way or another.”

       They added: “It can also be described as a widely held opinion based on the present state of information available that taking certain steps, for example attending a crowded place during the height of the current pandemic, would increase the risk of contracting Covid and may therefore be dangerous.

       “Few people may argue against that.

       “However, a fear of physical harm and views about how best to reduce or avoid a risk of physical harm is not a belief for the purposes of section 10 [of the Equality Act].”

       The ruling will be seen as a win by employers hoping to see their staff return to the workplace.

       Findings vary on the productivity levels attached to those who work from home, but many have found those who do work from home are perceived to be less productive than those who do not.