I have worked for the church all of my adult life. Over the years the organizations that have employed me have had to deal with difficult or even controversial issues. In retrospect, I have sometimes felt that some of these issues could have been handled better. But when I try to evaluate the recent employment tribunal case in which the Trans-European Division (TED) has faced serious complaints from a former employee, I do not have ambivalent feelings. I am convinced that the TED leadership need not feel guilty about what has transpired.

It is difficult for the leaders of the TED to defend themselves. It is possibly a little easier for me to speak out, since I have recently accepted another assignment. I do know what I am talking about: I was working in the TED office as the executive secretary when most of the alleged events took place. In fact, I was heavily involved with the case, because I had been delegated the responsibility for dealing with personnel matters in the TED office between mid-1995 and May 2001. I testified at length before the tribunal, even though I had in the meantime moved from Great Britain to my home country (the Netherlands).

I am keenly aware that the main allegation brought before the tribunal was that the employee concerned had suffered from racial and gender discrimination. Given that fact, one might be tempted to see this particular case against the backdrop of the racial tensions that, admittedly, have been part of the history of the SDA Church in Britain in the last few decades. But I would suggest that a lot has been achieved in addressing the racial sensitivities in British Adventism. It may well be that some issues are still unresolved and that more needs to be done to reach the ideal of full ethnic integration in a church that manifests diversity in unity. I should add, however, that it must be realized that the TED office happens to be located in Great Britain, but that it is not an institution of the British church.

Unfortunately, I have ample reason to think that some members in the various ethnic groups follow their own private agendas with power and influence as the main concerns. Indeed, enough of this is enough.

The key point to be noted in the case against the TED is that the tribunal concluded there was no racial or gender discrimination. In spite of serious allegations, after many days of testimony, in which the counsel for the plaintive left no stone unturned in his attempts to prove racial discrimination, the tribunal concluded that the facts could not uphold the complaint. Therefore, the recent article by Errol Lawrence misses the point entirely.

Of course, it is unfortunate when complaints of unfair dismissal and victimization against a church employer are upheld. I am personally very much of the same opinion as those in the TED who strongly feel that the tribunal’s decision was unfair. This is particularly true of the "Reasons" for the decision, which fail to do justice to the motives and acts of a number of individuals and plainly have many facts wrong. Furthermore, I believe that the settlement to be paid is unreasonably high.

It is regrettable that so much money must be spent in this way while there so many needs exist around the division. Furthermore, TED regrets that the relationships with a trusted employee broke down and that brothers and sisters had to face each other in a tribunal setting. Some lessons have been learned. But the leaders of the division can hold their heads high. They have not been guilty of anything that smacks of racial discrimination. As to the other allegations, hopefully one day the other side will be heard. For, I can assure you, there is definitely another side to be considered.

Over the past months many rumors have spread that allege institutional racism within the headquarters of the TED. These allegations have no basis in actual fact and should stop.

Enough is enough!

EMAIL THIS ARTICLE