The Danger Reform UK’s Policies Pose to Women

We must consider the real possibility that Reform UK will win the next general election, and with that possibility comes the plan to remove one of the most fundamental mechanisms protecting women against discrimination in the workplace. According to ‘Operation Restoring Justice’, Reform UK plans to leave the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and scrap the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) and the Equality Act 2010. These are the foundational pieces of legislation protecting individuals’ rights in the UK. As such, the question must be asked: why does Reform want to repeal them?

Suella Braverman, earlier this year, spoke about Reform’s plan to scrap the Equality Act, claiming that “we are going to work to build a country defined by meritocracy and not tokenism”. Reform takes the biggest issue with Diversity, Equality and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives, suggesting they are a waste of resources and ineffective at preventing discrimination in the UK. It is almost as though they see DEI as reverse discrimination, in line with their beliefs about implementing a meritocracy. However, this completely ignores the benefits that DEI can have. For example, 25% of companies in the FTSE 100 met or exceeded board targets when they had 2 or more Ethnic Minority Directors, suggesting that diversity within the workplace contributes to higher success. Given this, when Reform pledges to scrap DEI, not only will it affect people seeking work and their protection against discrimination, but it could also harm business productivity in the long run.

While Reform bids to eradicate DEI, the consequences for individuals who are protected by the Equality Act become a major concern. Several women have sued and won against their employer and have done so under this legislation, proving its fundamental importance for rights protection. This is evident in the case of Stacey Macken v BNP Paribas, where a settlement of £2 million was awarded due to unequal pay and workplace harassment resulting in psychological and emotional harm. Additionally, Osborn v Mothercare Global Brand Ltd determined that a claimant had been unfairly dismissed following maternity leave, a protection guaranteed under section 18 of the Equality Act. 

On a broader scale, in the first quarter of 2026, 1,535 sex discrimination claims were made to the employment tribunal. While it is important to note that not all claims are successful, the Equality Act remains the legal route through which women can seek compensation and justice. The same applies to women of ethnic minorities, different sexual orientations and those with disabilities. Over half of LGBT+ individuals claim they have experienced workplace harassment, and 44% of disabled women claim the same. 

Removing these domestic and international safeguards would, absent a clear replacement, effectively make discrimination legal. In response to this concern, Reform claims that workers will be protected through a proposed Bill of Rights and a ‘Women and Motherhood Protection Act’ set to take its place. Nonetheless, many continue to argue that removing core and long-serving pieces of legislation creates uncertainty, as the Bill of Rights, as it stands, is unclear about who and what it is going to protect. 

This plan is uncertain and has the potential to be very harmful. Expecting people to accept such uncertain terms in the workplace is unfathomable when a system which actively protects their rights is already in place.

Sir Keir Starmer spoke out on the matter in an interview, deeming Reform’s plan “shocking” and saying that it calls into question “basic values, one of which is that women should be treated equally to men”. The UK has been a member of the ECHR since its founding 75 years ago - to overturn such a decision would be a symbolic eradication of the establishment’s commitment to rights protection. Tremendous progress in rights protection has been made in that time, and to reverse such decisions marks a substantial amount of reform which the establishment would resist strongly.

With so much uncertainty, everyone should be worried about Reform’s plan. It is dystopian to imagine a world without rights; this must not become reality.