EXCLUSIVE Hard-Left new teachers' union leader (who isn't a teacher!) faces racism claims from his last job
Matt Wrack, a militant socialist who formerly led the Fire Brigades Union (FBU), was named as the new general secretary of the National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers (NASUWT) on Tuesday despite having no teaching experience.
A day later, an injunction application to have Mr Wrack's appointment rescinded was made after a would-be candidate was barred from running for the post.
An MoS investigation has discovered that Mr Wrack is at the centre of three different employment tribunal disputes relating to his time at the FBU.
Among the claims, it is alleged Mr Wrack racially discriminated against an Asian member of the FBU's executive council and personally blocked a black firefighter from joining the union.
The claims are set to go to separate tribunal hearings.
The MoS asked if Mr Wrack had declared the claims. He and the NASUWT declined to answer. Mr Wrack's appointment to the UK's second largest teaching union has prompted fears that the NASUWT could swing to the Left.
The Jeremy Corbyn ally has been criticised by government sources for being 'overly combative'.
Jewish leaders have also accused Mr Wrack of being insensitive to the problem of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. Speaking at the FBU's conference in 2016, Mr Wrack said 'the so-called furore about so-called anti-Semitism in the Labour Party' was 'in reality about an attack on the Left'.
Now his uncontested appointment to the £130,000-per-year job has triggered legal action, with lawyers acting on behalf of potential candidate Neil Butler, the NASUWT's national officer for Wales, claiming that Mr Butler was barred from running.
It is the first time the union has not been run by a former teacher, despite being Britain's only union exclusively for teachers.
Separately, Mr Wrack has come under scrutiny in recent years over the FBU's use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs). Tens of thousands of pounds were paid in NDA payments to at least two FBU officials and one FBU staff member, all of whom left their roles after complaining that Mr Wrack mistreated them.
The new allegations about Mr Wrack are set to be aired at upcoming employment tribunal hearings. Two claims are against the FBU and involve allegations about Mr Wrack in his capacity as FBU general secretary.
These have been brought by FBU official Jon Lambe and union member Mohammed Ahmed. The third, brought by FBU executive council member David Shek, is against both Mr Wrack and the FBU.
Last night Mr Wrack said: 'These claims are false and without merit as will be shown in a tribunal in due course. I am pleased that the FBU, on very strong legal advice, is defending the union itself, other FBU officials and me from these false claims.'
An FBU spokesman said: 'The Fire Brigades Union is aware of claims brought against the union and our former general secretary, Matt Wrack.
'We will not go into any details of these claims as they are all still subject to legal proceedings. However, we can report that all of the claims lodged against the FBU and Matt Wrack will be vigorously defended by the union.
'We have robustly defended both ourselves and Matt Wrack from the outset against these claims and will continue to do so. Our legal team's advice is that the claims brought against the FBU and Matt Wrack are without merit.
'The FBU has a long and dedicated record of campaigning against racism and all forms of discrimination. Our record speaks for itself.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
13 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Sex Matters warns National Library over book ban law breach
The charity said the decision 'creates a hostile environment for gender-critical staff' and 'discriminates against members of the public who share those beliefs'. They added: 'By April 18, 2026, when the exhibition closes, you could be facing thousands of claims under the Equality Act.' READ MORE In their letter to National Librarian and NLS chief executive Amina Shah, and to board chair Sir Drummond Bone, Sex Matters chief executive Maya Forstater, director of advocacy Helen Joyce and director of campaigns Fiona McAnena said many of the chapters in Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht were "personal testimonies to the harassment and discrimination faced by women who express this belief in Scotland today'. 'Gender-critical belief is covered by the protection against belief discrimination in the Equality Act under Section 10. 'As an employer and service provider you have a legal obligation not to subject your staff to harassment or discrimination on the basis of their beliefs, and not to subject members of the public who may use the library or visit its exhibitions to direct or indirect discrimination based on their belief.' The letter says the exclusion could also breach the law on unlawful harassment under Section 26, which covers unwanted conduct 'that violates a person's dignity or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment' linked to a protected characteristic. 'Displaying books that individuals may disagree with or even find offensive is not harassment; it is core to the job of a library,' they wrote. 'However, refusing to display a book in an exhibition of books nominated by the public because it relates to a protected belief is an action that could well meet the test for harassment in relation to your gender-critical staff.' NLS is celebrating its 100th year (Image: National Library of Scotland) They also warned it could meet the threshold for direct discrimination under Section 13. 'The internal documents about the decision released under Freedom of Information reveal that this is exactly what you did: you decided to exclude this book, which was nominated by four members of the public, from the exhibition after a group of staff claimed — without evidence — that there were groups behind it that were 'exclusionary', and that including it would cause those staff 'severe harm'. "They threatened 'to notify LGBT+ partners' if you went ahead with the original plan to include the book in the exhibition.' The letter continues: 'Imagine if a small group of staff complained about the inclusion of a book by black authors about their experience of racism, a book by gay authors about their experience of homophobia, or a book by Jewish authors about their experience of antisemitism. "You would have had no difficulty recognising this as a call to discriminate based on a protected characteristic.' It accuses library management of capitulating to threats and of using 'a tool that is meant to help you identify and mitigate risks of undertaking unlawful discrimination as a device for discrimination', calling the Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) a 'sham' because it omitted the protected characteristic of belief. The charity has called on the NLS to reinstate the book 'without denigrating it with a sign calling it divisive', meet editors Susan Dalgety and Lucy Hunter Blackburn, apologise to authors and nominators, and 'consider what other reasonable steps, such as training, you could take to prevent future harassment based on gender-critical belief and to build a true culture of inclusion.' Read more: Judicial guidance on discrimination cases, the charity added, gives a range of £1,200 to £12,000 for injury to feelings in less serious cases — meaning thousands of claims could lead to multi-million pound exposure. Members of the public were invited to nominate 'books that shaped people's lives' for the Dear Library exhibition. After securing four public nominations, two more than the others that made the display, The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht — which features more than 30 essays from contributors including JK Rowling, Joanna Cherry KC and Ash Regan — was initially confirmed for inclusion on May 14 with 'safeguarding measures' in place. FOI documents show the same day, an internal note described it as 'a book that calls for exclusion of a section of society' and suggested 'calling it divisive [might] minimise the harm caused by including it'. In an email, the staff LGBT+ network said it was 'disappointed' and alleged 'the group behind it are explicitly exclusionary in nature.' The network compared the book's stance to 'racist, homophobic and other discriminatory and exclusionary viewpoints', warning of a 'detrimental' impact on staff, visitors and relationships with marginalised communities. On May 15, the network met urgently with managers. The EqIA, completed on May 21, cited perceived harm, asserted increases in hate crime, risks of being seen to endorse 'anti-trans ideology', a 'detrimental impact on staff', visitors feeling 'emotionally impacted', potential backlash from external partners, losing trust, and the risk of protests. It also warned of the risk of accusations of censorship and that it would be the only book from that perspective in the exhibition. On May 28, Ms Shah wrote to Sir Drummond recommending exclusion 'not due to the content of the book itself or the views expressed, but to the potential impact on key stakeholders and the reputation of the Library". "There is a risk that they will withdraw their support for the exhibition and the centenary,' she added. Sir Drummond agreed. FOI records show no equivalent review was carried out for any other book, and no suggestion that titles presenting the opposite perspective should be reassessed. READ MORE Joanna Cherry KC said she was 'appalled' the NLS had 'bowed to pressure from a small group within their staff to censor a book written by feminists, sex abuse survivors and lesbians, about their experiences during an important period in Scottish recent history'. Bathgate and Linlithgow MP Kirsteen Sullivan called the decision 'absolutely ridiculous — censoring a book that gives detailed accounts of women who have been unjustly censored!' In July, Ms Shah told a colleague the episode showed 'training on intellectual freedom is required' within the NLS. Following the backlash, Ms Shah told staff: 'It's important to note that the Library is not banning or censoring this or any other book. Anyone can visit our reading rooms and access it or any other title.' Dr Hunter Blackburn pushed back against that. 'This is unprofessional," she tweeted. "Anyone can see from the FoI, WWWW was not just another book that was left out. "There are 30+ pages of internal consideration about whether to accede to internal activist complaints about the initial decision to include it. The Chair was consulted.' An NLS spokesperson told The Herald: 'We will examine the contents of the letter and will respond in due course.'
Wales Online
a day ago
- Wales Online
Council accused of 'throwing money like confetti' to 'gag' staff who leave
Council accused of 'throwing money like confetti' to 'gag' staff who leave Figures show just how much was spent on staff non-disclosure agreements Plaid Cymru's Caerphilly group leader Lindsay Whittle is among the critics of the council's NDA use (Image: Plaid Cymru) A Welsh council has been accused of "gagging" former employees and treating money like 'confetti' after figures showed it spent more than £800,000 last year on staff non-disclosure agreements (NDAs). Caerphilly council signed as many NDAs with staff leaving its employment in 2024/25 as the other four councils in Gwent combined. The council has long had a comparatively high use of NDAs, which over the past five years has cost it more than £2.7million. Critics have questioned the motives, suggesting they could be used to "cover up" issues or "stifle" whistleblowers. Caerphilly council challenged those claims and described the use of NDAs as "common practice" between employers and employees. For our free daily briefing on the biggest issues facing the nation, sign up to the Wales Matters newsletter . In 2023/24 the council signed 41 NDAs for a total cost of around £784,000. It signed fewer agreements last year, but a total of 32 NDAs added up to more than £832,000. A Freedom of Information request by the Local Democracy Reporting Service showed that over the past five years Caerphilly has signed 150 NDAs with departing employees – while, elsewhere in the Gwent region, Newport signed 62, Blaenau Gwent signed 40, Torfaen signed 18 and Monmouthshire signed 17. Article continues below Councillor Nigel Dix, who leads Caerphilly council's independent group, called the use of NDAs "absolutely wrong" and said they should be "banned in the public sector". "Somebody leaves their employment and they are gagged, basically," he said. "It smacks of a cover-up and that is unacceptable." Mr Dix also said he was concerned about a lack of democratic oversight, and accused the council of "throwing money around like it's confetti". Concerns were also raised by the council's Plaid Cymru group leader, councillor Lindsay Whittle, who said the council should "explain in detail" its use of NDAs. "The widespread use of the so-called gagging orders worries me," he said. "What type of information is so confidential that former staff have to be gagged from speaking about them? "Are these NDAs being used as a way of covering up matters within the workings of the council which may be in the public interest?" A Caerphilly council spokesman said: "These types of settlements are not 'gagging orders', they are agreements that are common practice and are used by many employers to facilitate a mutual termination between an employer and employee." On the comparative figures, the spokesman said: "Caerphilly is one of the largest councils in Wales. Therefore, you would expect these figures to be higher than other smaller local authorities." However, population comparisons show Caerphilly's use of NDAs is higher than other authorities. The most recent Welsh figures show Newport's population is more than 90% of Caerphilly county's, yet Caerphilly council's use of NDAs is more than double that of Newport in the last five years. "As front-line services have been cut back, paying out such sums to ex-staff shows a complete lack of priorities and principle, and stifles any attempts by staff who want to 'whistle-blow,'" said one Caerphilly resident and taxpayer. "There's a widespread belief that people are being gagged not to spill the beans on some of the council's gaffes." The council spokesman, however, said NDAs "are only used when a robust business case has been completed to demonstrate their requirement and are, by their nature, designed to minimise the financial impact on the council". Article continues below He added: 'We will continue to carefully monitor the use of such agreements going forward.'
The Herald Scotland
2 days ago
- The Herald Scotland
National Library of Scotland in legal warning over gender book move
The charity said the decision 'creates a hostile environment for gender-critical staff' and 'discriminates against members of the public who share those beliefs'. They added: 'By April 18, 2026, when the exhibition closes, you could be facing thousands of claims under the Equality Act.' READ MORE In their letter to National Librarian and NLS chief executive Amina Shah, and to board chair Sir Drummond Bone, Sex Matters chief executive Maya Forstater, director of advocacy Helen Joyce and director of campaigns Fiona McAnena said many of the chapters in Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht were "personal testimonies to the harassment and discrimination faced by women who express this belief in Scotland today'. 'Gender-critical belief is covered by the protection against belief discrimination in the Equality Act under Section 10. 'As an employer and service provider you have a legal obligation not to subject your staff to harassment or discrimination on the basis of their beliefs, and not to subject members of the public who may use the library or visit its exhibitions to direct or indirect discrimination based on their belief.' The letter says the exclusion could also breach the law on unlawful harassment under Section 26, which covers unwanted conduct 'that violates a person's dignity or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment' linked to a protected characteristic. 'Displaying books that individuals may disagree with or even find offensive is not harassment; it is core to the job of a library,' they wrote. 'However, refusing to display a book in an exhibition of books nominated by the public because it relates to a protected belief is an action that could well meet the test for harassment in relation to your gender-critical staff.' NLS is celebrating its 100th year (Image: National Library of Scotland) They also warned it could meet the threshold for direct discrimination under Section 13. 'The internal documents about the decision released under Freedom of Information reveal that this is exactly what you did: you decided to exclude this book, which was nominated by four members of the public, from the exhibition after a group of staff claimed — without evidence — that there were groups behind it that were 'exclusionary', and that including it would cause those staff 'severe harm'. "They threatened 'to notify LGBT+ partners' if you went ahead with the original plan to include the book in the exhibition.' The letter continues: 'Imagine if a small group of staff complained about the inclusion of a book by black authors about their experience of racism, a book by gay authors about their experience of homophobia, or a book by Jewish authors about their experience of antisemitism. "You would have had no difficulty recognising this as a call to discriminate based on a protected characteristic.' It accuses library management of capitulating to threats and of using 'a tool that is meant to help you identify and mitigate risks of undertaking unlawful discrimination as a device for discrimination', calling the Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) a 'sham' because it omitted the protected characteristic of belief. The charity has called on the NLS to reinstate the book 'without denigrating it with a sign calling it divisive', meet editors Susan Dalgety and Lucy Hunter Blackburn, apologise to authors and nominators, and 'consider what other reasonable steps, such as training, you could take to prevent future harassment based on gender-critical belief and to build a true culture of inclusion.' Read more: Judicial guidance on discrimination cases, the charity added, gives a range of £1,200 to £12,000 for injury to feelings in less serious cases — meaning thousands of claims could lead to multi-million pound exposure. Members of the public were invited to nominate 'books that shaped people's lives' for the Dear Library exhibition. After securing four public nominations, two more than the others that made the display, The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht — which features more than 30 essays from contributors including JK Rowling, Joanna Cherry KC and Ash Regan — was initially confirmed for inclusion on May 14 with 'safeguarding measures' in place. FOI documents show the same day, an internal note described it as 'a book that calls for exclusion of a section of society' and suggested 'calling it divisive [might] minimise the harm caused by including it'. In an email, the staff LGBT+ network said it was 'disappointed' and alleged 'the group behind it are explicitly exclusionary in nature.' The network compared the book's stance to 'racist, homophobic and other discriminatory and exclusionary viewpoints', warning of a 'detrimental' impact on staff, visitors and relationships with marginalised communities. On May 15, the network met urgently with managers. The EqIA, completed on May 21, cited perceived harm, asserted increases in hate crime, risks of being seen to endorse 'anti-trans ideology', a 'detrimental impact on staff', visitors feeling 'emotionally impacted', potential backlash from external partners, losing trust, and the risk of protests. It also warned of the risk of accusations of censorship and that it would be the only book from that perspective in the exhibition. On May 28, Ms Shah wrote to Sir Drummond recommending exclusion 'not due to the content of the book itself or the views expressed, but to the potential impact on key stakeholders and the reputation of the Library". "There is a risk that they will withdraw their support for the exhibition and the centenary,' she added. Sir Drummond agreed. FOI records show no equivalent review was carried out for any other book, and no suggestion that titles presenting the opposite perspective should be reassessed. READ MORE Joanna Cherry KC said she was 'appalled' the NLS had 'bowed to pressure from a small group within their staff to censor a book written by feminists, sex abuse survivors and lesbians, about their experiences during an important period in Scottish recent history'. Bathgate and Linlithgow MP Kirsteen Sullivan called the decision 'absolutely ridiculous — censoring a book that gives detailed accounts of women who have been unjustly censored!' In July, Ms Shah told a colleague the episode showed 'training on intellectual freedom is required' within the NLS. Following the backlash, Ms Shah told staff: 'It's important to note that the Library is not banning or censoring this or any other book. Anyone can visit our reading rooms and access it or any other title.' Dr Hunter Blackburn pushed back against that. 'This is unprofessional," she tweeted. "Anyone can see from the FoI, WWWW was not just another book that was left out. "There are 30+ pages of internal consideration about whether to accede to internal activist complaints about the initial decision to include it. The Chair was consulted.' An NLS spokesperson told The Herald: 'We will examine the contents of the letter and will respond in due course.'
