Business told they can discriminate in favour of female and ethnic minority job candidates

[Happy Face 29]

Equality minister Harriet Harman has defended plans to allow firms to discriminate in favour of female and ethnic minorities job candidates.

 

She said firms should be able to choose a woman over a man of equal ability if they wanted to - or vice versa.

 

The new Equalities Bill will also force employers to disclose salary structures in a bid to close the gender pay gap.

 

The plans, which will be adopted first across England then Wales and Scotland, will also ban all age discrimination.

 

Setting out the plans in a Commons statement, Ms Harman said the proposed legislation - due later this year - would "address the serious inequalities that still exist" in the UK.

 

'Old boy network'

 

They would increase fairness and diversity and help Britain compete in the global economy by being more open, she told MPs.

 

"A society which is equal and fair is a one which is more at ease with itself," she added.

 

The plans would also bring together all previous discrimination law into a single piece of legislation which she said would cut red tape for business.

 

Allowing positive discrimination would help organisations such as the police better reflect the communities they serve by recruiting more female and ethnic minority officers, said Ms Harman.

 

But if, for example, a headmistress wanted to discriminate in favour of a male teacher to balance an all female team that would be allowed too.

 

Wage gap

 

Asked how she could justify discrimination in the name of equality, she said she wanted tackle "patterns of discrimination" in the workforce and ensure firms were "not just 'entrenched in the old boy network'".

 

Age discrimination in the workplace has been illegal since 2006, but the new legislation will tackle more widespread forms of age-related prejudice.

 

The bill aims to close the gender pay gap by forcing firms to "publish their gender pay gap".

 

Female part-time workers still earned 40% less per hour than their full-time male counterparts, Ms Harman told Today BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

 

"Do we think she is 40% less intelligent, less committed, less hard-working, less qualified? It's not the case. It's entrenched discrimination. It's allowed to persist because it's all swept under the carpet."

 

The bill will also seek to stop pensioners being denied NHS treatment because of their age.

 

Ms Harman said doctors will still be able to refuse treatment if they believe there are sound clinical reason for doing so.

 

she added: "Everybody should be treated as individuals and not just discriminated against across the board because of their age."

 

Age discrimination will also be outlawed in the provision of goods and services, such as holidays and insurance.

 

It is likely organisations and companies will be given time to review and, if necessary, change their practices before the new law would be enforced.

 

Other age distinctions, such as free bus passes and holidays for the over-50s or 18-to-30s, will be exempt.

 

Theresa May, for the Conservatives, broadly welcomed the proposals but said they were short on detail.

 

The Tories want compulsory pay audits for firms found guilty of gender discrimination at industrial tribunals.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7474801.stm

[Torres 0]

Great thing if it happens!

[W.L 0]

Great thing if it happens!

 

I hope you're being sarcastic.

 

Then again, it won't affect the city your team are from, where employing anyone would be a first.

[MattM4 0]

Great thing if it happens!

 

I hope you're being sarcastic.

 

Then again, it won't affect the city your team are from, where employing anyone would be a first.

Predictable comeback but still

[Fop 1]

The gender gap

 

* Mark Easton

* 26 Jun 08, 08:42 AM GMT

 

When the strike committee from Ford's Dagenham motors was invited round for tea by Barbara Castle, they probably had their first inkling they'd started something. Eight hundred and fifty women sewing machinists making seat covers for Cortinas and Zephyrs walked off the production line exactly 40 years ago this month. They had discovered that, although they did exactly the same job as some men at the factory, they had been designated unskilled B-grade labour and paid 15% less than their male counterparts.

 

The workers' struggle became an inspiration for millions of women determined to fight discrimination. Indeed it was the spark that led ultimately to the Equal Pay Act in 1970, making it illegal to have separate pay rates for men and women.

 

Four decades after the Dagenham machinists' industrial action, how do things look? Well, the good news is that in April, the gender pay gap narrowed to its lowest value since records began. The less good news is that using the internationally accepted measure, women's average hourly pay is still 17.2% less than men's. It is a figure that angers trade unionists and women's rights activists. Why, after all this time, should women still be earning less than men? Well, the answer is not necessarily employers secretly paying the blokes more for the same job - although some undoubtedly do.

 

According to the Office for National Statistics, the explanation is probably down to different work patterns. Female employees tend to have more disrupted career patterns than males: a greater number of different occupations, and their length of service with an employer is likely to be less.

 

Nevertheless, the government will today announce its determination to close the gap completely. And to help make that happen, any private company looking to win some of the £160bn worth of orders from the public sector will have to be upfront about the pay differential in their firm. If they don't, no contract. If they do, and it's too wide, no contract. The differential is said to be significantly higher in the private sector.

 

Woman at computerBut it is worth noting just how much things have changed since the Dagenham strike. Back then, the employment rate for working-age men was 92%. And for women, it was just 56%. Today, it is 79% and 70% respectively.

 

Women now run 700,000 companies in Britain. Women own 48% of the nation's personal wealth - predicted to rise to 60% by 2025.

 

There are many more young female millionaires in Britain than men - 47,000 aged between 18 and 44 as opposed to just 38,000 men.

 

Women now sit in the boardrooms of 78 of the FTSE 100 companies - more than ever before. True, there are still many more men and fewer women get to sit in the big chair and control the extendable pointer. But even that seems to be changing as hard-nosed investors recognise that successful companies increasingly are those which are empathetic and consensual rather than aggressively competitive.

 

Given that women are outstripping men, educationally and financially, it's probable that the real losers from any inequality will ultimately be male.

[Fop 1]

You also have to wonder if men will be getting preferential medical treatment under this bill, as women after all live longer on average (and by the logic of this bill they therefore clearly should).

 

 

Which just goes to show that discrimination is discrimination and there's no such thing as "positive" discrimination.

[Park Life 71]

Women live too long, something needs to done about that.

[manc-mag 1]

Aye but if your Fop's missus the years must just fly by tbf.

[Torres 0]

Great thing if it happens!

 

I hope you're being sarcastic.

 

Then again, it won't affect the city your team are from, where employing anyone would be a first.

 

Move to the modern age, this law has been in place in Europe for years ... you island monkeys (as you are commonly known as in Europe) are so far behind it`s unreal.

[Meenzer 14245]

Great thing if it happens!

 

I hope you're being sarcastic.

 

Then again, it won't affect the city your team are from, where employing anyone would be a first.

 

Move to the modern age, this law has been in place in Europe for years ... you island monkeys (as you are commonly known as in Europe) are so far behind it`s unreal.

Only in German-speaking countries I'd have thought?

[TheInspiration 1]

Great idea. After all, it's pretty clear white people are all hopeless and it's okay to discriminate against them because they are the original people of this country who have never received unfair treatment across the world.

Edited June 26, 2008 by TheInspiration

[Torres 0]

Great thing if it happens!

 

I hope you're being sarcastic.

 

Then again, it won't affect the city your team are from, where employing anyone would be a first.

 

Move to the modern age, this law has been in place in Europe for years ... you island monkeys (as you are commonly known as in Europe) are so far behind it`s unreal.

Only in German-speaking countries I'd have thought?

 

Mostly, but most of the scandanavian countries have it as well.

[TheInspiration 1]

Great thing if it happens!

 

I hope you're being sarcastic.

 

Then again, it won't affect the city your team are from, where employing anyone would be a first.

 

Move to the modern age, this law has been in place in Europe for years ... you island monkeys (as you are commonly known as in Europe) are so far behind it`s unreal.

Yes that's right. Discriminating against men and white people is the way forward.

[Torres 0]

Great thing if it happens!

 

I hope you're being sarcastic.

 

Then again, it won't affect the city your team are from, where employing anyone would be a first.

 

Move to the modern age, this law has been in place in Europe for years ... you island monkeys (as you are commonly known as in Europe) are so far behind it`s unreal.

Yes that's right. Discriminating against men and white people is the way forward.

 

 

 

It is.

[TheInspiration 1]

Great thing if it happens!

 

I hope you're being sarcastic.

 

Then again, it won't affect the city your team are from, where employing anyone would be a first.

 

Move to the modern age, this law has been in place in Europe for years ... you island monkeys (as you are commonly known as in Europe) are so far behind it`s unreal.

Yes that's right. Discriminating against men and white people is the way forward.

 

 

 

It is.

Good to see you believe in equality then.

[Fop 1]

Great thing if it happens!

 

I hope you're being sarcastic.

 

Then again, it won't affect the city your team are from, where employing anyone would be a first.

 

Move to the modern age, this law has been in place in Europe for years ... you island monkeys (as you are commonly known as in Europe) are so far behind it`s unreal.

Yes that's right. Discriminating against men and white people is the way forward.

 

 

 

It is.

 

In most EU countries you can choose an employee over another because they are female or a member of an ethnic minority already can you?

 

Sounds about as fair as completely ignoring the Irish no vote.

[Torres 0]

Great thing if it happens!

 

I hope you're being sarcastic.

 

Then again, it won't affect the city your team are from, where employing anyone would be a first.

 

Move to the modern age, this law has been in place in Europe for years ... you island monkeys (as you are commonly known as in Europe) are so far behind it`s unreal.

Yes that's right. Discriminating against men and white people is the way forward.

 

 

 

It is.

 

In most EU countries you can choose an employee over another because they are female or a member of an ethnic minority already can you?

 

Sounds about as fair as completely ignoring the Irish no vote.

 

 

The Irish vote should be ignored. .2 per cent of the Euro population deciding to halt progress for the rest is daft. Sinn Fein (the 'no' party) is made up of terrorists, 70 per cent of voters didn`t know what it was about anyway ... and that should be respected?!?!.............it`s an economic timebomb.

[Fop 1]

Great thing if it happens!

 

I hope you're being sarcastic.

 

Then again, it won't affect the city your team are from, where employing anyone would be a first.

 

Move to the modern age, this law has been in place in Europe for years ... you island monkeys (as you are commonly known as in Europe) are so far behind it`s unreal.

Yes that's right. Discriminating against men and white people is the way forward.

 

 

 

It is.

 

In most EU countries you can choose an employee over another because they are female or a member of an ethnic minority already can you?

 

Sounds about as fair as completely ignoring the Irish no vote.

 

 

The Irish vote should be ignored. .2 per cent of the Euro population deciding to halt progress for the rest is daft. Sinn Fein (the 'no' party) is made up of terrorists, 70 per cent of voters didn`t know what it was about anyway ... and that should be respected?!?!.............it`s an economic timebomb.

 

Ah yes, "democracy" should only be respected when you agree with it. You are in exalted company with thoughts like that.

[Torres 0]

Great thing if it happens!

 

I hope you're being sarcastic.

 

Then again, it won't affect the city your team are from, where employing anyone would be a first.

 

Move to the modern age, this law has been in place in Europe for years ... you island monkeys (as you are commonly known as in Europe) are so far behind it`s unreal.

Yes that's right. Discriminating against men and white people is the way forward.

 

 

 

It is.

 

In most EU countries you can choose an employee over another because they are female or a member of an ethnic minority already can you?

 

Sounds about as fair as completely ignoring the Irish no vote.

 

 

The Irish vote should be ignored. .2 per cent of the Euro population deciding to halt progress for the rest is daft. Sinn Fein (the 'no' party) is made up of terrorists, 70 per cent of voters didn`t know what it was about anyway ... and that should be respected?!?!.............it`s an economic timebomb.

 

Ah yes, "democracy" should only be respected when you agree with it. You are in exalted company with thoughts like that.

 

 

 

Ah ... so 840,000 people deciding the fate of 490 million is democratic?!

 

You`re understanding of democracy is very unique, or 'exalted' as you deftly put it.

[Fop 1]

Great thing if it happens!

 

I hope you're being sarcastic.

 

Then again, it won't affect the city your team are from, where employing anyone would be a first.

 

Move to the modern age, this law has been in place in Europe for years ... you island monkeys (as you are commonly known as in Europe) are so far behind it`s unreal.

Yes that's right. Discriminating against men and white people is the way forward.

 

 

 

It is.

 

In most EU countries you can choose an employee over another because they are female or a member of an ethnic minority already can you?

 

Sounds about as fair as completely ignoring the Irish no vote.

 

 

The Irish vote should be ignored. .2 per cent of the Euro population deciding to halt progress for the rest is daft. Sinn Fein (the 'no' party) is made up of terrorists, 70 per cent of voters didn`t know what it was about anyway ... and that should be respected?!?!.............it`s an economic timebomb.

 

Ah yes, "democracy" should only be respected when you agree with it. You are in exalted company with thoughts like that.

 

 

 

Ah ... so 840,000 people deciding the fate of 490 million is democratic?!

 

You`re understanding of democracy is very unique, or 'exalted' as you deftly put it.

 

The Irish deciding their own fate is democratic (and in their constitution), all EU countries having to ratify the constitution, sorry "treaty", is democratic, but trying to ignore that because someone acted in a way that doesn't fit the plan is something..... else.

 

Like I said you're in exalted company with your view of "democracy".

[Torres 0]

Great thing if it happens!

 

I hope you're being sarcastic.

 

Then again, it won't affect the city your team are from, where employing anyone would be a first.

 

Move to the modern age, this law has been in place in Europe for years ... you island monkeys (as you are commonly known as in Europe) are so far behind it`s unreal.

Yes that's right. Discriminating against men and white people is the way forward.

 

 

 

It is.

 

In most EU countries you can choose an employee over another because they are female or a member of an ethnic minority already can you?

 

Sounds about as fair as completely ignoring the Irish no vote.

 

 

The Irish vote should be ignored. .2 per cent of the Euro population deciding to halt progress for the rest is daft. Sinn Fein (the 'no' party) is made up of terrorists, 70 per cent of voters didn`t know what it was about anyway ... and that should be respected?!?!.............it`s an economic timebomb.

 

Ah yes, "democracy" should only be respected when you agree with it. You are in exalted company with thoughts like that.

 

 

 

Ah ... so 840,000 people deciding the fate of 490 million is democratic?!

 

You`re understanding of democracy is very unique, or 'exalted' as you deftly put it.

 

The Irish deciding their own fate is democratic (and in their constitution), all EU countries having to ratify the constitution, sorry "treaty", is democratic, but trying to ignore that because someone acted in a way that doesn't fit the plan is something..... else.

 

Like I said you're in exalted company with your view of "democracy".

 

 

Democracy is simple. Majority rule. The rest of Europe votes in favour (according to their constitutions) and the Irish vote against ... it is clear who loses.

 

I don`t think you understand the word democracy ... perhaps you`re confusing it with some other word.

Edited June 26, 2008 by Torres

[Happy Face 29]

I had no opinion on this story.

 

I knew Fop would carry it though.

[Torres 0]

I had no opinion on this story.

 

I knew Fop would carry it though.

 

[Fop 1]

Democracy is simple. Majority rule. The rest of Europe votes in favour (according to their constitutions) and the Irish vote against ... it is clear who loses.

 

I don`t think you understand the word democracy ... perhaps you`re confusing it with some other word.

 

 

If the EU was already a SUPERSTATE, yes.

And indeed if it weren't in the treaty that EVERY state has to ratify it for it to stand, yes.

 

 

But then that's exactly the issue, isn't it.

 

 

As I said your understanding of "democracy" puts you with exalted company.

[manc-mag 1]

Democracy is simple. Majority rule. The rest of Europe votes in favour (according to their constitutions) and the Irish vote against ... it is clear who loses.

 

I don`t think you understand the word democracy ... perhaps you`re confusing it with some other word.

 

 

If the EU was already a SUPERSTATE, yes.

And indeed if it weren't in the treaty that EVERY state has to ratify it for it to stand, yes.

 

 

But then that's exactly the issue, isn't it.

 

 

As I said your understanding of "democracy" puts you with exalted company.

 

Woo-hoo!

 

Bolds, italics, CAPITALS, smilies and "quotes!"

 

Ladies and gentlemen, the Fop, bullshit bingo FULL HOUSE!