Cocktail

Hey, hey, hey sports fans! Tonight’s little aperitif for the remainder of the week is a bit of a cocktail. First pour in two measures of the observation that my blogs have impact. Oh yes! The Persian powers that be have clearly read my inchoate mumblings and thought ‘Aha, the infidel has a point, perhaps we will show mercy on the poor innocent youth we were about to murder in the name of Allah (pbuh)’.The keyboard is indeed mightier than the rock my friends.

The next addition to my liquid musings is a splash of breaking news that the idiot in charge of BP, what’s his name, Tony thingummy, the ex Chief Exec. chappy, may in fact have shown better judgement than his regal Obamaness. Owzat! I hesitate to draw any parallels between the doom-mongers who vilified BP (after all a British Company – not) as the architects of the greatest ecological disaster to befall mankind, the global warming mythicists who relied on falsified data from University of East Anglia (amongst other worldwide climategate tosh) and the conspiracy theorists who insist that the Apollo 11 moon landing in ’69 was bogus …. But if you see a similarity, who am I to argue?

Finally, serve the two aforementioned ingredients over plenty of cynicism - as supplied by my ‘professional’ blog below – and allow yourself to be shaken or stirred as your fancy takes you.

The Equality Act 2010

I’ve got real issues with some legislation, and how it is implemented. That doesn’t make me an anarchist or a Che Guevara wannabee … just a professional bloke with an opinion. The Equality Act 2010 due to come into force in October this year is a case in point.

To start with, what is equality? The word equal – so popular that it can be a noun, adjective and verb – has been a topic of spirited debate for philosophers, preachers and politicians for millennia. Aristotle, Jesus Christ and Harriet Harman have all expressed trenchant views on what equality means and what it looks like, but it is Harriet Harman, the previous Equalities Minister and leading proponent of the Equalities Bill 2008, whose definition will affect the UK most. So what kind of equality did the minister propose; formal equality, substantive equality or equality of opportunity?

Yep! Here’s your starter for ten Cambridge … what are the definitions of formal equality, substantive equality and equality of opportunity? Well without boring you dear Reader (if indeed you’re still awake), here are the brief versions of the definitions:

• Formal equality is about consistency, and assumes that ‘likes’ should be treated alike. Seems logical and fair enough, and indeed this was the dominant model of equality in the UK until 2008, driving such legislation as the Equal Pay Act, Sex Discrimination Act and Disability Discrimination Act.
• Substantive equality however has the aim of alleviating disadvantage – in round terms, positive discrimination applied to any perceived or numerically founded ‘ism’ (sex, race, age etc).
• The final ingredient in this definition soup is the equal opportunities view of equality, which intends to remove any and all specific barriers to any underrepresented groups. In real terms - say in the selection of a successful candidate for a job - this could lead to an individual from an underrepresented group, who is of equal merit to a candidate not from an underrepresented group (phew, still with me?) being chosen for a job in recognition that the two individuals started the application from different points. It’s no surprise that this is the brand of equality to which the EU subscribes (anyone see recent television footage of the French Riot Police tearing a baby from it’s migrant mothers arms by the way?)

So, to cut to the chase – because I’m even boring myself now – what impact will this new ‘improved’ equality have on the workplace? Here is a list of the main points:

• People who consider that they have been discriminated against because of a combination of protected characteristics such as sex or race will be able to bring claims of combined discrimination.
• Pre-employment health questions may not be asked unless the reason is one of a number of defined reasons.
• Employment tribunals’ powers will be extended so that they can make recommendations that an employer takes steps to eliminate or reduce the effect of discrimination on other employees, not only on the claimant.
• Any clause in an employment contract that requires pay secrecy will be unenforceable.
• Associative discrimination (because they have an association with someone with a particular protected characteristic) will now apply to age, disability, gender reassignment and sex discrimination.
• Perceptive discrimination (discrimination against a person because the discriminator thinks the person possesses that characteristic) will now apply to disability, gender reassignment and sex discrimination.
• Indirect discrimination (application of a detrimental provision) will now apply to disability discrimination and gender reassignment.
• Employers will be potentially liable for harassment of their staff by a third party they don’t employ.

Some of these changes may seem a little obscure to you - how prevalent is gender reassignment? Some are counter intuitive - why should you be responsible if a visitor to your business abuses one of your employees? Some of these changes may seem like yet more bureaucratic nonsense designed to add punitive costs into the already precarious world of the small to medium business owner.

With regret, I have to tell you that neither of our opinions matters – this is the way it is.

And you know that employees are much more aware of their rights and are willing to enforce them, through Employment Tribunals and the Courts if necessary.

If you’re not sure how this might apply to you in your business, check it out with a professional who can reassure you, amend policy if needs be, advise on safe practice and help safeguard your business in the future. That would be me then!

I hope to talk to you soon; trade well.

%^&*

So there you have it friends, free speech. It’s even better when you get paid for it, but until then …

th th th th th th th that’s all folks

Anne