Discrimination and positive action

 Discrimination 

In terms of equalities law this is where people are treated differently because of characteristics that they have which have nothing to do with the situation e.g. someone who is blind can be discriminated against if they applied for a driving job because they cannot see to drive but they cannot be discriminated against when seeking a job that requires a person to be able to travel independently e.g. a social worker, because there are ways for blind people to travel independently e.g. taking buses and taxis.

Whilst discrimination can be both positive and negative it tends to be used in terms of being negatively discriminated against.

Direct Discrimination 

Where someone is treated less favourably because of their race, disability, sex (gender), age, marital status, religion, sexual orientation or gender reassignment etc.

Indirect Discrimination 

Indirect discrimination occurs where the effect of certain requirements, conditions or practices has an adverse impact disproportionately on one group or other. For example if there is a rule which only applies to part-time workers and the majority of part-time workers are women then this can be seen to indirectly discriminate against women.

Positive action and positive discrimination

In limited circumstances, organisations can use ‘positive action’ to address inequalities. This can be used to make up for past discrimination and stereotyping. It may take the form of mentoring women in middle-management who feel that senior management is only for men.  ‘Positive action’ is only allowed where the law expressly permits it, because it is indirect discrimination.  Positive discrimination e.g. choosing one person over another in an interview because of certain characteristics rather than their ability to do the job is illegal.

From April 2011 it became lawful to take positive action when recruiting but only in very specific circumstances.  These circumstances are when employers are faced with two or more candidates with the same abilities and qualifications, they can then choose to hire a candidate from under-represented groups. 

Some definitions

Equality of opportunity and equality of outcome

Equal opportunity describes the intention to create a social environment in which people are not excluded from the activities of society on the basis of physical characteristics e.g. sex or cultural roles e.g. those assigned along gender lines.  We can see how over time many activities have become open to both men and women e.g. primary school teaching, engineering, football and domestic chores.  

It is difficult to measure the success of equal opportunity policies. Opportunity itself is difficult to accurately measure. In practice, equal opportunity is said to exist when people with similar abilities reach similar results (equality of outcome) after doing a similar amount of work. Equal opportunity and equality of outcome are therefore seen as complementary. 

Inclusion

Inclusion and exclusion (or social exclusion) were terms which became used in Government in the late 1990s. The Government defined social exclusion as

‘a shorthand term for what can happen when people or areas suffer from a combination of linked problems such as unemployment, poor skills, low incomes, poor housing, high crime, bad health and family breakdown.’

However, this definition tells us more about how it has come about rather than what it is.  Another definition provides further detail of what social exclusion actually is.

“An inability (of individuals) to participate effectively in economic, social, political and cultural life.” 

These four dimensions of exclusion can be further explained

Economically – cannot afford a decent standard of living: Unable to afford enough, or good enough quality, housing, food, clothes, heating and other things that make up a decent standard of living.

Socially – socially isolated, abused or live in fear: Have few friends, family or neighbours that can be called on for help, may be physically or sexually abused, harassed outside of the home, live in fear of being burgled or their children getting involved with drugs or crime.

Politically – cannot have their voice heard and lack influence: Do not know how to get their voice heard, are not taken seriously by political parties, powerful pressure groups or service providers.

Culturally – are not valued: Get discriminated against or harassed because of their disability, race, religious beliefs, social customs, language, sexuality, age, etc.

 
Inclusion in the world of special needs

I came across the term inclusion in the early nineties when working in social care> I read about it in papers about people with learning disabilities and their education. Inclusion was described as being a completely different concept (and reality) than the term integration.

Integration suggests that there is a norm and those who do not fit into this must in some way adapt. Inclusion suggests that it is the system which must adapt rather than the individual. One document puts it like this

Integration vs Inclusion
Needs of “special students”	••••••••	Rights of ALL students
Changing/remedying the subject	••••••••	Changing the school
Benefits to the student with “special needs”	••••••••	Benefits ALL students
Professionals, specialist expertise, and formal support	••••••••	Informal support and the expertise of mainstream teachers
Conclusion: inclusion = good teaching for ALL

 http://www.cdss.ca/images/pdf/general_information/integration_vs_inclusion.pdf

Inclusive faith communities

Therefore inclusive faith communities strive to be the sum of their parts and then some. But first we do have to have a sense of what those parts are. We have to udnerstand what stops people feeling fully included.

This posting may not have cast much light on the situation - my apologies - but equalities and inclusion are not easy concepts to fully understand. Happy for others to add more clarity.




 

Who are we talking about

The legislation only covers

• age
• disability
• gender reassignment
• marriage and civil partnership
• pregnancy and maternity
• race
• religion or belief
• sex (gender)
• sexual orientation

But there are other categories of difference which may impact on how people may be treated 

• People with long term illnesses (mental and physical) - this may in some instances be included in disability;
• Carers;
• Employed people on low wages;
• Unemployed people;
• Lone parent Families;
• Children in need and their families;
• Young people;
• People who live in rural areas;
• People living in disadvantaged areas;
• People who have been in contact with the criminal justice system and their families;
• People with low levels of literacy and numeracy skills;
• People with communication difficulties;
• Homeless people;
• People living in residential and nursing homes; and
• Refugees and asylum seekers.

This list is by no means complete. And of course in many instances people may fall into several categories - sometimes by chance and sometimes because there may be causal links e.g. people with disabilities are much more likely to either unemployed or on low wages than those without disabilities.

Does this mean we have to completely understand the issues associated with all these groups or can we start with actually doing something?

The 2010 Equalities Act

The 2010 Equalities Act made understanding the law a bit easier as is replaced previous anti-discrimination laws. The aim was to make the law easier to understand and comply with.

The act covers nine protected characteristics, which cannot be used as a reason to treat people unfairly. Every person has one or more of the protected characteristics, so the act protects everyone against unfair treatment. The protected characteristics are:

• age
• disability
• gender reassignment
• marriage and civil partnership
• pregnancy and maternity
• race
• religion or belief
• sex (gender)
• sexual orientation

The Equality Act sets out the different ways in which it is unlawful to treat someone, such as direct and indirect discrimination, harassment, victimisation and failing to make a reasonable adjustment for a disabled person.

The act prohibits unfair treatment in the workplace, when providing goods, facilities and services, when exercising public functions, in the disposal and management of premises, in education and by associations (such as private clubs).

Most of the provisions of the Act have now been implemented but the government has decided not to take forward

• Public sector duty regarding socio-economic inequalities;
• Gender pay gap information; and
• Combined discrimination: dual characteristics.

For more information http://homeoffice.gov.uk/equalities/equality-act/

Of course as Unitarians we are not interested in equalities because the Government tells us we should be, we are interested in equalities and committed to making a difference because of our values and our faith.