Equal Opportunities

[CALSHOT]

Hello,

My workplace has recently sent out a revised policy that includes the equal opportunites requirement.

It states -
It is unlawful to discriminate directly or indirectly in recruitment or employment because of a ?protected characteristic?.

The ?protected characteristics? are:

 Age;
 Disability;
 Sex; and
 Sexual orientation;
 Gender reassignment;
 Pregnancy and Maternity;
 Race; (which includes colour, nationality and ethnic or national origins)
 Religion or belief;
 Marriage or civil partnership.


I always thought medical conditions were part of this. As medical conditions are not listed on here does that mean the number of hypos etc etc can be used to restrict against opportunity/job progression?

thanks,

 

[imtrying]

Hi Calshot, this would come under Disability if the restrictions had enough impact. Most places will make adjustments anyway.

 

[Caroline]

My place takes things like diabetes and any other long term medical condtion into account and if it impacts on your work will make the appropriate adjustments. I think by law all firms should do this but not all do.

 

[Northerner]

Diabetes is covered by the Disability and Equality Act:

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/DisabledPeople/RightsAndObligations/DisabilityRights/DG_4001068

🙂

You may not considered yourself disabled, but you do have protection under the Law.

 

[margie]

Diabetes is covered by the Disability and Equality Act:

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/DisabledPeople/RightsAndObligations/DisabilityRights/DG_4001068

🙂

You may not considered yourself disabled, but you do have protection under the Law.

I think though if you want to call on the law because you feel you have been discriminated against you must have told your employer about your disability.

 

[Copepod]

No, no quite Northerner. Pedantically, but in this case, pedentry is important: disability is covered by the Equality Act 2010, disability is not part of the Act's name.

From 1st Oct 2010, "the Equality Act replaced most of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA). However, the Disability Equality Duty in the DDA continues to apply."

Diabetes, as a long term condition, is covered under sections dealing with disability.

 

[Northerner]

No, no quite Northerner. Pedantically, but in this case, pedentry is important: disability is covered by the Equality Act 2010, disability is not part of the Act's name.

From 1st Oct 2010, "the Equality Act replaced most of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA). However, the Disability Equality Duty in the DDA continues to apply."

Diabetes, as a long term condition, is covered under sections dealing with disability.

Thanks for clarifying Copepod 🙂

 

[imtrying]

You may not considered yourself disabled, but you do have protection under the Law.

...but only if -

"In the Act, a person has a disability if:

?they have a physical or mental impairment
?the impairment has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their ability to perform normal day-to-day activities

which for some people it doesn't...

depends what spin you want to put on it!! I'd say I'm lucky and that mine doesn't...

 

[trophywench]

Well it does surely? - it has a long term substantial effect before eating anything, or pre-driving our vehicle plus every 2 hours for instance, both of which are normal day to day activities. Also to just go out the house before you go anywhere you have to check you have all your kit.

Non diabetic people don't.

We don't tend to regard any of that as substantial, do we? Just a habit we have to get into. But if you take 3 paces back and stare at it hard - it jolly well is - isn't it?

 

[imtrying]

We don't tend to regard any of that as substantial, do we? Just a habit we have to get into. But if you take 3 paces back and stare at it hard - it jolly well is - isn't it?

well when you put it like that....!!! lol. in fact, we all deserve medals!....but we knew that already 🙂

I suppose some depends on personal experiences and personal perception. would be interested to see what people on here think - do you class yourself as covered, or not?

 

[Mark T]

...but only if -

"In the Act, a person has a disability if:

?they have a physical or mental impairment
?the impairment has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their ability to perform normal day-to-day activities

which for some people it doesn't...

depends what spin you want to put on it!! I'd say I'm lucky and that mine doesn't...

In the "Guidance relating to the definition of disability" pdf on the direct gov web page it states the following:

B13. For example, if a person with a hearing impairment wears a hearing aid the question as to whether his or her impairment has a substantial adverse effect is to be decided by reference to what the hearing level would be without the hearing aid. Similarly, in the case of someone with diabetes which is being controlled by medication or diet, or the case of a person with depression which is being treated by counselling, whether or not the effect is substantial should be decided by reference to what the effects of the condition would be if he or she were not taking that medication or following the required diet, or were not receiving counselling (the so-called ?deduced effects?).

 

[imtrying]

In the "Guidance relating to the definition of disability" pdf on the direct gov web page it states the following:

ah thanks Mark!! I never knew that!

well....I'd be dead without my medication, so I'm guessing that's me covered then!!