Harman at it again.

[DodgyAgent]

I overheard an HR person telling a colleague "she's of childbearing age, and mid 30s with no kids, so we can strike that one off the list". This was in a large pharma, a couple of years ago. Discrimination is still alive and well.

And quite right too

[BoredBloke]

Harman herself has benefited from this type of positive discrimmination. She got into the HoC based on an all women selection list when Nu Labour wanted to boost the number of women sitting as MP's.

And it shows - how thick were the other candidates?

[DiscoStu]

She wants to outlaw hookers too. For this reason alone New Lie have lost my vote.

[BoredBloke]

Do they come under this legislation. Surely a hooker getting knocked up is a known risk relating to the role. Would her pimp be expected to keep her job open while she has the sprog?

[DodgyAgent]

The headmistress at my kids' primary school had a baby a few months ago. She now works from home one day a week, and brings the baby in to school with her on the other four days. People have gone in to her office during the day and found the curtains closed and the baby dozing. When she's teaching classes, the headmistress's mother comes in to school and sits at the back of the classroom holding the baby.

So it doesn't seem to be a problem to have kids and a decent job.

What if she was a scaffolder? or a fighter pilot? Are you saying that there are only certain jobs that women are fit for? I am with SAS on this having been a victim of someone who employed a woman who six months later got pregnant and deprived me of the worker that I needed.

If a woman has worked for me for some years I have no problem accommodating her maternity leave and I think that our society should accommodate everyone as much as we can.However I as an employer have a legitimate entitlement to prefer to employ someone on the basis of whether they are likely to fall pregnant in the near future or not. If I dont want to employ someone on the basis of them being likely to fall pregnant then no amount of legislation can stop me provided I am careful in how I reject such a candidate.

[wobbegong]

What if she was a scaffolder? or a fighter pilot? Are you saying that there are only certain jobs that women are fit for? I am with SAS on this having been a victim of someone who employed a woman who six months later got pregnant and deprived me of the worker that I needed.

If a woman has worked for me for some years I have no problem accommodating her maternity leave and I think that our society should accommodate everyone as much as we can.However I as an employer have a legitimate entitlement to prefer to employ someone on the basis of whether they are likely to fall pregnant in the near future or not. If I dont want to employ someone on the basis of them being likely to fall pregnant then no amount of legislation can stop me provided I am careful in how I reject such a candidate.

In a nutshell!! That's why no amount of racial or sexual equality legislation will ever make a jot of difference.

[ratewhore]

I'm very sceptical when it comes to equal rights for women. I spent 6 years in the Navy watching a bunch of slaaaags playing the ticket to sad old men to get an easy life. Suckers fell for it every time.

Yes, I remember the ladies who sued the MOD because they had to leave when they fell pregnant. Then I remember the case of the woman who sued the MOD because she decided to not get pregnant in order to continue her career.

All this fairness costs a lot of money...

[BoredBloke]

Under these laws, suppose you have 2 candidates, one is a white woman and the other is a black man. One has to be chosen - does that mean that the other automatically has the right to appeal on discrimmination grounds?

[xoggoth]

Also agree with SAS. Companies should not be obliged to act as part of the social services, their only concern should be having the people who can do the job. When some employees do not play their part for whatever reason, others often have to take up the slack as even large companies do not have pools of people with the experience and expertise to immediately take over in any particular department.

[SueEllen]

Under these laws, suppose you have 2 candidates, one is a white woman and the other is a black man. One has to be chosen - does that mean that the other automatically has the right to appeal on discrimmination grounds?

They can appeal on discrimination grounds but you just state the other candidate was more experienced, lived closer or skills better matched the job requirements.

You don't do what that Hairdresser did in London state that the person was not employed because they wouldn't remove their religious scarf when they hadn't annoyed or offended a single customer. Then stick to it and wonder why you got a £4000 fine.