There are two basic forms of
discrimination. Indirect and direct.
Direct discrimination is when an
employee or prospective employee is less
favourably treated because of their race
or sex.
This tends to be obvious discrimination,
for example, a female candidate with the
best qualifications and experience does
not get an interview.
Or, if she is already in a job, she is
ignored for promotion, the job going to
a less qualified male worker.
An employer cannot argue that it was not
their intention to discriminate, the law
only considers the end effect.
In-direct discrimination is a more
complicated form of discrimination.
An Employment Tribunal will look at 3
factors.
- The amount of people from a
racial group or of one sex that
can meet the job criteria is
considerably smaller than the
rest of the population.
- The criteria cannot actually
be justified by the employer as
a real requirement of the job.
So a candidate who cannot meet
the criteria could still do the
job as well as anyone else.
- Because the person cannot
comply with these criteria they
have actually suffered in some
way because of it. This seems
obvious, but a person cannot
complain unless they have lost
out in some way.
With Indirect Discrimination
an employer can argue that there
may be discrimination, but that
it is actually required for the
job.
This does not happen very
often, but circumstances where
it might occur are, for example,
actors who are needed to play
certain characters for
authenticity. The same can be
true for restaurants, for
example an Indian restaurant
will want Indian staff rather
than white staff.
