EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY AT WORK

Equality and Diversity at Work

Equality and Diversity at Work

Background

I was already employed by the company in a junior position at the time of this incident. The incident happened against the Article 14: Prohibition of discrimination under Human Rights Act 1998.

Introduction

Legislation, voluntary codes of practice and equality initiatives have resulted in some progress towards equality of treatment for minority groups at work, but there remains inescapable evidence of continuing discrimination. More recent approaches under the banner of management of diversity include the economic and business case for equality, the valuing and managing of diversity in organisations, culture change and mainstreaming of equality initiatives . (Torrington, Hall and Taylor, 2005 p.529) The purpose of this study is to examine racial inequality and we will also discuss the case happened against the Article 14: Prohibition of discrimination under Human Rights Act 1998. The study also examines the existing legislation and other actions that are use to shield ethnic minority from discrimination in their workforce.

Discussion

Beardwell et al (2004) noted Under the Race Relations Act 2001, the public authorities are obliged to promote racial equality as a form of positive duty. During the recruitment and selection process, discrimination needs to be taken seriously, This same case happened with me when I was being asked for an interview and when I reached at the interview spot. For the last assortment stage, I was presumed to be consulted by an locality manager. The interview was on Sunday which was an un-pleasant know-how due to two reasons; I didn't realise that why am I being consulted on a non-working day and secondly I faced transport difficulty because it was a public holiday.

According to Stone (2005), there are two types of discrimination; direct and indirect discrimination. It is quite simple to tell the difference between the both. Stone (2005) maintained that direct discrimination applies where an employee or a person is treated less favourably than someone else because of their race. On the other hand, indirect discrimination is described as more sinister and covert by Peters (1991) and occurs when a person or group cannot comply with the specific requirement and condition that has been set by employers which leads to ethnic minorities being disadvantaged. Similarly, when I come to at the interview position, I was being notified to delay for the shop supervisor in the coffee shop / retail shop of the identical company. This was another shock because I was notified that an locality supervisor will interview me. In about 10 minutes, the shop supervisor advanced me and consulted me in the shop which was rather engaged and noisy. This is indirect discrimination because ethnic minorities will be disadvantaged by the injudicious requirement set in the first place as English is not their mother-tongue. In opposition, an employer can only lawfully discriminate in favour of someone according to their race/ethnic, taking into account that if race is considered as a genuine occupational qualification (Lucas ...