Thetownend.com

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7473568.stm

what a load of utter crap.

age is one thing that it is perfectly acceptable to discriminate based on!

there was a man on the news yesterday who's story was "I've been using the same travel insurance for the past thirty years, yet when i turned 70 they would no longer insure me".

So what! It's a private business, if they don't want your custom then that's at their discression, find another firm.

There was another bit in the news report which said "discounts on bus passes, free travel, etc. etc. will remain unaffected" - do they want to be discriminated against or not??

The BBC say:

"Travel, health and motor insurance is also expected to be included, where cover is simply withdrawn beyond a certain age or is prohibitively expensive."

Will they also be prohibiting discrimination against young drivers then? Surely.

Is this PC gone bananas? I can obviously understand that nobody should, for example, be witheld or delayed from receiving medical treatment on the NHS because of their age, but some of this seems a step too far.

From a health/life insurance point of view it'll be a nightmare.

Logan's run.

i would have thought that, the older you are the more likely you are to get sick, injured whatever, seems perfectly reasonable to me.  I suppose the insurance people will just make you cough up for a medical instead now.

Its the wierd thing about insurance,  only the people that don't need it are the ones you really want to pay for it.  Same with trying to get credit, its a lot easier if you are loaded.

soylent green

And presumably all us men will have the right to get a bonza deal at Sheila's Wheels.

Ridiculous, though it's not fair on some individuals, surely motor insurance is based on statistics. Which seems correct - more risk, higher premium.

Of course it is wrong to be discriminated against.

Unless you are white or male -or god forbid- both

I fucking hate this government

Touché

 Deloitte

Tohmatsu

on one hand she is saying people should be selected as individuals and on the other hand in the act  Harman suggests that Women and Ethnic minorities should be picked over white men ... and has made it legal for firms to do so ... okay this is an imbalance but this is a pretty artificial way to rectify the problem ... and smacks of positive discrimination to me

the point the old chap is trying to make OF is that the increase in premiums (in his case travel) was not based upon actuarial risk but on an arbitrary cutoff date (in this case above 75). Everything else is based upon the true statistics why shouldn't this? By the way, I am below 75 so I am not biased in this case.

There's got to be a cut off point somewhere, where the firm decides those above age X are too risky to insure whilst travelling. 70 seems fine to me.

Isn't it an arbitary cut-off date based on stats?

Cut-off ages are based on risk though. The problem is companies say "no, we don't insure people above 75" whereas in truth it's more like "no, we don't insure people above 75 because the pose too high a risk to the company and we don't want to have to pay out loads of claims", but a company would never actually come out and say that because of the bad press they'd get.

it's pretty obvious that's their reason though.

You won't be aloud to take legal action if you've been discriminated against (only during an employment process?) and you're a white male. If I heard radio4 correctly when I was making a cup of tea this morning. So basically legislation to allow positive discrimination, but not really forcing it.

I'll never get a job now.

So if I was a white male over 75 i'm buggered I can't get a job in b & q because some ethinc will get it and to top it off I can't even go and take the job he left in his own country becuase I can't get travel insurance.

you know in football programmes,  where they list the squad and sometimes say stuff like age, height, weight etc - is that illegal ?

B&Q are one of the few firms who would employ said 75 year-old.

They employ the lady who lives over the road from me in Oxford, and she is very obviously a complete loon. Poor old Sonia.

nope

So, I presume it's ok to vote BNP now, as their policy is only 'positive discrimination' for whites?

Yes, definitely ok to vote BNP now.

Although, I wonder, as the bill is not due to be proposed until the end of the year, if this 'news item' is just not another headline designed to detract away from other controversial measures about to be implemented soon - keep an eye on the 'small news' on the BBC

"Listen to us, we are the law, you will do as we say, and you cannot now, ever, in any way, discriminate against people who are old and less capable of doing certain things.

"Now get to work cleaning those skyscrapers, flying those planes and fighter jets, driving those tanks, being bodyguards to the royals, feeding those lions, working on building sites, carrying out brain surgery and building computer chips. Earn us our tax. And that includes you wrinkly. Now put down that walking stick, stop shaking and get to work. And change those trousers; you've wet yourself again."

This ageism thing really is ludicrous. I love the stupid wording that's being used "outlawed". :D

Wonder where this leaves footballers? And drivers for that matter, Old people SHOULD be retested for competency, yet i presume this is now not allowed? Okay, so what about youngsters losing their license after 6 points?

WTF does this shoddy Govn think they have to micro manage every aspect of our lives, They rob us blind left right and centre, & use the money to buy the votes from their hard core support, & in my view are a bunch of hypocrites.
They shed crocodile tears about Mugabe, who descriminated against the white minority in Zimbabwee, & then do the same thing. They critisise his lack of democracy but stifle it here over Europe.  (I'm not supporting Mugabe, if it were up to me he'd go the same way as Sadaam)
Discrimination is wrong. End of. But why then is it ok to tell someone he hasn't got the job because he's white & how would the other guy he got the job because of the colour of his skin.
Does that mean that MM has got to pick his team with this rubbish in mind.
This positive descrimination stuff does my head in. Some might see it as POSITIVE, But I still see it as DISCRIMINATION.

I don't agree with discrimination.

Although should I be going on a long coach journey and have 2 choices: A 65 or a 40 year old then I'll go with the 40 yr old thanks. That's not discrimination in my mind, just plain common dog.

The South Park Episode where they take driving licencses away from OAP's springs to mind here.

I laiugh and laugh at teh EU and Labour every day! So I am advised to higher a black women who is a minority instead of a white bloke who applies? Fuck that

Yeah, apart from that's not what the new legislation says.

Nah it says that if you have two applicants, one a man and one a women, they would not do you for discrimination if you choose a women over the man of equal experiance/qualifications.  The legislation in this country is strangling businesses.

I may come across as a joker Ben but do not ignore legislation

I thought it was just advising people what to do, rather than flat out ordering them

Nope. It does what Ash says.

what, the government wont do you if you choose a woman other than a man?

:D edited! was emailing at same time! I might start concentrating on here instead of working so I get my posts right.

  I read in the Daily Mail, that the government are making homosexuality compulsory....they will do you if you choose a woman over a man...it's an EU regulation, like the straight cucumber.

Is it currently illegal to appoint a man over an equally adept woman then?

It changes nothing really does it. Just some media hysteria

What I dont get about this at all is the point behind it - that workplaces should be "diverse"

I dont see how having a diverse workforce is benifical to a business at all. The police maybe , fair enough but what about a mobile phone company? a garage?

Having a workforce made up of the most varied cross section of society adds no value to the business whatsover.  I'm not saying straight white men only or anything daft like that, but diversity should just be one of those thing that happens naturally, through various candidates being the best for their jobs. If they are asian / lesbian / hindu, then whatever. It dosnt matter, it adds no more value than employing a white middle aged man.

Anti-discrimination laws should encourage people to choose the best candidate, making it illegal to discriminate on grounds not related to the ability to do the job. Not just to get diversity for the point of it. ie. If I'm a black lady who's the best candidate for a job, it's in both business and my interests that my potential employer doesn't discriminate against me on race/gender issues.

The diversity thing is more in the realm of positive discrimination. This tends to come about (rightly or wrongly) when statistics show that there's still a certain amount of underlying discrimination going on which is difficult to pin down with anti-discrimination legislation. So you redress the balance by allowing certain forms of discrimination, usually against the current "winners", normally the majority.

This was rolled out in my firm last year.

I don't see the problem with the age part, as it is only protecting you.

If you apply for a job, you should get it, or not, based solely on your ability, not the fact that your in your 20's, or 30's, or 40's, etc.

It also protects you from being thrown on the scrapheap once you reach an arbitary age. Lets face it, pensions for most people will be virtually worthless when they reach 65, so if you can still carry out your job role you should be allowed to continue if you wish.

Double post

Errrr, yeah that was pretty much my point.  

What annoys me is that diversity is seen as a goal, a positive outcome, whereas it should be considered something that just happens. It infers that a small company who only employ white male salesmen for example are in the wrong. that somehow it would be better for the business to employ someone who does not fit that profile.

It  boils down to the stupid situation of solving discrimination by discriminating.

Although some of it is still left in the hands of the employer. If I had interviewed 2 identical candiates I wouldnt employ one of them to increase the percentage of lesbian hindus with 1 leg within my business as it makes fuck all difference to anything. I'd find another way. (i.e employ the white man obviously :wink: )

Disappointed with you, Reg.

I think that's where we disagree, well sort of. If a small company who only employs white sales men because they are white, ignoring better non-white candidates, then they are in the wrong. If they have only employed white sales men because everytime they've recruited the best person for the job has been white, then that's fine.

None of the anti-discrimination laws have a problem with the later. There's nothing that says that x% of your employees have to be from minorities, not even the newer positive discrimination style law says that.

  You've got to read something in the dentist's waiting room.....besides it's the only way I can find out where loads on here get their views.

I like the Daily Mail, it's like a black comedy. Funny, but with a sinister undertone of a large circulation who take its articles as fact.

The Mail can be amusing for that reason but the Express just scares the shit out of me.

Although their work did result in a great Bad Science this week...
http://www.badscience.net/

"None of the anti-discrimination laws have a problem with the later. There's nothing that says that x% of your employees have to be from minorities, not even the newer positive discrimination style law says that."

Not yet fB but we won't have to wait long.

Do you have any evidence to back up this impending madness?

  I read it in the Daily Mail...along with the policy for the next Tory Government, of forcing young people into work, by collecting up the young jobless, and shipping them off to Eastern Europe by cattle train.

What's the age limit on this? I've always fancied a trip to Eastern Europe.

 < 40

  I don't think the plan , so far, is to knock on your door, but collect you up from street corners or town centres.

  Not sure how standing outside the Savaloy having a fag pans out.

Just years of being a cynical bastard. It won't be long before companies are told to do "stock control" of their ethnic minorities, gays etc and be fined if they're under represented.