Discrimination at work?

[IndecisivelyAnnoyed]

It's a bit of a WWYD...

Imagine if you worked as part of a large team of 150 people. There are 15 women.

A new contract is awarded to the company that entails much less desirable work. Rather than share the work out across the entire team, as is typical, they set up a taskforce dedicated to this one project. It has its own team leader.

They put 10 women onto it, and twenty men. "This disproportionate number of women is just a coincidence" is what the women have been told.

Employees cannot leave the dedicated team and rejoin the wider workforce once they have been handpicked for the dedicated team.

So how would you handle it?

Wow, that is so blatant. How were the people chosen, if they say it's coincidence, was it alphabetical, out of a hat? how were they selected.

''Employees cannot leave the dedicated team and rejoin the wider workforce once they have been handpicked for the dedicated team.''

They can leave if they have another job surely?
Do you mean they have no option to turn down being on the special new team.

Are you in a union? That’s my first thought.
I’d be asking management about how they did the selection process. Did they ask for volunteers? I assume not. Is there any extra pay or reward? I assume not. What does your contract say about the job role?

It’s a complicated situation with lots of potential scenarios tbh. Have similar contracts been won, with a different application of resources? Is there something unique about this contract that requires certain skills from the team? Could genuinely be a coincidence, what reasons do you have that makes you think to the contrary, OP?

They can, of course, leave the company, but not return to their old jobs in the large team.

They say it's not a change in job roles. It's just a dedicated team focused on one project. No specialist skills required although the work is inherently more dangerous and aggravating.

Employees were chosen on their positive outlook and professionalism. In other words: we don't complain very loudly.

No extra pay or rewards. If you don't like it, you leave.

Most workers haven't been employed for two years....

Similar contracts have been won and work distributed across the entire large team.

So women comprise 10% of the workforce
The team is 20% of the workforce
Which means the equitable/representative number of women of the team should be 3. Not 10.

Seems massively prejudiced.

Any “random” allocation should have separated sexes, picked 3 from the female set and the rest from the male.

To do otherwise is not logical or competent!

Wow, that's awful. Even without this new team for less desirable work, a work force with only ten per cent women is very low. I'd imagine that makes it really hard to voice a woman's perspective in a work force that is 90% men.

But this new team, can HR be asked to confirm how the members of the new team were selected.

If there's an HR.

I know my own HR are shit. You get nothing from them. On the rare occasions I've asked for any information from them, (or feedback) I got back a clear 'talk to the hand we're busy'' message and I felt it reflected badly on me for asking for attention. Their ideal employee never complains about anything.

I did ask.

I get told over and over that a woman chose the team members and therefore it's okay!

I put in a grievance and was told it was just a coincidence.

I'm undecided whether or not to take it further.

So a woman chose all the women! That's their defence?!
That doesn't make it a fair process.

Only you know how good a job it is, how easily you could get another equal or better job, but on the face of it, it sounds really unfair and if you are at all employable I would look for another job.

I guess you are not in a Union. If you want to take a discrimination claim further, like to ET you'll have to prove the women are at detriment. If the job is the same pay, same level of work, not a breach of your contract then I don't see how you'll get anywhere. If, however, it's not just work you don't enjoy but it's a pay cut, a completely new role nothing like your original one, different hours etc and detrimental then you've nothing to lose.

I noticed you said more dangerous, if this is quantifiable danger, like working in physically or mentally dangerous situations, I guess working at higher heights, with sex offenders, with known agitators, (not just in a role similar to others where you might have angrier customers) then you could have a claim. Speak to ACAS

Definitely raise your grievance to the next stage of appeal. Clearly state the reasons why the work is more undesirable. Also point out the statistics of their workforce. I think you have a clear case here. (I work in HR - I would not have allowed this situation in the first place, but if a manager had gone and done it and I then became aware of this grievance, I would be upholding it and starting the selection process all over again!)
Good luck op.

Take your grievance further. Assuming that the more dangerous bit could risk time off work, injury etc.

I’d say it’s irrelevant who did the choosing.

HR should have given clear guidelines.

Treating either men or women less avoidably because of their sex is a breach of the Act.

If the new team is doing a less-pleasant job, then the high proportion of women chosen to be on the team is sex-based discrimination.

I’d be joining a union asap.

As well as representing workers interests, unions do a lot to educate workers about their rights.