That fattist discrimination is allowed in the workplace?

[SortedwishIwas]

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/24/fattist-discrimination-should-be-outlawed-in-the-workplace-says/

Just read this article and it says it is not illegal to discriminate against overweight people.

Yet fat people are protected only if they can prove they are also disabled

from the article. So it is seems to be ok to discriminate against someone who is fat but not if they are fat and disabled?

This is worrying though but a separate issue from the same article

New forecasts show that obesity will soon be more common than being a normal weight.The figures from Cancer Research UK show on current trends, almost three in four adults will be overweight or obese by 2035.

rose you are allowed to discriminate on things you actually have evidence for.

I can choose the white person for the job because there is evidence on their CV that they are better qualified (like A-level grades or something). I can;t hire the white person because on average white people have higher A-level grade (in our racist society they do unfortunately) and ignore the actual A-level grades of the two candidates.

You can choose the slim person because they actually are healthier as evidenced by less sick days. You can't choose the slim person because on average slim people have less sick days when the actual slim person you are interviewing has more sick days than her obese competitor.

You can discriminate on the basis of evidence, not assumptions' or stereotypes^.

If the number of sick days is important then find out what it is instead of assuming you can guess which candidate fulfils your criteria better!

I think a lot of people tend to forget that food can be an addiction. Just like cigarettes drugs and alcohol. Which people rightly so have sympathy for. However with food addiction people are mocked called greedy and jeered at.

1. I would say that most of the time, people don't actually have much sympathy for drug addicts or alcoholics, and only other smokers tend to feel sorry for smokers. I don't think that's fair, but sadly it's certainly the case that not many people feel particularly sorry for addicts of any type.
2. Yes, food is certainly an addiction. But the other addictions you've listed aren't protected characteristics, so why would a food addiction be one?

Someone asked me about how legislating against discriminating on the grounds of weight would work. It wouldn't be that hard. It'd be no more or less difficult than outlawing any other discrimination. Enforcement is always an issue but that doesn't stop successful cases being brought. If you had evidence of the type of conversations going on on this thread you'd have a pretty slam dunk case, but the point would be prevention rather than cure - requiring people to think about their conscious and unconscious bias and making it clear it's unacceptable. Saying that all things being equal the obese person has demonstrated a life choice that would prevent you from employing them is just ridiculous really and you could well be shooting your business in the foot making such superficial judgements.

Someone who is fat because of a disability deserves to have the same protection as anyone else with a disability does.

If you simply eat too much and exercise too little there is an easy solution. Even if you do like your food (I do) exercising more burns the calories. And it DOES work. I've been running for 6.5 years. I had lost weight before I started but now I eat far more and weigh the same and look more toned and and obviously much fitter.

However, being rude in public achieves nothing. Someone told me this morning that she'd been told she shouldn't be out running because she was fat. So sitting on the couch will help her lose weight, then. Idiots.

I actually do wonder whether height should be a protected characteristic. Absent a disability, you can do something about being fat. You can do nothing about being short. I think the characteristics that should be protected should be those that can't be changed - or not easily. I suppose if you are fed up with being discriminated against as a woman you could have a sex change but you know what I mean.

As for perhaps discrimination will shame people into making healthy choices, that is just horrible, and demonstrably bound to backfire, in any event.

It is possible for most fat people to not be fat, which isn't the case with race, sex or disability. Therefore it shouldn't be treated in the same way, in my opinion.

An interesting thing from my point of view is that I have a disability which is a protected characteristic. Several of the main medications for this condition, two of which I took together for a long period of time, are well known to cause rapid and extreme weight gain in a large proportion of people who take them (through changes to the metabolism and insatiable hunger - it's very, very hard not to overeat on these medications).

When I took these medications, I became very obese, which is not a protected characteristic, and I could be discriminated against for it. When I didn't take them, my untreated disability was such that it would have been impossible for me to work.

From a discrimination point of view, it would've been better for me to not treat my condition - the law would have protected me from negative consequences.

Someone who is fat because of a disability deserves to have the same protection as anyone else with a disability does.

As a previous poster has said, I don't hang a sign round my neck saying "I'm fat because I take medication" (I don't take that medication any more, and while I'm still overweight, I'm not obese any more). How are people supposed to know?

Ollieplimsoles Obese models? Where? I don't see any. Plus Size models are plump. None of them are seriously life threateningly obese that I can see. If by Vloggers you mean people like Whitney Thore, her weight is metabolic, caused by PCOS. PCOS is a disability

I am not saying this is true of all obese people but many of them overeat compulsively. In other words, they are addicted and addiction/eating disorders are psychiatric disability. It seems odd that if someone was considered menatlly ill due to bulimia or anorexia they would be protected, and rightly so, by the law, but not someone with BED/Compulsive eating? And BED is said to be the most common ED but the most underdiagnosed and undertreated. I suspect a lot of emotional eaters out there fit the criteria for BED, even mildly, or a depression, anxiety or PTSD disorder (or even a disorder like Borderline PD which causes self harm and addictive behaviours) but have never been really labelled as such because their issues are mild so they haven't been sectioned etc or maybe because they are embarassed to seek help, or are so used to living with emotional turmoil that they never sought help for it? And even those who don't strictly fit a criteria for mental illness or ED (and those criteria are narrow) may be dealing with persistent low mood or emotional hurt that causes them to eat? I remember hearing that 90% women who overeat have been abused in some way shape of form. I can believe that. 1 in 4 women are sexually abused under the age of 18 (ranging from heavy stuff like rape to being flashed at ), and that does not include empotional verbal or physical abuse of children. I consider having a difficult childhood CAN be an impairment

Food is not addictive.
And morpheme, yes you can hire the slim person because they're slim. It might be stupid but it's not illegal.

Pretty, Google Tess Holliday. She's huge at the moment, especially in the US (pardon the pun).

You can discriminate on the basis of evidence, not assumptions or stereotypes.
You can discriminate and hire people however you want to, as long as it isn't based on a protected characteristic. If I don't want to hire you because you come across too middle class, it may be an assumption and a stereotype, but it's up to me. There are some positions that I would not hire an obese person for.

Obesity should not be a protected characteristic. The occasions where their weight is caused by a disability, they are already protected under the law.
Apart from that, it may not be easy to lose weight, but it is possible. It is not possible to cure my disability.

I consider having a difficult childhood CAN be an impairment
An impairment or even a mental illness does not automatically mean that a person meets the criteria for having a disability.
To have a disability, you must have a condition that has a ‘substantial’ and ‘long-term’ negative effect on your ability to do normal daily activities.

Ive gone from 21 stone to 11 stone. I was abused in the street when i was bigger. I worked extremely hard to get where i am.

Weebarras experience is my biggest fear...........i have already decided that i will NOT take certain meds. I wont even take the Mini Pill.

You make some interesting points olly
I recently visited Japan for two weeks. In that time I saw only a handful of fat Japanese people.(I myself lost 4lbs in the fortnight eating mostly their diet -a lot of raw fish-and walking a lot).

And although I have the 'excuse' that my metabolism is slow because of an underactive thyroid, I know full well that I am fatter than I should be because I eat too much and don't exercise enough and havent ,until recently ,had the willpower to address it .I suspect the great majority of overweight people are like me. And its a vicious circle -you getter fatter and more miserable so,if you are like me,you comfort eat.....
I suspect I may have discriminated against fat people in the past while interviewing ,if only subconsciously,because I saw it as lacking self discipline in myself that I struggled to lose weight (hasten to add I am talking about 20lbs not real obesity )If I did so I'm not proud of it .

It's true you rarely see even a stout Japanese person, and the food and walking help. Also, I never saw anyone eating on the street, aways sitting at a table.

A friend with Japanese relations also confirms what I've suspected, there is a very strong social disapproval of fatness. It's linked with ideas of sloppiness, lack of self-control. The relatively high levels of conformity in Japan reinforce this.

PrettyLittleGuinea What do you think people with anorexia and bulimia are protected from by the law? If my weight drops below a certain point I will not be allowed to be attend work until I can get it up again. If I had too much time off I would be deemed unable to do my job and would lose it. That is right and fair. It's good for my school and it's good for me (as, although I keep it as close as I dare, I will not drop below that line and lose everything). I don't think many obese people are actually told they will have to leave work as they are too heavy are they? Or, if they are, it would be because of health problems caused by their weight which, like in my similar but opposite situation, is fair enough.

I do disagree that obesity = laziness in the work place though.
We have 2 deputy heads.
One is 60ish but goes to the gym every day. Very fit, eats very healthily, teaches lots of sport, practises mindfulness, goes hiking blah blah blah. The other is 40ish but morbidly obese, never exercises and is a self confessed food addict.
One puts in a 70+ hour working week, is highly organised and disciplined, very effective, a calm, firm manager and thoroughly approachable and trusted by staff, parents and children.
The other is a clock watcher. Good at what they do but do the minimum of it and seek to offload onto others rather than be proactive and get things done.

The hard and efficient worker is the obese, non exercising one.

MyWineTeam True. I meant that it isn't always disabling but can be. That is why PIP/DLA and ESA benefits go by how symptoms affect someone on a day to day basis not by their diagnosis. Eg- someone with ME/CFS for example may be able to work but be too exhausted to have any social life or family life or hobbies. Another person with ME/CFS may be bed bound and can't even watch TV without getting a migraine, feeling sick etc.
Interestingly I found out the other day that kids who wet the bed can get DLA for it, but I am assuming that is if they have an actual debilitating condition which goes alongside it or is linked to it? Find it hard to believe one could get it for just enuresis with no other issues. Not that I',m saying they shouldn't get DLA if that is the case. Nappies, alarms and ,matress covers etc are expensive, whether they have any other condition or not.

ManicInsomniac I would hope people with anorexia and bulimia should be protected from discrimantion if they are still able to do the job. If they are too sick to work then that is different, same with obese people/Overeaters. But say someone discriminated against an anorexic or bulimic due to MH stigma or becaus eof their weight then i would HOPE they would be protected. Just as fat people should be.

I read something once, might have been on here, that food is the addiction/vice of the sensible and diligent but busy and stressed person. Apparently many adults, especially working mums I believe, feel under so much pressure to 'do it all' and need some kind of destructive and unhealthy outlet to turn to. Drugs, alcohol, smoking, gambling etc get passed by in their minds because they have families, jobs and responsibilities they can't forget about. So they turn to food - legal, cheap, not harmful short term and very, very comforting.

Hence a new epidemic of busy, active, successful, hardworking obese adults.

I have no evidence (as I said, I can't even remember where I read it) but it sounds like a solid explanation to me.

echt There is a strong disapproval of fatness in the UK. I get abuse on the streets from people. If on a good day I go out without my cane and still need to use a disabled seat on public transport I get threatened and told my only disability is fat. It isn't- I have Dystonia- BUT- even if my issues were just fat related, disability is disability in my book. People who try to drive their cars into walls and end up in wheelchairs are allowed to be treated as disabled and obesity is the same. really, if it is caused by an ED. Self-harm is self-harm IMO. But I do agree that in Japan the disapproval is stronger to the point where apparently it is illegal to emigrate to Japan if one is fat. I read it somewhere. Unless it is just a Daily Fail/Mirror horror story

That is a good point ManicInsomniac I also liked your example regarding the diligent worker being a fatty. The "fat people are slobs etc" is a stereotype. Obviously if one gets very obese and has a bad diet it can make someone sluggish and they may appear "lazy" but that isn't necessarily their true character. I believe obesity is unhealthy and I know the effects first hand. My knees hurt. I need a CPAP machine to breathe at night. It is affecting my health. BUT all the moral judgements of us fatties are no more true for us than for the next person. Those thin people who never exercise and eat junk food all day are still at risk of the the same coronaries or strokes as we fatties because WHAT you eat and how active you are is what makes the difference. When govmt talks of banning ops for non- fatal conditions for fatties they conveniently forget that a skinny person who eats macDs and pizza all day an ddoe snothing but sit at a desk or on the couch is at same risk of serious illness. Not arthritis and sleep apnea, maybe. But cardiovascular stuff, gout and vitamin deficiences, yes.

But I do agree that in Japan the disapproval is stronger to the point where apparently it is illegal to emigrate to Japan if one is fat. I read it somewhere. Unless it is just a Daily Fail/Mirror horror story

I know fat people who have done it, so I suspect it's horseshit.

Food isn't addictive. You just need self control. I don't think we should be normalizing unhealthy weights. We need to be pushing healthier lifestyles for all.