To not like equal opportunity questions on job applications?

[malificent7]

I resent having to disclose my personal details and wonder if I said I was a transgender bisexual disabled bipolar Muslim if my application would get binned.

I don't trust the motives behind it...am I paranoid?

Sorry for lack of commas!

I must admit that I wonder whether they would be used for positive discrimination purposes. I always make sure to fill in the race section so that they know that I am not white white.

You don't have to answer the questions.
They are not generally part of the shortlisting process.

Just in case

You can tick "prefer not to say"

Ridiculous worrying from the OP.

Doesn't bother me, they are pretty standard nowadays.

If you don't answer employers likely think you have something to hide or are one of those people who pull apart everything.

They're usually on a separate form (or separate part of the form) because they get separated from the main application before it goes to the shortlister/interview panel. They help organisations figure out if they're managing to recruit and retain a diverse workforce but that's done via a separate process of reports and analysis.

I have never answered these questions. That is what Prefer not to answer is for.

When my office introduced the sexual orientation question the response rate was 10%.

That info shouldn't be passed on to anyone with responsibility for hiring. It's used for reporting purposes centrally and it should be optional.That doesn't stop you being discriminated against at interview if you're visibly disabled, trans, BME etc.

If you are so concerned tick prefer not to say. I for one am very happy that it is there, it is necessary for understanding processes of discrimination etc. It’s already known that people with names which aren’t identifiably white British are often penalised and are less likely to receive interviews etc. My only problem is not having a defined category to fit my ethnicity so I’m always ticking Other!

I always answer. If I don't get an interview, it's for one of two reasons: a) I wasn't good enough, in which case that's fine, or b) the prospective employer is discriminatory, in which case I wouldn't want to work there anyway!

I also just find it intrusive.

How is it intrusive if you can refuse to answer?
How are companies able to assess recruitment and retention without using these measures?
Do you realise there are legal obligations on companies to monitor equality and diversity?

The whole discrimination thing is pretty pointless anyway, because even though employers aren't supposed to discriminate thry can just give a different reason for not employing you.

I started a new job today and spent 2 hours filling out forms. On the what sex was: male, female, transgender, prefer not to say. I ticked female. Then there was title (I chose Ms) marital status and sexuality where I ticked prefer not to say for each. Then the employer asked to check I'd filled all of them in and I felt embarrassed, like I had something to hide. I see absolutely no reason why they needed to know. They say for equality but bullshit. Why ask those questions after offering the job in that case.

If you don't declare disability at the beginning you can't request reasonable adjustments for a condition you didn't declare initially. It's about retention as well as recruitment.

Where I work the forms are separate to the application form and don't go to the people shortlisting.

We also take the top sheet of the applications so name, dob etc also aren't seen.

They say for equality but bullshit. Why ask those questions after offering the job in that case.

Well because they use it for monitoring equality in pay, promotions, quit rates, etc. For instance, if they didn't ask about sex, they wouldn't be able to show that women leave the company in first 12 months at twice the rate of men. Or that while they are lots of gay employees at lower grades, none of them ever get promoted to management. And so on.

Whether a particular company actually does this monitoring properly is a different issue. But collecting the diversity data for each new employee is the start of a sensible process of identifying whether and where systematic problems lie.

If you personally don't want to answer, then don't 🤷

If you don't declare disability at the beginning you can't request reasonable adjustments for a condition you didn't declare initially.
Utter bollocks! You can declare your disability at any time during your employment and your employer is legally bound to make reasonable adjustments and you will be protected under the Equality Act.

They say for equality but bullshit. Why ask those questions after offering the job in that case.
Because that would prevent them from monitoring if their recruitment process routinely weeds out all the women or Asians etc

If the people monitoring the forms find out that their company isn't attracting applications from certain sectors of society, then there is an issue to be investigated.

Similarly, if they are attracting applications from all sectors of society but then they realise that they only offer jobs to white males, then that's also an issue.

People who usually complain about equal opportunities are usually people who don't face discrimination.

For large companies, how else can they check that they have a diverse workforce, that minorities are proportiontely represented, that equal opportunities HR policies are being followed etc...?

Monitoring is fine as long as management grasp that you cannot extrapolate from those who answer to those who don’t - so unless the no-reply rate is low the figures are meaningless and you cannot act on them. And there must be no pressure, actual or reasonably perceived, to answer.

I don’t like them either. I think it’s outrageous to differentiate everyone on those particular things.