Policy Exchange article by Paul Yowell - The Future of Equality

[highame]

policyexchange.org.uk/publication/the-future-of-equality/

Sincere apologies if this has already been posted somewhere.

I haven't had chance to read but glanced through and unconscious bias training As one commentator noted recently: ‘Looking at the meteoric rise of unconscious bias training, it’s hard not to suspect that its ascent was directly related to its relatively low cost. For businesses and other big organisations, having something to point to when a PR response is needed is highly useful, even if that "something” is a brief quiz administered online. At the same time, it averts the need for more costly interventions also

Protecting people from upsetting ideas or speeches and Recruitment for employment and appointments. There is an increasing tendency for public appointments to include a candidate’s understanding of and commitment to diversity issues as part of the criteria for appointment. Many positions currently advertised in the civil service, heritage sector, and National Health Service require candidates to have ‘a strong commitment to diversity, inclusion and providing opportunities for all’ (or a similarly worded requirement) and often to demonstrate that commitment through evidence or a written diversity statement.

This paper is part of the debate on where equality has been and where it is headed. Unresearched ideas have sprouted up and been implemented to save money but have had implications for our freedoms as women.

It's a lengthy read but I hope useful. Will try and make some space later today for a good look.

Interesting. I liked the reforms he has suggested:
“After providing an overview of the background of the Equality Act and its main provisions, this report offers an analysis of four key areas and with some proposals for reform:

1. The Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) should be amended so that the requirement to promote diversity includes diversity of political opinion, and to stress the need for tolerance of differing political, philosophical, and religious opinions, especially in educational institutions. Furthermore, the Equality Act should be amended to adopt as part of the PSED a principle of reasonable accommodation that aims to promote mutual cooperation among individuals with differing opinions and beliefs.
2. The prohibition on discrimination in the Act should be amended

to clarify the conditions under which direct discrimination can be found. Current case law rules out looking to a defendant’s intent while allowing for liability on the basis of subconscious bias. The lack of clarity over mental state has led to unsatisfactory results in some cases.

1. The Act should be amended so that the issue of whether conduct amounts to prohibited harassment is judged by a standard of objective reasonableness. Further, the prohibition on harassment should be amended to clarify the relationship between the Equality Act and legal protection of freedom of speech, in order to ensure that the right to free speech (in universities and elsewhere) is not defeated by claims that speech will cause offence or discomfort.
2. The Act should be amended to counter the effect of Grainger v Nicholson (2010), which adopted a test for what counts as a ‘belief’ under the Act that has led to exclusion of beliefs that should have been protected.”

Another thread I this posted last night.

Reform of EA2010 http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4355488-reform-of-ea2010

But this is very useful to be plucked out.

Protecting people from upsetting ideas or speeches and Recruitment for employment and appointments. There is an increasing tendency for public appointments to include a candidate’s understanding of and commitment to diversity issues as part of the criteria for appointment.

Off to read the whole thing and not just skim read, I think there could be some confusion or misinterpretation of what is actually being suggested by this think tank so of to get a better grip on it!

I found this interesting so I did a couple of online unconscious bias tests. The answers were all either bleeding obvious or highly questionable.

If anyone is paying anything at all for stuff like this they are being ripped off. Even if they're free it would be hard to find a less useful way for staff to spend their time - give them all the afternoon off instead.