• Media Enquiries

    07505 448925(24hr)

We mustn’t discriminate against the unreliable

Jobcentre This absurd story has understandably been reported everywhere this morning:

Nicole Mamo, 48, wanted to post an advert for a £5.80-an-hour domestic cleaner on her local Jobcentre Plus website.

The text of the advert ended by stating that any applicants for the post ''must be very reliable and hard-working''.

But when Ms Mamo called the Jobcentre Plus in Thetford, Norfolk, the following day she was told that her advert would not be displayed instore.

A Jobcentre Plus worker claimed that the word ''reliable'' meant they could be sued for discriminating against unreliable workers (from the Daily Telegraph)

Unsurprisingly the DWP have refused to comment, which makes me suspect that rather than a general rule, this was one officious member of staff at the Jobcentre taking the law into their own hands.

Nevertheless, it says something about society today that those working in the public sector are so afraid to not be discriminatory they end up seeing discrimination in everything.

More to the point, it reinforces the need for people and politicians alike to give far greater scrutiny to things like Harriet Harman’s Equality Bill.

By Dylan Sharpe

Posted on January 27, 2010 by Big Brother Watch Posted in Home
  • http://alastairs-place.net alastair

    If “reliable” is against the rules, surely “hard-working” should be too? After all, we mustn’t discriminate against the lazy. :-D
    I had a similar problem trying to advertise for a “Junior Software Engineer”. I was told by at least three people that because of the “Age Discrimination Act” (which, of course, doesn’t exist), I wasn’t allowed to advertise a vacancy with the word “Junior” in the job title.
    This despite the fact that (a) it would have been me as an employer that was liable, and (b) the law (actually a Statutory Instrument called the “Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006″) doesn’t say I can’t use the word “Junior” anyway.
    This phenomenon (officious assertions about rules that don’t exist) seems to be concentrated in areas surrounding equality, health and safety and data protection legislation. My approach to it when confronted with it is to ask them to cite the applicable legislation, or to go and read the legislation myself and quote it back to them. Even then, sometimes they are sufficiently ignorant that they still ignore what the law says in favour of what they think it might say.

  • Equality Street

    As an unreliable person myself I was delighted to see this story… People are always on my back for my poor punctuality and clumsiness, not to mention my drinking on the job. But seriously, Harriet is seriously harmin’ this country. What a depressing story to start the day

  • Purlieu

    Surely selecting an employee can only involve discrimination, that’s what the process is.
    Otherwise we’d just take the first one through the door whatever ….

  • http://cazzyjones.blogspot.com/ Cazzy Jones

    You couldn’t make it up. Here’s my own take on it – the Ability Discrimination Act – with all due acknowledgments.
    http://cazzyjones.blogspot.com/2010/01/whingeing-britain-1-ability.html

  • Shy Hermit

    I had better be careful not to say anything too clever or witty or littrut, or the Harridan may get me.
    Yes, it is the politicians who set the tone, the poor plebs just try and echo it. Who can keep up with all the nuances of the constantly mutating law anyway? “We have the power, you don’t”, is the gist of the message most people actually hear. Many people just try to behave like whoever is in power.
    Harriet Harman: I cannot think of her without recalling Kurt Vonnegut’s “Diana Moon Glampers” – the handicapper general, from the story “Harrision Bergeron”.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron

  • Steve Clarke

    The Job Centre employee may find him or herself in need of the services of the recruitment agency in the very near future if this is an example of their performance come annual apparaisals!!!!