is this the new thing now..?

Oldernotwiser

sigrid wrote: »

it's different for disabilities because quite often you have to judge them on an individual case but in regards to the race issue, I think the fact people have to state what race they are shows that we are no further forward now in our diversity than we were 20-30 years ago except for the fact that people now don't say the things they are thinking out loud.

The only place you have to give details of race is on the ethnic monitoring forms which are confidential and kept separately from your job application, often being submitted in a sealed envelope.

HappyG1rl

starsinmycrown wrote: »

Really disappointed, applied for a job that I really wanted to do, and I could do, and the application form comes back. its 30 points listed on the person spec, and the application form is 30 points- you have to answer each one with evidence of how you have done this in the past.

Now although I know I can do some of the things, I haven't actually done them before, and i have no examples. It really sucks and some of the examples are just stupid like "I have implemented my commitment to equality and diversity in the workplace"

One of the posters (Sigrid) has responded that showing commitment to equality and diversity can be demonstrated by having taken on someone who is disabled.

This IS NOT an appropriate example of commitment to equality. That is probably an example of positive discrimination (i.e. discriminating in favour of a disabled person) which is pretty much the opposite of what they are asking.

Commitment to equality is actually shown by treating all people in the same way irrespective of differences between them in terms of gender, sexual orientation, ethnic background, race, colour or able-bodiedness. Equality is NOT showing positive discrimination but actually judging everyone on the same merits and it means not noticing and taking and differences into consideration in your treatment of people. For instance if you were employing someone then their suitability for the job would be assessed on the same criteria for everybody - can they do the job? Then you would interview the people whose applications/cv shows they are capable of doing the job and whether they are able-bodied or black or a woman or a homosexual would not affect whether you interview them or not.