Buying goods and using services
The Equality Act makes it unlawful to discriminate against, harass or victimise someone when providing services, goods or facilities or when carrying out a public function, such as policing. For example, it is unlawful to refuse to serve a customer because he is gay.
The Act mainly brings together what was in previous law.
The Act extends protection to ban age discrimination when providing goods and services, which was not previously included in equality legislation. This would mean, for example, that it would be unlawful for a shop to refuse to serve an older customer, but age-related discounts and concessions would still be allowed. The Government has recently consulted on bringing this ban into force and making it work in practice. Click here to view a recent consultation on ending age discrimination in services, public functions and associations (opens in a new window)
Tell us what you think should happen to these measures and why, being specific where possible
- Should we scrap them altogether?
- Could their purpose be achieved in a non-regulatory way (eg through a voluntary code?) How?
- Could they be reformed, simplified or merged? How?
- Can we reduce their bureaucracy through better implementation? How?
- Can we make their enforcement less burdensome? How?
- Should they be left as they are?
Alternatives to gender based policies for opposite sex workers are now largely absent or ignored in single sex toilets and washing/showering/changing room facilities where permanent warning signs that male and female staff regularly check these facilities (or similar), are being used to allow free access to female facilities by male workers (and vice versa) by gaining implied consent from unsuspecting service users. In order that employers can reduce their cleaning costs and pay one worker, instead of two, people are being denied a choice to use a single sex facility provided for them with same sex privacy because employers are not compelled to apply Genuine Occupational Requirements ‘s (GOR) when it is proportionate and legitimate to do so, nor operating robust alternatives to a gender based policy for existing users, ie times of cleaning, same sex worker checks first and waits till existing users have finished. A survey shows that 1:3 people are being put off using a toilet when they need to but are deterred form complaining by being told that it is discrimination if they do. Many people (especially those with a history of sexual abuse), experience cross sex observation as abusive in itself, and should not be forced in to such situations when they need to use a toilet. Apart from severe embarrassment, this is a serious safeguarding concern as children and vulnerable groups may be alone with an opposite sex worker in an enclosed area. There are now more men than women cleaning women’s toilets because many women do not want jobs involving cleaning around men exposed at a urinal. Single sex services are needed now more than ever and should be what they say they are ie single sex, including the staff. Employers should not be allowed to employ opposite sex staff in areas where people may be undressed /using a toilet/urinal unless the facilities are fully enclosed unisex cubicles opening to a communal area.Comment Tags: Privacy and decency obsolete