Equal opportunities
p. Here’s an interesting situation; a shop called [“Bravissimo(Bravissimo web page)”:http://www.bravissimo.com/home.html] is opening up in Oxford, selling lingerie for the larger-busted woman. They recently placed an advert in the appointments pages of the local paper for bra-fitters. Of course they couldn’t specify that it was open to women only, because of equal opportunities legislation, but do you think that they would actually invite any male applicants for interview? Assuming that they would be worried about—how can I phrase it delicately—applicants getting an inappropriate level of satisfaction from the job, then they might also be worried about gay women applying. But you can’t ask people about their sexuality either, so they seem to have a bit of a difficult task.
p. What we have here is a modern legal minefield.
1
I've often wondered on that one myself - when Knickerbox or lingerie departments in general are advertising.
The real minefield is that if a man does apply, and he's savvy on these things ( I know that "savvy man" is a bit of an oxymoron, but bear with me here - I did say IF) then he can raise a discrimination case simply on not getting an interview. Unless the company really knows what it's doing, they're in a world of illogical but legal hurt - the employment policy is sexist because no men work there, a man applied, didn't get the interview, therefore they're not even trying to balance out the workforce.
Mind you, I've always also wondered how the porn shops, Private stores etc. get their staff too - it's not like they advertise or anything. I can't even begin to imagine what the interview technique's like, let alone the product knowledge.----- the ann summers chain recently fought for, and won, the right to advertise its jobs in job centers [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3077411.stm ]. i'm not sure how the process works -- does the employer have to interview everyone the job centre puts forward?
by dvd @ 21/08/2003 11:08 am • Permalink •
2
hmm, do you like my multicultural approach to the spelling of 'centre'? i'm anything but consistent.
by dvd @ 21/08/2003 12:08 pm • Permalink •
3
Jobs like this, and others like lavatory attendents, are exempt from sex discrimination legislation.
by Phil @ 21/08/2003 8:09 pm • Permalink •
4
Phil: Really? I never knew that. You learn something every day.
dvd: I think that the deal is that the applicant is obliged to go to anything the job centre digs up, or they lose their benefits. And I didn't notice the inconsistent spelling until you pointed it out
I have terrible trouble with -ise vs. -ize, as you've probably noticed by now.
Lyle: I think I'd rather not know how private shops advertise or recruit...
by bsag @ 22/08/2003 6:08 pm • Permalink •
5
More on 'genuine occupational qualifications', if anyone's interested, at http://www.eoc.org.uk/cseng/advice/the_law.asp
by Phil @ 22/08/2003 6:09 pm • Permalink •
6
if only they would have such jobs in asia. that would be a great laugh!
by ming @ 25/08/2003 6:09 am • Permalink •
7
"More on 'genuine occupational qualifications', if anyone's interested, here"
The link's dead. Would you mind elaborating. I was unaware that professions that require intermit contact were in any way granted special status under sex discrimination law. I would for instance presume a male gynaecologist could sue say bupa over sex discrimination and a breast exam is a great deal more intimate than a bra fitting.
by peter clark @ 23/12/2006 1:03 am • Permalink •
Page 1 of 1 pages