Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

73% of employers admit to discriminating against the disabled and older ages during recruitment

A survey for the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH) undertaken by “YouGovStone” returned the devastating verdict that almost three quarters of employers would not give people on Incapacity Benefit (now Employment and Support Allowance) and older people, the opportunity to return to employment.

The article by Health Insurance Magazine, flipped this around saying that 27% of employers would still employ those on incapacity benefit and older people, and give them the opportunity in the economic recession of returning back to the workplace.  This has angered many Incapacity Benefit claimants.

Over a quarter (27%) of employers say they would still give people on incapacity benefit, and older people, the opportunity to return to the workplace, despite the economic recession. This finding, from a survey by YouGovStone on behalf of the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH), the world’s largest professional health and safety body, suggests that government plans to get two million people currently out of work back into the workplace can still be achieved. At the launch of its manifesto, ‘Creating a healthier UK plc’, in the House of Lords, IOSH called on the government to press ahead with its plan to get people back to work – stressing that the nation cannot afford to keep writing people off just because they are not 100% fit.

Under UK legislation it is unlawful for businesses to discriminate on disability and age.

Written by Universal Jobmatch

June 15, 2009 at 8:59 am

21 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I wonder what the figure is for the Unemployed (JSA claimants).

    Dan

    June 16, 2009 at 7:05 pm

  2. It must be very diffiuclt to prove a case of employment discrimination based on age, despite the legislation outlawing it.
    I wonder how we got to this stage in the UK? In America age doesn’t seem to be such a barrier to work opportunities or politics as it is here.

    Tipster

    June 28, 2009 at 6:42 pm

    • It is very difficult – this said it is rare for someone to be able to start a case if they have never been employed by that employer and the job is new. I would go as far to state that it is not seen as unlawful in that instance.

      If however you were denied say an promotion due to it and it was obvious that for example someone less qualified then you were given the position and an age different is significant you are more likely to have a case.

      Age discrimination only really applies to those on the higher end of the scale – there isn’t much the young ones can do.

  3. if my sick husband did not take ill health retirement because he gone blind through diabetes he would of been sacked as soon as he got ill in 2003 they wanted to sack him by dressing it up saying they want to help him my ars they did. me being sarcastic he worked for 31 years they even threatened to put off his ill health retirement if they did not hear by june from morefields then he would of had to claim esa what fuckers his employers lbh were now we get
    adaptions freethey have made some beautiful steps for us even aAAPTED OUR BATHROOM FOR NOUGHT
    AND NOT HAVE HAD TO PAY A PENNY
    BEAUTIFUL EXTRA RAILS AND WE DO NOT LIVE IN SOCIAL HOUSING ALL I SAY IS MPS ON THE TAKE LIKE BROWN CAMERON ALL OF THE FUCKERS CLAIM WHAT YOU CAN WHILE YOU CAN AS THEY HAVE THATS WHY JOHN LEWIS IS PROSPEROUS BECAUSE OF THE FUCKINGS MPS YET THEY WANT TO PUNISH DIASABLED PEOPLE LIKE MY HUSBAND I CANNOT WAIT TILL ELECTION TIME I WILL HAVE A RIGHT FUCKING GO AT THEM

    E Smith

    October 27, 2009 at 1:56 am

  4. […] 3 in 4 employers discriminate against disabled people and older ages […]

  5. I am disdabled and I have difficulty getting a job. Firstly I was treated awfully by A4E. inadequate paperwork, no paperwork incorrectly putting my telephonenumber on their systemtwice. Failing to contact me for my meeting. The list goes on and on.

    Say guys the EDL is coming back to dudley do you think if i was to put up a picture saying burn the place down i would get exited toooo

    Kyron

    April 22, 2010 at 5:50 pm

  6. Arn’t there opt out clauses for employers that employ below a “magic” number of people? As we all know by now it would never do under any circumstance to put the human rights and dignity of the most disadvantaged people over the “alledged” competitaveness of British buisnesses,(so expect small children to be stuck back up chimneys and down mines in the name of competitivness any day soon, ). To make matters worse it was obvious to the synical sods who draughted the magic number opt out that there are far more small buisnesses than large ones meaning that the discimination law in effect isn’t worth the paper its written on.

    Lowestoft's Finest

    April 22, 2010 at 7:16 pm

    • DDA compliance only applys to employers with a certain number of staff.

      Under DDA 95 Section 7 (“Exemption for small businesses”) employers with fewer than 20 staff are exempt.

      I thought it was a number like 5 or 6… so it might have been modified since to decrease this.

      Flexible New Deal

      April 22, 2010 at 8:55 pm

      • Thanks for the info Flexi,I bet whatever the magic figure is exploititive employers will still find a way round it. For a start does the legislation apply to all employees or just full time employees, and does it also apply to temporary employees as well? there is nothing to stop someone only taking on people as self employed to get round it and also saving on employee liability insurance.
        Recently to our amazement Lowestoft came top in the UK league table for buisness start ups.Though sadly the figures didn’t say how long they survived or reflect the fact the main reason people had to start their own buisness was they had been laid off from bigger buisnesses going bust or mooved here and realised the only real chance of ever getting a job in Lowestoft is to create your own. I looked at their average total jobs per buisness and it worked out to just bellow 2 (so probably just family members)but it doesn’t look good for disability rights legislation as we have less and less big firms here so in effect the legislation here would realy mainly effect public secter employers eg. Waveney District Council or NHS etc.

        lowestoft's finest

        April 23, 2010 at 1:11 pm

      • To be honest when it comes to older people being discriminated against (something I know about) I’d start it at over 40!

        The Civil Service exams themselves have a cut off point around there (for higher grades, the others are a bit older).

        Andrew Coates

        April 23, 2010 at 2:43 pm

      • LF: As far as I am aware it applies to all “workers” which could also apply to self-employed people as would be under a contract although not an employment contract.

        ” “employment” means, subject to any prescribed provision, employment under a contract of service or of apprenticeship or a contract personally to do any work, and related expressions are to be construed accordingly; ”

        No protection exists for those working on a ship, aircraft, hovercraft or people who do most of their work outside the country (even if they still work here).

        Places like Lowestoft have many schemes setup to help businesses there – which is primarily why so many employers are based outside many large cities and towns.

        Many businesses choose to setup at these places due to tax breaks and other incentives – in return for employing people.

        Have you thought of setting up a business?

        AC: Interesting to know. Ironically the first question of my latest job interview was “How old are you?” something which employers are not allowed to ask.

        Flexible New Deal

        April 23, 2010 at 5:43 pm

      • Hi Flexi and Andrew, the age discrimination thing is a real dog (especialy as I am rapidly turning into somewhat of an “old shuffler” as the kidz say .

        I have witnissed some mind bending age discrimination myself as I can remember seeing this bloke ring up for an advertised job as a labourer for a fence erecting company the bloke was 34 a body builder who also ran marathons as a hobby but the boss told him straight “I don’t employ any one over 30 as a labourer, I don’t care what your hobbies are !”
        Another time a now (ex) big Lowestoft print firm that frankly everybody knew was not going to be in existance in 18 months time (such was its debts) wanted to take on a machine minder but instead of employing any experiance machine minder which it could easily have done as many print firms in nearby Beccles had recently done some serious downsising so there was a huge supply of experianced people who needed no training and would have jumped at a years work).
        instead the Lowestoft print firm insisted that they would only take on a youngster on a 3 year apprenticeship (possibly for cheap labour resons) problem was all the youngsters rightfully figured out that the firm wasn’t going to be in existance to even complete the apprenticeship with, so nobody would touch it realised they were being had.

        Though employers arn’t meant to ask your age directly, it wouldn’t be two hard to get round this and get a pretty accurate estimate by craftily draughting the application forms to ask about secondary education schools dates attended along with qualifications (eg. O levels are a bit of a give away).

        On the subject of applying for jobs I wonder if it might be worth Ipswich Unemployed Action and (related network) giving out a warning about ID theft and CV safety eg. what personel info not to stick on your CV or to give out to potential employers along with safety for internet job registration sites etc. As ID theft is rife up here and still too many jobseekers don’t have a clue as what to not give out for ID safety.

        Here is a link to an experiment the Met tried

        http://www.iprofile.org/Career-Advice/Secure-Your-CV/

        lowestoft's finest

        April 23, 2010 at 7:47 pm

      • Cheers LF a great issue to raise.

        The problem is ID theft is relatively easy.

        The idea is to make yourself “available” that means you are expected to give the following details on CV:

        * Full Name (assumingly your legal name not shortened i.e. Daniel > Dan; Samantha > Sam; Stephen > Steve etc.)
        * Address
        * Telephone number
        * Mobile number (in a lot of cases)
        * Email address
        * Schools attended

        This is default stuff. They could also request National Insurance number – most people will be rather happy to give it – same with DOB. I get people once around every 2 weeks trying to post NI number, name, address and phone number on my blog!

        This assumes we are talking about spoof jobs with information sent to a criminal and abused with no interview. Go to an interview, take original for copying or a copy of birth certificate, passport, driving licence and NI card… how could you prove it was the employer?

        Shocking numbers of employers ask for you to prove your right to work in the UK at interview stage. The law states the evidence (for verification of Right to Work) is only required prior to offer of employment thus shouldn’t really be requested until later.

        Jobcentre Plus are to blame some of the jobs they allow advertise are absolute crap. Would you apply for a job to lowestoftshop@hotmail.com ? I wouldn’t… seen a lot of them recently. JCP has no concerns. As far as I am aware, the JCP LMS job site is very simple to list a “vacancy” online.

        Jobseekers are desperate bunch of people who will be the least conscious about ID theft. You have to be. You are jumping through hoops hoping for acceptance. No bullshit, a name and email address from a CV will in most cases will track most people down via facebook etc. – people will use same email address for personal and “business”. We have a lot of information published: electoral roll, perhaps telephone directory etc.

        You will be surprised how simple it is to get credit in other peoples’ names.

        Employment is one of the areas where so much information is dealt around with. Dating is also another, rather easy to pick up a lot of personal information.

        As for discrimination… it’s all bullshit, you can’t ask for age, race etc. on an application form, but you can request it via a mandatory “Recruitment Monitoring” form where it has to be submitted in the same envelope as the application form and normally can’t be filled in anonymously neither.

        A really great idea although I am rather stuck on what to advise. You can’t really trim the information given on a CV as it will result in it being rejected. You could get your telephone number masked with an 0845, 0870, 0871 or 070 number to prevent it being revealed but most employers will not ring a non-local number especially 070 and 0871 numbers which are very expensive to ring. Probably think you are sticking down a gay adult chat-line for a laugh.

        You could give a false name/alias but that won’t go down well, likely to cost you the job. Address? A PO Box would cost yet can be resolved back to the physical address anyway. You also can’t go around replacing words with an asterisk for each letter to hide certain information.

        As for other information, DOB and N.I. numbers should be avoided. A great link…

        I love this quote: “All CVs received as part of the experiment were destroyed, without being stored or shared, applicants were also informed that they were part of a controlled experiment, and that they would not be identified in any way” Does anyone see a problem with it?

        Flexible New Deal

        April 23, 2010 at 9:47 pm

  7. Hi Flexi,Yes the Met certainly did slip up on a few points allright. Another major thing they forgot about was a while back a load of jobseekers had their ID’s stolen by a bogus employment agency website, an awefull lot of time and money and expertise had gone into it so it realy looked like the real deal. Part of the scam was to register you basicly had to answer a list of just about every security question ever devised eg. mother’s maiden name, your middle name, favourite sports team, first pets name etc. This had the bonus effect that it gave out a false impression of security but the reality was the gang who set up the site had realised that too many people use the same passwords, security question answers everytime for everything so they now had a full list of answers. On top of the fact the job seekers had already contributed a huge amount of personal details.

    I’m now off to take my middle name off my CV.

    lowestoft's finest

    April 24, 2010 at 8:57 am

    • These employment agency scams are HUGE in the larger cities… they hire out office space, stick up professional looking signs, stick the “participants” on a computer to fill in an application form… its dead easy.

      You will be surprised to the extent of how people would:

      * stick down an email address for a login with a password which happens to be the password for the email address
      * if asked to create a “support” pin … use the pin for their debit card etc.

      I disagree with ID theft being this HUGE problem – although I agree it is a MAJOR concern.

      What do I mean? Everyday in so many ways we give out so much information. Comparing the extent of this and the number of ID theft crimes (sponsored by HMRC no less) although it is a large growing crime: as a percentage of all data potentially being abused it is a very RARE crime.

      Although efforts have been made to increase privacy – in fact nothing has happened as it doesnt matter how much is trying to be done, someone is also putting as much effort in for the opposite. Google StreetView is a good example of this.

      I would advise people to be intelligent at all times. When I am asked to enter the name of my secondary school I went to or mothers maiden name online – whether for email or social networking… I do not enter this information, nor do I pick an alternative…

      Mothers maiden name: #’ExmP13_0)=

      Not even a name, just random characters like a good password. Rather impossible to get around unless they find otu from you – difficult to specify over the phone though.

      I would advise not adding middle names or initials on CV – if you are that paranoid avoid having your legal first name… This could cause problems with some employers though.

      Flexible New Deal

      April 24, 2010 at 11:54 am

      • Unbelievable !!! I give up, after we try and warn jobseekers about ID theft by advising what not to include on CV’s and applications I have just caught a radio program on Radio 4 Called “Biometrics: An Identity Crisis” that poured scorn on the science behind the governments ID Card plan. To make matters worse they pointed out that the government’s ID Cards have 3 bits of info handy for ID thieves plasterd on the front of them which we have just warned Jobseekers to remove eg. Date Of Birth,Place Of Birth and full name. When Alan Johnson proudly held his ID card up to the cameras a scientist watching just wrote down the 3 details and sent off for a copy of his birth certificate (containing his mother’s maiden name as well) just to proove what an own goal the government had scored.But as per usual the normal govermental “we know best” attitude prevailed over reason and they are just ploughing on regardless despite apparantly their experts confusing their Irises with their Retinas and so confusing all the findings (makes a change from the usual not knowing arses from their elbows )? Maybe their next unsucessfull projest could be attempting to sucessfully organise a sociel gathering in a brewery?

        I Have atteached a link to the program page bellow which contains a listen again feature.

        http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00s0djj

        lowestoft's finest

        April 25, 2010 at 5:06 pm

      • Have you had to re-apply for the Dole? I am just finishing a placement and have to (another bonus – not). The form now includes demands for details about your identity which have grown beyond even their previous requirements.

        Andrew Coates

        April 27, 2010 at 2:48 pm

      • The ever increasing list of ID required isn’t to resolve potential ID theft and therefore benefit fraud but just to make it more difficult to claim.

        For example an ES40 booklet is enough to sign on (with the knowledge fo your address if you are asked to confirm and the ability to sign similar to the specimen)

        It is easy to obtain blank ES40 forms to fill in with anyones name or to produce your own replicas… of course, your name has to be on the list but typically they wont even check the NI number.

        Alternatively, forget (or lose) your ES40 then you are required for (certain) photo ID or bank card. They will not accept bank statements or letters because they consider it to be easy to obtain. (Although its just as easy to take someones credit or debit card)

        My point? An ES40 isn’t a form of ID. Nothing proves that you are the person’s name written on it. (hence why they ask for address confirmation etc.)

        However, an NI card, letter from DWP etc. contains same information apart from signing on details.

        Whereas a bank card which is accepted doesn’t specify the NI number and might even specify just the surname or first initial. (i.e. MR SMITH and MRS B JONES)

        Excuse the common examples, but on a weekly basis there is likely to be many Mr Smiths using the Jobcentre and perhaps a few Mrs Jones with first name beginning with B in a fortnight.

        But lets not go on about the list of ID required for re-applying for the dole!

        To make it worse, most these checks are performed on “oath” – the staff member just has to see it to tick a checkbox… no photocopying – which is annoying when for instance under New Deal it was your NDPA (who knew you when you had your previous claim) that processed the new claim.

        Even though you had an active claim before… and perhaps they had even saw the ID previously, you couldn’t progress until the tickbox had a tick. “No can do”.

        Flexible New Deal

        October 21, 2010 at 3:20 pm

      • This this forcing people into bedsits will only increase id fraud scams (and other forms of theft). At least payments are made direct into post office/bank accounts so nicking a giro out of the letter box isn’t an option.

        Bedsitter

        October 21, 2010 at 3:58 pm

      • It’s all about control of your “personal information” and not handing it over willy-nilly to random
        “third parties”.

        Bedsitter

        October 21, 2010 at 4:01 pm

  8. If a man of your calibre is having difficulties with the new dole application forms, spare a thought as to how Gordon Brown is meant to cope with them on the morning of May 7th ?

    lowestoft's finest

    April 27, 2010 at 7:05 pm


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: