![]() ![]() This is a form of encouragement to increase candidates for a post. Irrespective of the fact that they were legitimately appointed because they were the best candidate, the experience of previous positive discrimination may mean they are judged differently by their colleagues. There is also a risk of consequences for others with that same protected characteristic coming into the workplace. And finally detriment to the organisation can also come about from having employed someone who can’t deliver the product, affecting reputation and resulting in loss of income generation. Other candidates of course will feel unhappy and may make a legal challenge to the decision taken, which in itself can result in reputational and financial risk for the organisation. ![]() You also increase risk to their employment reputation amongst colleagues, potentially creating disharmony in the workplace. The first is that you may be placing the successful candidate at risk, asking them to carry out a role which they are not capable of and increasing their risk of stress or anxiety. Positive discrimination is unlawful discrimination.Įmploying someone who isn’t the best candidate can have a number of damaging consequences. Other candidates who are better qualified are passed over. An example might be an organisation appointing someone from an underrepresented group into a role without considering whether they have right skills for the post. This is a form of discrimination that favours someone by treating them differently in a positive way. The truth is that there is some real confusion around the concept of positive action and most people will only see it as another form of discrimination. Most equality and diversity officers or specialists will have been asked to explain the difference between positive discrimination and positive action. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |