| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. David Chidgey (Eastleigh): I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: With this, it will be convenient to discuss the following: New clause 5--Discrimination in the work-place on grounds of sexual orientation--
'--(1) The Secretary of State may make regulations for the purpose of prohibiting, in relation to any employment matter, discrimination by an employer against another person on grounds of that person's sexual orientation.
(2) In subsection (1) "employment matter" includes--
(a) the offer or refusal of employment;
(b) the termination of employment;
(c) terms and conditions of employment;
(d) the provision of training or skills development opportunities;
(e) promotion and career progression.
(3) Regulations under subsection (1) may--
(a) specify the types of action, or failure to take action, which are to be taken to constitute discrimination for the purpose of this section;
(b) confer jurisdiction (including exclusive jurisdiction) on employment tribunals and on the Employment Appeal Tribunal in relation to cases brought under this section;
(c) provide for penalties to be imposed or, as the case may be, compensation to be awarded in respect of offences committed under paragraph (a) above.
(4) No regulations shall be made under this section unless a draft has been laid before, and approved by resolution of, each House of Parliament.'.
New clause 6--Discrimination in the work-place (general prohibition)--
Mr. Chidgey:
The new clauses deal primarily with discrimination in employment. New clause 4 would prohibit discrimination on the ground of age, new clause 5 on the ground of sexual orientation, and new clause 6 on any grounds that the Secretary of State may from his experience see fit to specify.
The new clauses expose a glaring omission in the Bill. The Government failed to grasp the opportunity to end discrimination in the workplace. They also expose a basic breach of a pledge made by the Government during the general election. Having made such a blatant remark,
if Labour Members doubt me I refer them to their manifesto, which I happen to have in my hand. I am sure that we all remember it. Page 35 talks in glowing terms of equal rights for the citizen. It says:
Mr. Fabricant:
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Chidgey:
I shall make a little progress and then I shall be happy to give way. It should be a fundamental right that no person should suffer discrimination on the grounds of race, creed, gender, age or sexual orientation. I hope that that is a view shared by every hon. Member, regardless of party. I give way to the hon. Member for Lichfield (Mr. Fabricant).
Mr. Fabricant:
I wished to make a comment that was appropriate to the point that the hon. Gentleman was making, but he has moved on and I do not want to break his flow.
Mr. Chidgey:
The hon. Gentleman is so kind. Sadly, the moment comes and then it goes.
It surely must be the view of each and every Labour Member who campaigned throughout the general election on the basis of new Labour's manifesto pledges that no person should suffer discrimination. Discrimination on the grounds of age and sexual orientation is not prohibited by law, yet it is just as prevalent and pernicious in the workplace as any other form of discrimination.
New clause 4 would prohibit discrimination on the ground of age. I want to take a few salient examples of areas in which such discrimination is rife. The teaching profession is one. We are told that there is a crisis in teacher supply, but it could be that schools are guilty of ageism. Whenever we have reports of shortages of teachers, a few days later there is a flurry of letters in the broadsheets from older teachers who complain that they cannot get jobs even in maths and science, which are areas of scarcity.
I raised this matter in Committee, and it is worth emphasising the work of Alan Smithers, a professor of education at Liverpool university. He cites many examples of discrimination on the ground of age. A gentleman referred to as Bob has a degree in chemistry and 22 years of experience in industry. He trained as a teacher in 1997 as a second career. He applied for more than 50 jobs and received just six interviews, but each time the post went to a younger person. All that he can get is part-time supply work.
The second case is a woman called Melissa, a teacher of secondary maths--another area of shortage. She broke off to do educational research and she has come back with a PhD in education, but she is unable to get a post as a teacher. A gentleman called John happens to live, and previously worked, in my constituency in Eastleigh.He has a 2.1 honours degree and a PhD in modern languages--supposedly very much a shortage subject. He qualified as a teacher 27 years ago and at that time had no problem getting a job. Since then, he has worked for many years as a teacher, three as a head of a modern languages department. He then spent eight years training
teachers as a senior lecturer in a local college of higher education, but following a change in the college's curriculum his post was declared redundant when the language teaching area was closed down. That was three years ago.
In the past three years, John has applied for more than 160 teaching posts. Not one has resulted in a job offer, even though he has kept his teaching experience up to date and modern by working continually as a supply teacher. On the rare occasions on which he has reached the shortlist for a job, he has been told, "You were the best candidate, but we chose someone less well qualified because we thought they would fit in better with a younger team." Or he was told, "We are under a lot of pressure these days to appoint bright young people." John is an extremely successful teacher. His referees confirm that he delivers considerable value for money, but his problem is that he is 47.
Mr. Brady:
Many of the cases that the hon. Gentleman cites are worthy. Will he comment on the situation that I know frequently to be the case in the employment of teachers? The reason why an older teacher is not engaged is not simply age but the fact that he would be more expensive to recruit because he is more experienced. I wonder how the hon. Gentleman's new clause would apply in those circumstances.
Mr. Chidgey:
The hon. Gentleman makes a good point. If he will allow me, I will come to that and explain the position. Interestingly enough, John has gone through just those hoops. If the hon. Gentleman will be patient for a moment, I will come to the point that he makes.
John is told by the Association of Teachers Against Ageism that his case is typical. The statistics show that teachers of 45 or over are twice as likely to be unemployed six months after completing their training as new teachers in their 20s.
Ageism is by no means confined to teaching. John wrote to me in August last year and to the Department for Education and Employment at the same time. The DFEE replied sympathetically. It said:
Ageism is by no means confined to teaching; it can be found in many professions. It is certainly present in the mercantile marine--an area of employment that is, or at least used to be, prevalent in Southampton, with its shipping interests. I know of many examples of ageism. One is of a chief engineer with 30 years of experience, 10 years as chief officer. He applied for a job on an oil tanker, but was told that the company did not employ chief engineers over 45.
A deck officer qualified as a pilot and went on deep sea duties to acquire the experience that he needed atsea to apply for the senior positions for which he
was qualified, but by the time that he had acquired a suitable certificate, he was 39. He was refused the post as a pilot because he was too old. He had to go to sea to get the experience, and that took time, but by the time he got back he was too old to get to the job.
'--(1) The Secretary of State may make regulations for the purpose of prohibiting, in relation to any employment matter, discrimination by an employer against another person on any grounds specified in the regulations.
(2) In subsection (1) "employment matter" includes--
(a) the offer or refusal of employment;
(b) the termination of employment;
(c) terms and conditions of employment;
(d) the provision of training or skills development opportunities;
(e) promotion and career progression.
(3) Regulations under subsection (1) may--
(a) specify the types of action, or failure to take action, which are to be taken to constitute discrimination for the purpose of this section;
(b) confer jurisdiction (including exclusive jurisdiction) on employment tribunals and on the Employment Appeal Tribunal in relation to cases brought under this section;
(c) provide for penalties to be imposed or, as the case may be, compensation to be awarded in respect of offences committed under paragraph (a) above.
(4) No regulations shall be made under this section unless a draft has been laid before, and approved by resolution of, each House of Parliament.'.
"We will seek to end unjustifiable discrimination wherever it exists."
That is a sound sentiment, and it is one that I am happy to endorse.
8.15 pm
"Ministers believe that schools recognise that more experienced teachers have much to offer . . . They are also aware that experienced teachers entitled to a higher salary felt they could be at a disadvantage. They have, therefore, introduced"--
not are taking, but have introduced--
"a measure to assist schools who employ teachers with an entitlement to a higher salary."
That was last September. I went to see John in Eastleigh at the weekend. His job applications tally has now risen to 185 and he still has no offer of a post.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |