Women’s equality in the UK – A health check

Recommendations

Info

2.1 2.2 2.3 Article 2 – Legislative approach to obligations to eliminate discrimination It should be noted that as a result of devolution different legislative provision applies within the UK. In its 2008 Concluding Observations the Committee expressed concern that “public bodies, including Government ministries, have faced difficulties in developing results-based and action-oriented equality schemes and in mainstreaming gender equality into all policies and processes”. 1 There has been no improvement in this situation. Legislation, such as the Equality Act 2010, 2 is not routinely monitored for its impact, and protection in law across the UK is not consistent. In its concluding recommendations the Committee also repeated its previous recommendation for all rights under CEDAW to be incorporated into domestic law and asked for the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED), which forms part of the Act, to be brought into law right across the UK (para 265). However, this has yet to be achieved and the new PSED, which came into existence in April 2011, is already being reviewed with the possibility of its abolition. 3 Legislation to improve gender equality, such as the Equal Pay Act 4 and laws on crimes against women, does not result in substantive change as detailed later in the report. The mainstreaming of gender equality, despite the Equality Act, is still insufficient. 5 There are also significant differences in legal protection for women in different parts of the UK 6 and this is not always acknowledged when policy is set. (See Annex 1) The Government see their role as “moving beyond simply introducing more legislation, to promoting equality through transparency and behaviour change”. 7 There is considerable evidence that the Government views legislation to promote women’s equality as a barrier to economic growth which constitutes a serious potential limitation to the full implementation of CEDAW. The Government’s Plan for Growth 8 (its blueprint for the UK’s economic strategy), states: “Our economy needs to become much more dynamic, less burdened by pointless barriers”. Elsewhere in the report they say: “government needs to be pro-active in ensuring policy acts in a way that supports growth rather than hampers it. This requires tough choices and putting economic growth ahead of other priorities.” In this context, the Government goes on to state: “to minimise regulatory burdens, the Government will scrap proposals for specific regulations which would have cost business over £350m a year. This includes not extending the right to request time to train to businesses with less than 250 employees and not bringing forward the dual discrimination rule”. They further announced that they will repeal the right to request flexible working to parents of 17 year olds that was planned, which would have had an ‘administrative burden’ costing £0.5m; and would 1. CEDAW Committee (2008) Concluding observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Forty-first session http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N09/555/92/PDF/ N0955592.pdf?OpenElement 2. Equality Act 2010 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents 3. Crowther, N. (2013) ‘Will the Public Sector Equality Duty survive the Red Tape Challenge?’, UK Human Rights Blog, 22nd March 2013 http:// ukhumanrightsblog.com/2013/03/22/will-the-public-sector-equality-duty-survive-the-red-tape-challenge-neil-crowther/ 4. Equal Pay Act 1970 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1970/41 5. Equality and Human Rights Commission (2012) Making Fair Financial Decisions Final Report. EHRC: London http://www. equalityhumanrights.com/legal-and-policy/inquiries-and-assessments/section-31-assessment-of-hm-treasury/the-assessment-finalreport/ 6. For example, in the Public Sector Equality Duty: see http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/equalities/equality-act/equality-duty/ 7. Government Equalities Office (2010) The Equality Strategy – Building a Fairer Britain. GEO: London http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/ publications/equalities/equality-strategy-publications/equality-strategy/equality-strategy?view=Binary and CEDAW 55th session (2013) List of issues and questions with regard to the consideration of periodic reports: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Addendum: Replies of United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the list of issues to be taken up in connection with the consideration of its seventh periodic report, 5th February 2013 http://www2.ohchr.org/English/bodies/cedaw/docs/ CEDAW.C.GBR.Q.7.Add.1.pdf 8. HM Treasury and Department for Business Innovation and Skills (2011) Plan for Growth http://cdn.hm-treasury.gov.uk/2011budget_growth. pdf 28 Women’s equality in the UK: CEDAW shadow report 2013
2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 consult to “remove the unworkable requirement in the Equality Act [2010] for businesses to take reasonable steps to prevent persistent harassment of their staff by third parties as they have no direct control over it, which would save £0.3m”. We are further concerned by the following statement: “The Government will seek to revise numerous EU regulations and directives. The Government has identified specific areas where improvements can be made [on] EU maternity and paternity rights. The European Parliament’s position on the Pregnant Workers directive would give 20 weeks’ maternity leave and two weeks’ paternity leave, in principle on full pay, which would cost UK businesses in excess of an extra £2bn a year, with most benefits going to the highest paid women. The Government will seek to prevent costly and regressive changes to maternity rights.” What the Government calls ‘red tape’ for businesses are the rights of millions of women (and men). Improved employment rights have helped huge numbers of women – old, young and mothers - to enter the workforce. These rights remain indispensable to the large numbers of women who are now required to enter the workforce or are moving into employment in the private sector. (See Article 11 for further information) Legislation Since 2008 there have been positive legislative changes that impact on women’s rights. This is obviously good news, however, although there has been welcome legislation, often the implementation has been inadequate or there have been reservations about it in terms of the impact on women’s rights in practice. For example, the 2006 Equality Act 9 brought in the Public Sector Duty to promote gender equality and develop gender equality schemes which required public bodies to identify gender equality objectives and set out how the organisation would achieve them. At the last examination the Committee praised the introduction of the Gender Equality Duty (GED), which only became law in 2007, this required public bodies to take action on their most important gender equality issues across their functions and acknowledged that many services and policies have been designed in a ‘gender-neutral’ way which fails to take account of the different needs of women and men and therefore had a limited understanding of substantive equality. In fact the GED was often misinterpreted by public bodies that used it to argue against women-only services but with the introduction of the Equality Act 2010 the GED was amalgamated into the Act and lost many of its specific obligations and understanding of substantive equality. The PSED also removes the need to demonstrate ‘due regard’. 10 We are concerned that changes to legislation have in fact reduced women’s rights and increased their inequality. For example Public Service Agreements (PSAs) were highlighted 9. Equality Act 2006 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/3 10. Equality Act 2010, Section 149 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/149 states that a public authority must, in carrying out its functions, have ‘due regard’ to the need to: eliminate all forms of discrimination, harassment and victimisation that are prohibited by the Equality Act; and advance equality of opportunity; and foster good relations. The duty will be properly discharged only when each of the above requirements is properly taken into account. Having ‘due regard’ to the need to advance equality of opportunity is further defined in s.149 as having ‘due regard’ to the need to: remove or minimise disadvantages connected with a relevant ‘protected characteristic’ (e.g. address the problems that women have in accessing senior positions in the workplace); take steps to meet the different needs of persons who share a relevant ‘protected characteristic’ (e.g. ensure the particular needs of BME women fleeing domestic violence are met); encourage persons who share a relevant ‘protected characteristic’ to participate in public life or any other activity in which they are under-represented (e.g. take steps to encourage more disabled people to apply for senior posts in the civil service). Having ‘due regard’ to the need to foster good relations is further defined in S.149 as having ‘due regard’ to the need to: tackle prejudice (e.g. tackle homophobic bullying in schools); promote understanding (e.g. promote understanding of different faiths). Organisations that are not ‘public authorities’ are also required to have ‘due regard’ to the needs listed above whenever they carry out ‘public functions’. This could include, for example, a private company with a contract to provide certain public services. In Trades Union Congress (2011) Equality Duty Toolkit. TUC: London http://www.tuc.org.uk/equality/tuc-20159-f0.pdf Women’s equality in the UK: CEDAW shadow report 2013 29
Page 1 and 2: Women’s equality in the UK - A he
Page 3 and 4: Women’s equality in the UK - A he
Page 5 and 6: Appendices (online only) Appendix 1
Page 7 and 8: • the continued discrimination ag
Page 9 and 10: • Develop a common model of analy
Page 11 and 12: Article 9 - Nationality: One third
Page 13 and 14: investment in social infrastructure
Page 15 and 16: and increase the marginalisation of
Page 17 and 18: have been no prosecutions in Englan
Page 19 and 20: 1 2 3 4 5 Introduction This is a Un
Page 21 and 22: 10 11 12 13 housing crisis, a ‘lo
Page 23 and 24: 1.1 1.2 1.3 Article 1 - Overarching
Page 25 and 26: 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 1.11 1.12 Women’
Page 27: 1.17 1.18 1.19 Young women We are a
Page 31 and 32: 2.12 2.13 discrimination”. Howeve
Page 33 and 34: 2.17 2.18 2.19 2.20 2.21 worsen gen
Page 35 and 36: 2.26 2.27 2.28 2.29 CEDAW and the l
Page 37 and 38: 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10 would “increase
Page 39 and 40: 3.15 3.16 3.17 and accountable EHRC
Page 41 and 42: 3.22 3.23 3.24 report is was partic
Page 43 and 44: classes, migrants, and Gypsy, Trave
Page 45 and 46: the institutional discrimination an
Page 47 and 48: 5.5 5.6 5.7 Case study: 8 Sandra li
Page 49 and 50: 5.12 5.13 5.14 issue. A more approp
Page 51 and 52: 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 Article 6 - Exploit
Page 53 and 54: 6.9 6.10 6.11 to the protection and
Page 55 and 56: 6.15 6.16 6.17 6.18 Office’s own
Page 57 and 58: 6.24 6.25 6.26 women and increase t
Page 59 and 60: 6.31 6.32 6.33 6.34 infrequent lap
Page 61 and 62: 7.1 7.2 Article 7 - Political and p
Page 63 and 64: 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.10 The House of Lords
Page 65 and 66: 7.13 7.14 7.15 7.16 7.17 Recommenda
Page 67 and 68: 7.21 7.22 7.23 Political representa
Page 69 and 70: 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 Article
Page 71 and 72: 9.9 9.10 Mainstreaming gender in th
Page 73 and 74: 9.15 9.16 9.17 biased views towards
Page 75 and 76: 9.21 9.22 9.23 9.24 women. 47 (See
Page 77 and 78: 9.28 9.29 9.30 9.31 New family migr
Page 79 and 80:
9.35 9.36 UKBA, where men and women
Page 81 and 82:
9.39 9.40 9.41 9.42 • Do not redu
Page 83 and 84:
9.46 Research on immigration case m
Page 85 and 86:
10.5 10.6 10.7 10.8 10.9 The Educat
Page 87 and 88:
10.13 10.14 10.15 10.16 boys and on
Page 89 and 90:
10.22 10.23 allow speakers to promo
Page 91 and 92:
10.29 10.30 10.31 10.32 Case study:
Page 93 and 94:
10.37 10.38 10.39 10.40 • Many wo
Page 95 and 96:
10.46 10.47 10.48 applications (fig
Page 97 and 98:
11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 Article 11 - Em
Page 99 and 100:
11.8 11.9 are 754,000 women working
Page 101 and 102:
11.14 11.15 11.16 11.17 11.18 The g
Page 103 and 104:
11.24 11.25 11.26 per week or they
Page 105 and 106:
11.31 11.32 11.33 Introducing more
Page 107 and 108:
11.37 11.38 Case study: 83 Jasmine
Page 109 and 110:
11.42 11.43 11.44 11.45 At the 2012
Page 111 and 112:
12.3 12.4 12.5 12.6 of women and en
Page 113 and 114:
12.12 12.13 12.14 12.15 Translators
Page 115 and 116:
12.19 12.20 12.21 12.22 Barriers to
Page 117 and 118:
12.25 12.26 12.27 12.28 Gypsy and T
Page 119 and 120:
12.34 12.35 12.36 12.37 Older women
Page 121 and 122:
12.41 12.42 Recommendations: • Th
Page 123 and 124:
12.47 12.48 12.49 12.50 they are at
Page 125 and 126:
12.55 12.56 12.57 Case studies: 128
Page 127 and 128:
12.60 12.61 12.62 12.63 12.64 hospi
Page 129 and 130:
13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 13.5 Article 13
Page 131 and 132:
13.11 13.12 13.13 13.14 children ne
Page 133 and 134:
13.17 13.18 13.19 13.20 Welfare ref
Page 135 and 136:
13.25 13.26 13.27 13.28 because in
Page 137 and 138:
13.32 13.33 Case study: 57 “As a
Page 139 and 140:
13.36 13.37 allocation of resources
Page 141 and 142:
13.41 13.42 Homelessness, including
Page 143 and 144:
13.47 13.48 BME women would be left
Page 145 and 146:
13.52 13.53 13.54 13.55 with some l
Page 147 and 148:
13.60 13.61 13.62 effect to their p
Page 149 and 150:
14.6 14.7 14.8 disabled and lesbian
Page 151 and 152:
14.14 Gypsy and Traveller women suf
Page 153 and 154:
15.6 15.7 15.8 15.9 15.10 15.11 The
Page 155 and 156:
15.14 15.15 15.16 purport to be vic
Page 157 and 158:
15.21 15.22 15.23 Case study: 35
Page 159 and 160:
15.28 15.29 15.30 15.31 has not pro
Page 161 and 162:
15.35 15.36 behaviour by male priso
Page 163 and 164:
16.5 16.6 people being forced into
Page 165 and 166:
16.10 16.11 16.12 16.13 16.14 16.15
Page 167 and 168:
16.21 16.22 frequently women’s ac
Page 169 and 170:
Recommendations: • Parents with c
Page 171 and 172:
19.6 19.7 19.8 as well as for our c
Page 173 and 174:
19.13 19.14 19.15 19.16 The Governm
Page 175 and 176:
19.22 19.23 19.24 19.25 VAWG is a c
Page 177 and 178:
19.30 19.31 19.32 19.33 DV is still
Page 179 and 180:
19.38 19.39 19.40 perpetrators thro
Page 181 and 182:
19.43 19.44 19.45 Support for victi
Page 183 and 184:
19.49 19.50 19.51 19.52 Recommendat
Page 185 and 186:
19.57 19.58 19.59 19.60 BMER VAWG p
Page 187 and 188:
19.62 19.63 19.64 19.65 VAWG in hea
Page 189 and 190:
19.70 19.71 19.72 Invisibility of s
Page 191 and 192:
19.77 19.78 19.79 A number of repor
Page 193 and 194:
19.85 19.86 means more provision. T
Page 195 and 196:
Annex 1: The Devolved Administratio
Page 197 and 198:
to 41.8% of rural men. 16 Rural are
Page 199 and 200:
Annex 2: The UK’s relationship wi
Page 201 and 202:
Annex 3: UK reservations and declar
Page 203 and 204:
ESA - Employment and Support Allowa
Page 205 and 206:
Annex 5: Acknowledgements Many than
Page 207:
Women’s Resource Centre is suppor
show all

Women’s equality in the UK – A health check

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?