I have been looking up something else and came across this. Clubs/organizations such as "Kestrels" who charge a different entry for males and females are in direct breach of the equability act. I understand the reason to try and restrict "predatory" males. Example "A nightclub charges a higher price for entry to a man because of their sex where the service provided to a woman is otherwise exactly the same." Any lawyers out there? Would this be correct?
The Equality Act 2010 legally protects people from discrimination in the workplace and in wider society. It replaced previous anti-discrimination laws with a single Act, making the law easier to understand and strengthening protection in some situations. It sets out the different ways in which it’s unlawful to treat someone. Before the Act came into force there were several pieces of legislation to cover discrimination, including: •Sex Discrimination Act 1975 •Race Relations Act 1976 •Disability Discrimination Act 1995 It is against the law to discriminate against anyone because of: * age * being or becoming a transsexual person * being married or in a civil partnership * being pregnant or having a child * disability * race including colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin * religion, belief or lack of religion/belief * sex * sexual orientation These are called ‘protected characteristics’. You’re protected from discrimination in these situations: * at work * in education * as a consumer * when using public services * when buying or renting property * as a member or guest of a private club or association You are legally protected from discrimination by the Equality Act 2010. Discrimination can come in one of the following forms: * direct discrimination - treating someone with a protected characteristic less favourably than others * indirect discrimination - putting rules or arrangements in place that apply to everyone, but that put someone with a protected characteristic at an unfair disadvantage * harassment - unwanted behaviour linked to a protected characteristic that violates someone’s dignity or creates an offensive environment for them * victimisation - treating someone unfairly because they’ve complained about discrimination or harassment It can be lawful to have specific rules or arrangements in place, as long as they can be justified. For the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 an organisation is an association if: * it has 25 or more members, and * it has rules (not necessarily formal or written) regulating who can be a member and there is a genuine selection process for members. Examples of associations include private clubs such as golf and other sports clubs, ex-forces clubs, alumni clubs, social clubs, working men's clubs, gaming clubs and drinking clubs. How does the Act apply to private clubs and other associations? It is unlawful for a private club or other association to discriminate against, harass or victimise an existing or potential member or an associate. (An associate is someone who is not a member but who has some or all of the rights of a member because they are a member of an affiliated private club.) A club cannot refuse membership, or grant membership on less favourable terms (such as by applying different conditions or fees) because the person has a protected characteristic - disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex or sexual orientation Can private clubs still offer different types of membership? Private clubs will still be able to offer different types of membership at different prices or on different terms, providing each type of membership is open to all regardless of a person's protected characteristics. If you think you’ve been unfairly discriminated against you can: * complain directly to the person or organisation * use someone else to help you sort it out (called ‘mediation’ or ‘alternative dispute * resolution’) * make a claim in a court or tribunal Contact the for help and advice.
Don't get me started about the equality act - I am presently fighting a case of disability discrimination against my employer. These threads about the different treatment of men and women come up from time to time - there are a few on another website I know of. Broadly business can treat people differently regarding a "protected characteristic" - which is this case is gender - provided that they can justify it. This is the reason why police forces can use positive discrimination regarding some ethnic minorities. This can be justifed because having an appropriate ethnic mix of police officers for the local area reduces community tensions and helps vulnerable groups. It is also the same in a GP surgery, they sometimes ask whether you would rather see a male or female doctor. It's the justification and its reasons that are important here. Clubs like Kestrels might be able to point out that - Yes they do discriminate regarding gender, but it is justifiable for the reasons you have already identified. I don't know if this has ever been tested in UK law however for these type of clubs - I have read this justification could be used by reading other forums like this on the internet, so it's reliability might be suspect. Thinking about the recent car insurance case regarding the treatment of male and female drivers this was decided at a European level (EU law in most instances overrules UK law). Under the equality act I would think that insurers would be able to justify the different treatment because of the different risk characteristic between male and female drivers. The European Court obviously did not see that different treatment could be justified however. If this issue regarding how these types of clubs treat people regarding gender characteristics ever gets taken to the European Supreme Court things may change and everyone may end up paying the same - and if this ever happened I can't see it being good for anyone. Maybe considered fair and reasonable in law might not be what should happen in reality - But if your brain is anything like mine sometimes you need a logical explanation of things, or else it drives you crazy!
I believe the law is also changing in regard to decency which throws into the pot all naturist activity. But back to the thread. I believe that they could charge all the same but offer a system of prebooking that means they could maintain the quota. Then again pigs might fly. As it is single males are seen as a cash cow. Whilst men go to the clubs a pay the money they will keep raising the prices. 3 and 4 times as much is rather excessive just because a man chooses to live a single life. Hay ho life's a bitch. If it's not the government trying to screw you it's someone else.
Quote by jfpassingfun Thinking about the recent car insurance case regarding the treatment of male and female drivers this was decided at a European level (EU law in most instances overrules UK law). Under the equality act I would think that insurers would be able to justify the different treatment because of the different risk characteristic between male and female drivers. The European Court obviously did not see that different treatment could be justified however. !
I wonder when the European courts will make a case for age discrimination with car insurance ! Or perhaps they can't because at the end of the day it's about risk. Women are a safer risk than men as they make fewer claims, younger drivers are higher risk than others . .and the premiums are adjusted accordingly. Same with Kestrels etc, a balance needs to be struck and the easiest way is financial. alternative would be to write into their rule book how many single men and single women would be permitted to enter and as long as it's states the same number there is no discrimination ( assuming that single men and women are charged the same rate)
and their legal 'get out' being Private clubs will still be able to offer different types of membership at different prices or on different terms, providing each type of membership is open to all regardless of a person's protected characteristics. allowing clubs such as golf and other sports clubs, ex-forces clubs, alumni clubs, social clubs, working men's clubs, gaming clubs and drinking clubs, etc. to carry on largely unaffected by this Legislation
Quote by HnS and their legal 'get out' being Private clubs will still be able to offer different types of membership at different prices or on different terms, providing each type of membership is open to all regardless of a person's protected characteristics. allowing clubs such as golf and other sports clubs, ex-forces clubs, alumni clubs, social clubs, working men's clubs, gaming clubs and drinking clubs, etc. to carry on largely unaffected by this Legislation
Thanks H&S - saved much confusion. From what you say a provider providing services to the public comes under the equality act and has to charge the same price regardless of protected characteristic. The key to this is that the equality act is interpreted in a different way for "private clubs" which means they can charge different prices and under different terms for different protected characteristics, providing that membership can be provided irrespective of protected characteristic. In other words a private club could not prevent someone from being a member based on protected characteristic, but it could offer different terms and prices based on protected characteristic? - and they don't have to justify this treatment. As with all things legal the devil is in the detail! I do have to confess I prefer using the price mechanisim to balance demand for something rather than revert to rationing. From the customers perspective rationing may appear fair or unfair depending on your point on view - from the clubs perspective rationing could cause big financial loses, but it is difficult to think of an upside.
Woody, Agree with Gerty, Same with Kestrels etc, a balance needs to be struck and the easiest way is financial. alternative would be to write into their rule book how many single men and single women would be permitted to enter and as long as it's states the same number there is no discrimination (assuming that single men and women are charged the same rate) and if you'd read all of the post, at the end .... If you think you’ve been unfairly discriminated against you can: * complain directly to the person or organisation * use someone else to help you sort it out (called ‘mediation’ or ‘alternative dispute * resolution’) * make a claim in a court or tribunal Contact the for help and advice. Therefore the first option would be to contact the organisation concerned and ascertain what is in their rule book, or as this is almost certainly a corporate entity, what's in their Company documentation in respect of this subject. Therefore contacting their Copmpany Secretary direct would be the way forward for you.
Swinging Heaven features sexually explicit material. To access this site you must be of the legal age to engage with the material of an adult site.
By entering Swinging Heaven you agree to the following;
I am deemed an adult where I live, and I am at least 18 years old
I am allowed to access & view sexually explicit material
0 likes
Thanks H&S - saved much confusion.