This is a couple of days late, because I thought it was in my newspaper, but it was someone else's and I've managed to find it.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... drive.html



The best part about this article is the final paragraph.



JHFCOAPS (and bonus points if you figure out that American profanity.)

So if I go for a Job and say I'm Gay - to increase my chance of getting it - and then they find that I am straight would I get the sack. After I could have been gay but "Turned". Guess best is to say Bi-sexual

Maybe they will have a test to prove you are gay

I've been in my current place of work for nearly 13 years. I guess that most people know what I'm like by now. However, if I "came out" then I would get an interview solely on that basis, regardless of whether or not they thought that I was right for the job.

The world's gone [LIFTED] crazy.

As I said in a recent session on "equality" at work, we are trying to undo decades, centuries or even millennia of discrimination in a matter of a few years. We have to start somewhere, but as an able-bodied, middle-aged, white Celtic/Anglo-Saxon, heterosexual, Christian male, I am the most discriminated-against person in the country.

They have no right to ask that question and people would be under no requirement to answer. This is legally true, let alone ethically so. I'd hate to be them if they actually select (or not select) or even differentiate between existing employees on this basis, because any half decent lawyer would go through them like a chainsaw.


Err.. it isn't. At all.

Course, this is a Daily Fail story so there's about a 95% chance it's total bollocks.

Jon

This was in the Daily Fail?

Nuff said.

Random guess with no googling...

Jesus H F*cking Christ On A ... ermmm... Pie Shelf? ... Pea Shooter ... Pogo Stick ...

Only answer the form if one of the options is “Mincing Queen”. Otherwise send it back demanding amendments.

I hate positive discrimination.

But then they could sack you for the first two years without any reason. So no chance of an employment tribunal working in your favour for a couple of years, and you will possibly end up with a lot of inappropriate secret santa gifts.

It does depend on the base situation. Otherwise perfectly good candidates can be ignored because they are the wrong sex, religion or colour. Though generally I prefer recruitment on merit.

Discrimination was exempted from that 2 yr rule

Close, but no cigar.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... icle+stick)



I wouldn't mind on principal if, for example, disabled individuals were given a chance to attend an interview (even if carrying out the work would probably be impossible- e.g. scaffolder, police officer) providing that they did not replace other individuals in the quota of interviewees.

To guarantee someone an interview solely on the basis of their sexual orientation is just [LIFTED]. I know that gays and people from different ethnic backgrounds etc. fight for equal rights, but in case you hadn't noticed, this isn't equality.