Seanad debates

Wednesday, 18 February 2004

Equality Bill 2004: Committee Stage.

 

12:00 pm

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Labour)

The Labour Party opposes this section because it is a step backwards in terms of the legislation and is a huge inroad in terms of the current ban on sex discrimination in the workplace.

In section 25 of the 1998 Act, gender is a legitimate requirement only in certain limited areas — physiology, entertainment, duties outside the State, personal services, separate sleeping facilities etc. Under the Bill any ground could justify discrimination on gender grounds if it has an occupational requirement. It is just too broad. On the issue of entertainment, it is obvious why one would discriminate on grounds of gender in the area of acting. A person might choose a female taxi driver. I can understand the reasons but on the broader issue of an occupational requirement, I cannot think of any occupation where it would be a requirement to be one sex or the other. I am sure somebody will give me an example. This is opening up an excuse to people to discriminate on grounds of gender in various jobs and it will make the legislation much more difficult to implement.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.