Can you put this on the back please across the shoulders….

cos it tastes so **** good……………..

How about "…because I'm worth it"

An individual must be judged on their ability to do a job, not on anything unrelated to that task. It's the Law.

Which law is that then ?

Which law is that then ?

The Law which states that

Every worker in the United Kingdom has the right to work in an environment free from harassment and protected from discrimination based on age, race, religion, gender, sexual orientation and disability status (at the very least). Discrimination is defined as an employer treating one employee less favourably than another.

To deny someone a job because they are 'too fat', means you would have to prove their fatness would prevent them from doing a job. If this was the case, then it might imply that they had a disability. Which you can't legally discriminate against without good reason. There is no specific piece of legislation that says you have to employ a fat person, but to openly not employ someone who is fat would get you into a whole load of legal shit, I'd imagine. Human Rights act would probably come into it.

Of course, in the real world, you as an employer can employ who you consider to be the 'best candidate for the job'. That is of course at the employer's discretion.

1) An interviewee is not an employee.
2) Simply being obese is not a disability under the terms of the act.
3) Treating all candidates the same way in an interview process is not discrimantory.

Therefore it is perfectly legitimate to consider the obeseness or otherwise of a candidate, as an issue, perhaps quantifying it by simply requesting or even measuring their BMI, as opposed to a subjective judgement, and setting a target value that you would like to achieve in your recruitment, based on NHS stats for example.

So thats you talking absolute shite yet again then.

Thought so! 8)

(Boils my piss when Daily Mail type mentalities make up laws to defend some issue or other they've made up to project their often flawed views.)

Incline to agree with you BB… the word 'medical' springs to mind. Pretty sure a good few employers make this a compulsory part of the recruitment process.

Ta

It was frequently the case in the past that a medical would form part of a recruitment process, and not unreasonably IMHO.

Another way of dealing with this sort of thing, and for that matter criminal records if it concerns an employer is to ask everyone interviewed questions like "have you ever been in trouble with the Police?" or Do you have any existing medical problems?" with simple Yes or No answers. If that answer is subsequently found to be incorrect the employee has in fact committed a criminal offence which is "Gaining pecuniary advantage through deception", if you can prove that you would not have employed them if they had answered correctly. It is also why it is important to have a spec sheet quantifying what you are looking for and to keep that and all application forms from a recruitment against future problems arising.

Thats does get past the rehabilitation of offenders act, and the disability discrimination laws, as long as you apply it uniformly to all applicants.

So thats you talking absolute shite yet again then.

Thought so!

(Boils my piss when Daily Mail type mentalities make up laws to defend some issue or other they've made up to project their often flawed views.)

I could dig up all sorts of bits of Law to prove my point, but I really can't be bothered. 'Daily Mail type'? 😆

Therefore it is perfectly legitimate to consider the obeseness or otherwise of a candidate, as an issue, perhaps quantifying it by simply requesting or even measuring their BMI, as opposed to a subjective judgement, and setting a target value that you would like to achieve in your recruitment, based on NHS stats for example.

So, you'd be legally able to request such information from a prospective employee, would you? On what grounds? Ever heard of Medical Confidentiality? What if the person refused to give it to you? And you refused them a job because of that?

Go and research it. Unless the job required certain levels of fitness/condition, you'd not be legally allowed to demand such information. Same as you aren't, as an employer, allowed to have access to any person's medical information without their consent.

So, were you to refuse someone a job on medical grounds, which in this case it would be, without any evidence to support your case, you'd be fecked.

Imagine it like this: You have an employee, that you don't like because they are 'too fat', in your eyes. Nothing to do with their ability to do their job. You fire them for being 'too fat'. How well d'you think you'd do, in an employment tribunal?

As I said; you can employ who you want; you can't use their fatness as an excuse not to. Just pretend there's a better candidate, that's all.

You can have any criteria you like as long as its not discriminatory. Applying something uniformly to all candidates that does not breach any law is not. Simple

Do you actually know what it takes to calculate BMI? Its weight and height. That is not confidential medical information.

I could dig up all sorts of bits of Law to prove my point

No you can't, as you proved yesterday.

'Daily Mail type'?

Yeah, you know the sort, makes stuff up to make a case?

Go and research it.

Oh I think you will find that I'm on very solid ground, and I'm not really sure why I should if you're not prepared to.

You have an employee, that you don't like because they are 'too fat', in your eyes

You don't seem to be able to spot the fundamental difference between an employee and a prospective employee. I have pointed it out, but you seem to have missed it.

You fire them for being 'too fat'

You are probably right, but thats not we are talking about is it?

How about instead I use BMI as a criteria for selection for redundancy, and as an organisation we take the NHS's stats on health issues relating to BMI and then as part of the redundnacy process use BMI being into the Obese or into dangerously low areas as part of a selection process, how do you think that might be?

TM is not a daily mail type, that much is obvious!

The entire England rugby squad's BMI means their obese – fire them all!

I'm just into "overweight" yet under 9% bodyfat and sub 30" waist.

Anyway it depends on the job – the best freelance writer I know and regularly with with is overweight – so what?

Berm; you really want me to be wrong, don't you, to justify your prejudice?

See, the thing is, if you're going to use 'medical' reasons to employ or not employ someone, then you have to back them up. You can't just weigh them and measure their height. Many people have a high BMI, but are not obese. Many people have a low BMI, and aren't healthy. Your argument is based on the fact that you don't like fat people, and you're introducing things such as BMI to back your case up. The BMI is merely a guideline, and not an indicator of overall health.

Here's some info for you.

1.3 An employer may stipulate essential health requirements but may need to justify doing so, and to show that it would not be reasonable for him to have to waive them, in any individual case (page 33, para 5.5).
1.4 Stating that a certain personal, medical or health-related characteristic is desirable may also lead to discrimination if the characteristic is not necessary for the performance of the job.

Face it; you don't like fat people, and you'd love it if the Law would support you in your prejudice. It doesn't.

Anyway it depends on the job – the best freelance writer I know and regularly with with is overweight – so what?

Thats not really the point, the OP is about whether it would be reasonable for people not to employ someone because they were overweight. My take on it is that its not unreasonable to have that as a criteria in a selection process. So say for example there are two of your mates, one obese, one not then the BMI obese criteria kicks in as part of an objective selection and decision making process.

And the "so what" is that its not doing him or anyone else any favours pretending that its not a serious health issue. Maybe, just maybe by not pretending otherwise it might help them rather than hinder.

a picture of berm bandit hard at work

BB – don't get me wrong, I don't "get" obesity and have been a fitness obsessive (with a fair few medals and trophies for various physical activities) since my early teens but in some jobs it simply doesn't matter.

Employing an obese football referee or similar could be silly though.

The Forces have a fat nazi selection process (I've done the RM POC and passed it) – they seem to be "allowed."

Depends on the job.

I was on a flight last year and the stewardess had a right fat behind that kept knocking me as she moved up and down the aisle.

Now for stewardesses I would think that having a petite ass is essential and they should have some width limits applied, certainly from a safety point of view. Perhaps something like a narrow door to the interview room, if you're too wide then move aside.

Your argument is based on the fact that you don't like fat people

Out of interest, I have maintained myself comfortably in the Obese segment for the last 35 years 😯 So I think you might be a tad wide of the mark and dare I say stereotyping slightly.

In respect of this:-

1.4 Stating that a certain personal, medical or health-related characteristic is desirable may also lead to discrimination if the characteristic is not necessary for the performance of the job.

You appear to have missed this out, which is the complete statement.

Like a requirement, a preference may be decisive against an otherwise well qualified disabled candidate and may have to be justified in an individual case (page 33,para 5.6.Summarised)

And as stated above the selection criteria must be applied to all candidates equally. So unless you are trying to tell me that a function of disability is automatic obeseness, I fail to see how you can work out that this would be discriminatory towards disabled people.

I am however starting to wonder about your attitude. This is starting to sound a lot like the argument about race which starts with "I've got a mate whose black but…..".

Out of interest, I have maintained myself comfortably in the Obese segment for the last 35 years So I think you might be a tad wide of the mark and dare I say stereotyping slightly.

Not unusual for those with prejudices, for those prejudices to apply to themselves. Would you exclude yourself from a job where your weight is not an issue? What If I ran a pub, and barred you from coming in, because you're too fat? Would you be happy then?

You appear to have missed this out, which is the complete statement.

Irrelevant, as the bit I quoted applies to all. You're just trying to clutch at straws here, 'cos you know your argument's flawed.

I am however starting to wonder about your attitude. This is starting to sound a lot like the argument about race which starts with "I've got a mate whose black but…..".

Yeah, whatever mate. You've got no ammo left, so you try to turn it into an attack my character. Nice try.

Bored now. Argument done. Finished.

END OF THREAD

Yeah, whatever mate. You've got no ammo left, so you try to turn it into an attack my character. Nice try.

Bored now. Argument done. Finished.

END OF THREAD

PMSL….

au contraire mon petit potiron….

I believe that statement is equivalent to that of which you accuse me.

Thus I shall sleep content knowing that victory, (if indeed that what it is), is mine. 8)

I know a guy who is 22 stone and diabetic, constantly having treatment to feet and health problems but got his degree and works in a lab in the NHS and has a great brain.

Costly maybe in sick days but he's not lying like some out there and provides a service and great at stats.

His diet is terrible -takeaway currys everyday… I got him riding on a steel bike but he gave it up as it was too hard without trying but getting him to ride to work in his own time.

I personally think he's depressed from being diabetic, insulin injections, single-never ever had a diet or a GF and obese and eats more.

I think he should have the chance to better himself but if he becomes lazy and fails to do his job then no like anyone else, the job should be given to someone who can do it to the criteria required for the job duties.

Would you not hire a wheelchair user?

Private companies should be free to choose who they want to hire. If they do discriminate against any group then it's probably bad business sense because they are limiting their choice of employees, but that should be up to them.

If I went for a job and was told I wasn't getting it because of my weight or my height or my gender or whatever then personally it wouldn't bother me one little bit. I'd just go and work elsewhere and not moan about it. If you are good at your job you'll always get on, no matter who you are.

Hurrah Life in the old dog yet ! So that’s talky wrong yet again then!!

Can I just point out that people who do not look after themselves for whatever reason are not in any way a focal point for my personal wrath or anything like that. In fact quite the reverse, I do think that generally they need support and help to overcome their issues, and the opportunities for early intervention are ridiculously overlooked within our health and social provisions.. However, what I am saying is that it is not the responsibility of employers. It is ridiculous to try to pretend that obesity is not a health problem, wrapped up in some sort of pseudo political correctness bullsh!t. This is a case of the emperors new clothes. We all know that obesity and eating disorders are a health time bomb not only for individuals, but for the country as a whole. There is no reason whatsoever why an employer should not take that into account in a recruitment, it is simply seeking to reduce the likelihood of preventable costs and disruption to their business and entirely within the law as long as the criteria is applied evenly.

Pretty much! its all about Money and productivity.

But we are human-don't we look out for each other? Oh yeah we don't…capitalist world!

Japan used to go out of its way to sor out its employees but at huge costs.

Japan used to go out of its way to sor out its employees but at huge costs.

By sort out I presume you mean sort the wheat from the chaff?

For example Nissan at Sunderland the much vaunted example of manufacturing excellence proving that the British worker is the equal of any in the world….. they carried out one of the largest scale recruitment exercises ever in the UK. i.e. taking maximum care to ensure that they had recruited the "right" people. Further to that have you ever been to an Asian country? You will in general note if you have that fatties are quite rare, well until McDonalds got there that is.

So if you mean that they take care not to recruit "unsuitable" people, then the answer is yes, alternativly if you mean that they love their fatties and tend them at every possible opportunity I think you will find you are wrong for the reasons given.