Discuss the view that all legal approaches to reducing inequalities are fundamentally flawed.
Discuss the view that all legal approaches to reducing inequalities are fundamentally flawed.
In today’s society it is assumed that everyone has the right to equal opportunities. These equal opportunities include equal access to public services, to job opportunities and income, the freedom of access and movement, the right to be free from harassment and equal access to means of determining equal access, in other words who gets what, who is excluded and who is not, basically the right to vote. It can be hard to determine what equal is, does it mean we all get the same treatment or at least we should do or is equality associated more with what matches our needs? It’s a difficult question to answer, as we have to then delve into who decides our needs for us. Who is equality for? Ideally everyone. Most equality issues deal with the same sets of people, those who are disadvantaged in some way in society, whether individually or collectively as a group. Some disadvantaged groups are, Black and minority ethnic groups, young males, women, gay and lesbian people, faith groups, older people and those with disabilities. Different equality issues arise within these different groups and so not all experiences of inequality are the same, some may fit into more than one group and so have more inequality to deal with. One of the main methods for attaining equality is via the law. Most equal opportunity acts or policies focus on three main areas of inequality, they are, gender, disability and racial equality. I intend to focus on these three areas, looking at the laws and policies in place and whether or not all these legal approaches to reducing inequality are successful or fundamentally flawed.
Gender inequality goes back centuries but was never really recognised in law until the Equal Pay Act of 1970. Until this time, women had suffered a great disadvantage in the work place. In the 19th century women were excluded from certain areas of work, it was not acceptable for a woman to do certain jobs, especially in the labour market. In the 20th century politics focused more on women, giving them more political and civil rights, women were given the right to vote, although most voted as their husbands did, whether they wanted to or not. Domestic violence was recognised also and men beating and mistreating their wives has become taboo, it’s no longer a man's place to keep his woman in line, she has rights now and so can look after herself a lot better. After the Second World War women began to occupy more of what were once male dominated jobs, with all the men at war, there was no other choice than to allow women into the labour market. Once they had established their place in the work force there was little any one could do to stop the increase in women at work, however, women may have been allowed to do a 'mans' job but they did not receive a mans wage, and so inequality still lived on. In 1970, The Equal Pay Act attempted to amend this by giving employers a five year adjustment period in which to amend wages in line with the equal pay specifications of the act. The act was not enforced until 1975 and although the gap between male and female income narrowed, men still remain better paid. In the same year, 1975, the Sex discrimination act was passed and discrimination was put into two new categories, direct and indirect. The act tackled a range of issues including harassment. Although the legislation put into motion many positive changes, discrimination on the basis of gender cannot be totally combated, attitudes still remain and these take time to change, women may be able to work in male dominated jobs and have access, although not always, to the same opportunities but there is still quite a way until things are ‘equal’. Jeanne Gregory (1987: 52-53) calls the provisions made in British sex discrimination legislation “little more than a good will gesture…within which people and organisations already committed to the fight against discrimination can develop programmes for action”.
