Hi, Marcella,
Pragmatist that I am, I figured the legislation would eventually be
interpreted as an "all student" approach -- though even if it wasn't, I'd
probably promote it as such internally. However, I also figured it might be
useful, nitpicker that I am (!), to flag up the seeming inconsistency in the
draft legislation.
The other part of the loophole is that employers can lawfully set retirement
ages, at least until 2011. This means that students studying for particular
professions can lawfully be "lawfully excluded from that profession on
grounds of age", if they qualify close to or post retirement age. Working
back, therefore, are they protected during their studies?
Hey ho . . . the joys of consultation!
See you soon,
Faith
--------------------------
Faith Marchal
HR Consultant - Diversity
Anglia Ruskin University (note brand new name, just announced!)
Bishop Hall Lane
Chelmsford CM1 1SQ
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
tel: 01245 493131, ext 4928
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marcella Wright" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: Age legislation - impact on students
> Hi Robyn
>
> Thanks for your prompt reply yesterday and also clarification re the rules
> on loans.
> In response to your e-mail below just a quickie to say I see it the same
> way as you. The draft regs say that only print in italics is different
> from the regs on religion or belief and sexual orientation-section 22 is
> not in italics and we have all been told that the earlier regs included
all
> HE students. Although the regs don't cover goods and services my
> interpretation of section 22 is that students might have be able to use
> these if e.g. they were unfairly treated in say accommodation. But a
> conference delegate having the same problems couldn't get use the regs to
> get legal redress.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Kind regards
>
> Marcella
> At 13:26 05/10/2005 +0100, you wrote:
> >Dear colleagues,
> >
> >Apologies for the delay in responding to Faith Marchal's original query
> >and subsequent contributions from list members - Liz Sutherland and
myself
> >have both been away from the office for some days.
> >
> >We agree that the issue Faith raises is one which is not clear from the
> >DTI's draft regulations and consultation documents, and we will be asking
> >for clarification from the DTI when we make our own response to the their
> >final consultation. It isn't clear where students' rights are codified
in
> >the draft regulations - but what we think might be the DTI's intention
is
> >that HEIs as education providers are covered by the section specifically
> >relating to FEIs and HEIs (draft regulation 22) rather than the
vocational
> >training section (draft regulation 19).
> >
> >Our current understanding is that ALL students will be covered by the
> >forthcoming age equality legislation, in their applications to
> >institutions and throughout their studies, regardless of the course they
> >are studying. This seems to be reflected in draft regulation 22 which
> >I've paraphrased here (and which doesn't use the phrase 'vocational
> >training'):
> >
> >- It is unlawful for the governing body of an institute of further or
> >higher education to discriminate against a person in the terms on which
it
> >offers to admit him to the establishment as a student; by refusing or
> >deliberately not accepting an application for his admission to the
> >establishment as a student; or, where he is a student of the
> >establishment, in the way it affords him access to any benefits, by
> >refusing or deliberately not affording him access to them, or by
excluding
> >him from the establishment or subjecting him to any other detriment.
This
> >doesn't apply to students who, having completed a particular (vocational)
> >course, would be lawfully excluded from that profession on the grounds of
> >age (ie if a genuine occupational requirement could be cited by a
> >potential future employer. However the only example of a genuine
> >occupational requirement the DTI have proposed so far will apply to the
> >acting profession). -
> >
> >Draft regulation 19 refers separately to vocational training. This may
> >relate to the vocational training offered by institutions such as
> >Jobcentres, rather than by HEIs. However, in our response to the DTI's
> >consultation we're going to specifically ask about this and also about
> >responsibility towards students on work placements, which may be shared
by
> >HEI/ placement provider.
> >
> >In relation to student loans, we heard from the Department for Education
> >and Skills earlier this year that they have reviewed the upper age limit
> >of 55 on loans for living costs for students in higher education. From
> >September 2006, the upper limit for maintenance loans for new students
> >will be age 60. For existing students who take out a loan for the first
> >time in 2006 the limit will also be 60. This doesn't seem to chime with
> >the forthcoming age legislation, however the SLC may not have duties to
> >students under the regulations.
> >
> >We intend that ECU's response to the DTI's final consultation will be
> >posted on our website on 11 October, and we will notify the sector when
> >this has happened. We really encourage individual HEIs to respond to the
> >DTI and raise these questions as well. The deadline for responses to the
> >DTI is Monday 17 October.
> >
> >With good wishes,
> >
> >Robyn Challis
> >Policy Officer, Disability and Age team
> >Equality Challenge Unit
> >
> >tel 020 7520 7066
> >[log in to unmask]
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: HE Administrators equal opportunities list
> >[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Faith Marchal
> >Sent: 28 September 2005 12:52
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: Age legislation - impact on students
> >
> >
> >Dear all,
> >
> >Is anyone else out there, like me, concerned about whether or not
different
> >student groups will be protected by the new Age legislation, based on
their
> >course of study?
> >
> > From the consultation document, it seems to me that students on
programmes
> >of study which are prerequisites to particular professions or employment
> >(for instance, teacher certification, health and social care courses,
legal
> >practice, and professional courses, e.g., CIPD, etc.) will be protected
> >under the "vocational training" provisions, but not others. Am reading
> >this too literally, or what?
> >
> >Comments on the proverbial admin-eo postcard, please!
> >
> >Best wishes,
> >Faith
> >-------------------------
> >Faith Marchal
> >HR Consultant - Diversity
> >Anglia Polytechnic University
> >Bishop Hall Lane
> >Chelmsford CM1 1SQ
> >e-mail: [log in to unmask]
> >tel: 01245 493131, ext 4928
> >**********
> >The Equality Challenge Unit promotes diversity and equality of
opportunity
> >for all who work or seek to work in higher education. We are sponsored by
> >the representative bodies (SCOP and Universities UK) and the four UK HE
> >funding bodies.
> >
> >Although every effort is made to ensure that the information contained
> >within this email is timely and accurate, the Equality Challenge Unit
> >cannot be held responsible for any unintentional errors or omissions.
> >
> >The information provided in this email is not intended to be either
> >legally binding or contractual in nature. Should you require more
specific
> >advice regarding the application of equalities legislation, it is
> >recommended that you consult an appropriately qualified legal
professional.
> >
> >This message is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient you
> >should not copy or disclose this message to anyone but should kindly
> >notify the sender and delete the message. Opinions, conclusions and
other
> >information in this message which do not relate to the official business
> >of the ECU shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. No
> >contracts shall be concluded by means of this e-mail. Neither ECU nor
the
> >sender accepts any responsibility for viruses. The administrator of this
> >e-mail service (Universities UK) reserves the right to access and
disclose
> >all messages sent over its e-mail system.
> >**********
>
>
> Marcella Wright
> Head of the Equality Unit
> Tel: 4982
> Fax: 5094
>
|