value that underpins equality law, no one moral value supports the equality edifice and indeed Hepple identifies seven meanings for equality. The EA10 contains some innovative developments in general and for the forces in particular. The first is the duty on public sector authorities to mainstream equality of outcomes as a result of socio-economic disadvantage when making strategic decisions on the exercising of functions. In the context of the military these authorities include Ministers of the Crown and government departments. Fredman suggested that this duty did not apply to the armed forces and on the face of the Act she was correct but it would have applied to the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and Secretary of State for Defence when making strategic decisions, eg the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2011. As it was the Coalition government decided against bringing this duty into force although the aspirational nature of the obligation would have created difficulties for enforcement. The armed forces are classified as a public authority and the new public sector duty set out in section 149(1) applies to the military and is extended to persons performing a public function who are not public authorities. To demonstrate compliance with this duty, public authorities must publish annual equality information covering all protected characteristics. Furthermore, according to section 29(6) of the EA10 person must not, in the exercise of a public function that is not the ‘[a] provision of a service to the public or a section of the public, do anything that constitutes discrimination, harassment or victimisation.’ However, this is disapplied when relating to relevant discrimination the purpose of ensuring the combat ‘for effectiveness of the armed forces’ with discrimination’ made up of four of ‘relevant the protected characteristics, age, disability, gender reassignment and sex but does not include race and sexual orientation. As a general employer the armed forces are prohibited by section 39(1) from discriminating when deciding who to or not to employ and the terms of employment and in section 39(2) from discriminating against an employee over terms of
value that underpins equality law, no one moral value supports the equality edifice and indeed Hepple identifies seven meanings for equality. The EA10 contains some innovative developments in general and for the forces in particular. The first is the duty on public sector authorities to mainstream equality of outcomes as a result of socio-economic disadvantage when making strategic decisions on the exercising of functions. In the context of the military these authorities include Ministers of the Crown and government departments. Fredman suggested that this duty did not apply to the armed forces and on the face of the Act she was correct but it would have applied to the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and Secretary of State for Defence when making strategic decisions, eg the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2011. As it was the Coalition government decided against bringing this duty into force although the aspirational nature of the obligation would have created difficulties for enforcement. The armed forces are classified as a public authority and the new public sector duty set out in section 149(1) applies to the military and is extended to persons performing a public function who are not public authorities. To demonstrate compliance with this duty, public authorities must publish annual equality information covering all protected characteristics. Furthermore, according to section 29(6) of the EA10 ‘[a] person must not, in the exercise of a public function that is not the provision of a service to the public or a section of the public, do anything that constitutes discrimination, harassment or victimisation.’ However, this is disapplied when relating to relevant discrimination ‘for the purpose of ensuring the combat effectiveness of the armed forces’ with ‘relevant discrimination’ made up of four of the protected characteristics, age, disability, gender reassignment and sex but does not include race and sexual orientation. As a general employer the armed forces are prohibited by section 39(1) from discriminating when deciding who to or not to employ and the terms of employment and in section 39(2) from discriminating against an employee over terms of
MLR%20Article%20(Revamp).docx