Recommendation 13

HM Government Rejected

91. The government does not accept this recommendation. 92. The government agrees that it is important that women who suffer substantial and longer-term menopausal effects should be adequately protected from discrimination in the workplace. However, we are not satisfied that the evidence given to the Committee during its inquiry fully supports new legislation, and in particular introducing menopause as a new protected characteristic, to protect women experiencing discrimination related to the effects of the menopause. We have particularly noted evidence from key stakeholders on this point: • “Legislation which should protect employees experiencing the menopause is in place. Under the Equality Act 2010, menopause should largely be covered under the three protected characteristics of age, sex and disability discrimination.” Unison • “We’re not convinced that further legislation would have the desired impact and there’s a risk of using regulation as a blunt tool.” Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development • “With the highly varied experiences of menopause and different business contexts, legislation is a blunt tool and the government might be better placed supporting businesses to find what works for them.” Business in the Community 93. The government supports the aim underpinning this recommendation of ensuring that women are not discriminated against because of the menopause. However, the introduction of a new protected characteristic is not the only approach, or necessarily the best approach, to addressing risks of discrimination. 94. Baroness Stedman-Scott’s letter noted that, wherever possible, the use of protected characteristics within the Equality Act 2010 is intended to create protection across all the fields covered by the Act. Introducing menopause as a new protected characteristic does not align with this principle as it is only relevant to Part 5 of the Act. Furthermore, sex, age, and disability are all protected characteristics in the Equality Act 2010 which provide protection against unfair treatment of employees going through menopause. 95. Alternatives to a new, separate protected characteristic might include an expansion of the reasonable adjustments’ duty in section 20 and schedule 21 through an expansion of the definition of disability; or expansion of age discrimination provisions as they apply to employment. However, any choice between such alternatives is not simply a matter of practical drafting of legislative provisions. These options require primary legislation. 96. Furthermore, given the importance of this legislation it is important to ensure that the policy is considered in the round to avoid unintended consequences which may inadvertently create new forms of discrimination, for example, discrimination risks towards men suffering from long-term medical conditions, or eroding existing protections. The more substantial the necessary changes to the 2010 Act are, the more likely it is that they would require a full-scale review of the Act. This could only be made as part of a wider reform of the Act. This is a major undertaking which would necessarily be some years away. 97. For these reasons, the government will work within the existing legal structure while considering the potential additional protection that might result from different changes to the Act. As noted above however, these will not include commencement of section 14 of the Equality Act 2010.