http://www.moderation.org.uk/3display_post.php?pst_id=7 &returnto3displayulm.php This poster did not understand how indirect discrimination works and asked a perfectly reasonable question in a thread that is about discrimination. I am not sure why this is not a legal question when equal pay actions still provide a good living for a number of lawyers. -- Percy Picacity
Percy Picacity <key@under.the.invalid> wrote in news:Xns9C5784303BB3Dperspicacity@208.90.168.18: > http://www.moderation.org.uk/3display_post.php?pst_id=7 > &returnto3displayulm.php > > This poster did not understand how indirect discrimination works > and asked a perfectly reasonable question in a thread that is > about discrimination. I am not sure why this is not a legal > question when equal pay actions still provide a good living for a > number of lawyers. > I mean post ID 74004 Try again: http://www.moderation.org.uk/3display_post.php?pst_id=74004&returnto=3displayulm.php -- Percy Picacity
Percy Picacity wrote: > Percy Picacity <key@under.the.invalid> wrote in > news:Xns9C5784303BB3Dperspicacity@208.90.168.18: >> >> This poster did not understand how indirect discrimination works >> and asked a perfectly reasonable question in a thread that is >> about discrimination. I am not sure why this is not a legal >> question when equal pay actions still provide a good living for a >> number of lawyers. >> > I mean post ID 74004 > http://www.moderation.org.uk/3display_post.php?pst_id=74004&returnto=3displayulm.php I'm inclined to agree - it was inoffensive and reasonably relevant, perhaps the moderator just hit the wrong button. Apols to Pete Verdon, if he wishes to repost his comments I imagine they'll be passed.
