Fighting Back

[carmanmemoranda]

Unfortunately, you don't.

Completely wrong. The discrimination has to be on the basis of the protected characteristic. In the case of the first post we have no evidence and given the investigation by the police and the bus company, a fair chance that Race, Nationality or any other protected characteristic was not the basis for the refusal of service. Refusing them because they were asylum seekers (or any other non protected grounds) is lawful.

Perhaps you might have a better grasp if you read the ruling on the "Gay Cake" discrimination case.

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2017-0020-judgment.pdf

Here the claimants were gay (protected characteristics) and they were refused service. The ruling upheld the cake makers choice to refuse to make a specific cake and that this did not result in discrimination on the basis of protected characteristics.

Interesting.

could anybody be refused travel because they were a man, or a woman, or transgender? Or overweight, or had poor English speaking skills, or any other reason as long as it is not a protected characteristic ?

 

[motorbiking]

The first 3 are protected characteristics. That is not to say a transgender person (for example) cannot be refused travel on non-protected grounds. e.g. drunk, rude, personal hygiene, bringing a bike etc.

There also comes a point were obesity will be a disability, which is protected.

 

[gant]

They can refuse to transport you using that old canard health and safety.
Back in the day you wouldn't be able to get on eating your 'dinner' because you knew you'd get short shrift. Oh for one of them kind of bus driver to rise to the surface again.

 

[Pat ex]

Do you now accept that anyone who discriminates against an asylum seeker, will (by deduction) also be discriminating against them on the basis of their protected characteristics? (nationality or ethnicity)
Any and all asylum seekers in the UK will automatically have such characteristics that will protect them under that Act. Therefore it's safe to say that all asylum seekers in UK will be protected.

Completely wrong. The discrimination has to be on the basis of the protected characteristic.

You really are struggling with this, aren't you?
All and any asylum seeker in the UK will have characteristics that will qualify for protection against discrimination.
Therefore if you discriminate against an asylum seeker, you will, by definition be discriminating against them on their ethnicity or nationality.
There is no escaping that obvious and incontrovertible fact.
Therefore all asylum seekers in UK are protected, it's automatic.
As you said:

EVERYONE has protected characteristics.

If they have specified characteristics, they are protected. All asylum seekers in UK have such characteristics, and the only way you can tell they are asylum seekers is by those characteristics.

In the case of the first post we have no evidence and given the investigation by the police and the bus company, a fair chance that Race, Nationality or any other protected characteristic was not the basis for the refusal of service.

How do you assume he guessed that they were asylum seekers?
Did they wear badges stating, "I am an asylum seeker"?

Let's not pretend that their are also racist police.

Home Office suspends ex-Met officer over racist WhatsApp chat​

Home Office suspends ex-Met officer over racist WhatsApp chat

The man, now a Home Office immigration official, has been suspended, after a BBC investigation.

www.bbc.com

Refusing them because they were asylum seekers (or any other non protected grounds) is lawful.

You're even confusing yourself now.

 

[Mottie]

How do they know?


The web site clearly says that you can pay cash.

I heard they tried to pay in Iranian rials though.

 

[gant]

Put it to bed Pat before you go up your own ars*le again. I've told you what grounds they can do it.

 

[motorbiking]

All and any asylum seeker in the UK will have characteristics that will qualify for protection against discrimination.
Therefore if you discriminate against an asylum seeker, you will, by definition be discriminating against them on their ethnicity or nationality.
There is no escaping that obvious and incontrovertible fact.

Still completely wrong. The discrimination has to on the grounds of protected characteristics. Even Ali G gets it.

 

[Pat ex]

Still completely wrong. The discrimination has to on the grounds of protected characteristics.

And all asylum seekers have those characteristics, so in essence, asylum seekers are protected because they all have those characteristics.
There is no exception for any asylum seeker not having those protected characteristics. Thus all asylum seekers are protected in UK.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

The first 3 are protected characteristics. That is not to say a transgender person (for example) cannot be refused travel on non-protected grounds. e.g. drunk, rude, personal hygiene, bringing a bike etc.

There also comes a point were obesity will be a disability, which is protected.

So man, woman and transgender are protected characteristics ?

Are asylum seekers not any of those categories ?

 

[Pat ex]

So man, woman and transgender are protected characteristics ?

Are asylum seekers not any of those categories ?

They are, but motorbiking's argument seems to rely on the Act not specifying "Asylum Seekers"

But if an asylum seeker is discriminated against, how does the perpetrator of that discrimination know that the victim is an asylum seeker? They don't wear badges. Therefore there is an assumption by the perpetrator that the victim is an asylum seeker based on some other criteria. That other criteria of nationality or ethnicity are specified characteristics. There can be no scenario in UK, that an asylum seeker does not have one or other, (or both) characteristics. Therefore asylum seekers are, by deduction, protected.

 

[gant]

This talking to yourself, do you do it in public?

 

[motorbiking]

So man, woman and transgender are protected characteristics ?

Are asylum seekers not any of those categories ?

Everyone has protected characteristics. Immigration status is not one of them.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Everyone has protected characteristics. Immigration status is not one of them.

so they are protected, regardless of being asylum seekers ?

 

[motorbiking]

It would be lawful to refuse to offer service to someone on the basis that you thought they may be asylum seekers, trouble makers, moderately fat, brown shoe wearing, unable to pay, conservative voters. etc etc. Not lawful to discriminate on the basis that they are English, Iranian, Catholics, Muslims, disabled, old, gay, male, etc.. Pretty easy to understand really.

 

[Pat ex]

Everyone has protected characteristics. Immigration status is not one of them.

Asylum seekers, by definition, are not British citizens. Therefore, by definition, they are protected. There is no exception. There is no possible exception for an asylum seeker, in the UK, to not be a British citizen. Therefore they are protected, always, by their inherent characteristics.

No-one, except you with your strawman argument, ever suggested that someone discriminating against them would be prosecuted for discrimination on the grounds of them being an asylum seeker.

Way back in post number 7 of this thread, 5 days ago, I said that an asylum seeker will have the required characteristics that would protect them from discrimination.

It is unlawful to discriminate on the grounds of race/ethnicity, and it's highly likely that an asylum seeker would not be a UK indigenous person.

Additionally, the guidance that I posted, Post number 10, also 5 days ago, specifically says:

Refugees, asylum seekers and migrants are not named specifically in the Act, but they are directly protected under the characteristic of ‘race’ as it is illegal to discriminate against people because of their colour, their nationality (including citizenship), and their ethnic origins and national origins.

Only you have persistently made this strawman argument of asylum seekers not being named in the Act. It doesn't matter, they are protected because of their inherent 'other' characteristics.