Advert rules · Equality policy · Post a job
Advert wording, and what gets refused
Every advert on this board is read by software before it can go live. This page is the whole of what that software looks for, why, and what to write instead. Nothing here is hidden, because a rule nobody can read looks arbitrary the first time it catches somebody.
Why a job board does this at all
We are liable for what we publish, separately from you
Section 55 of the Equality Act 2010 applies to an employment service provider, and publishing vacancies is an employment service. It is our own section, not a borrowed one.
Being asked to do it makes it worse, not better
Section 111 covers instructing, causing or inducing discrimination and section 112 covers knowingly helping it. A board told that wording is a problem, that publishes it anyway, has walked from one section into the next. "The client asked for it" is the thing section 111 is about.
Most of it is careless, not deliberate
Nearly every advert we hold was written in a hurry by somebody who meant nothing by it. So the note says which words, which section and what to write instead, and the advert can be back with us in two minutes.
A refused advert is not charged for
Nothing is taken until an advert is live. A refusal costs the advertiser the time it takes to reword it and nothing else.
A discrimination claim about a recruitment decision must normally start at ACAS early conciliation within THREE MONTHS LESS ONE DAY of the act complained of. That is the same short window for the advertiser and for us, and it is the reason this runs before publication rather than after somebody complains.
Refused, every time
These are discriminatory on the face of the words. No context rescues them, so they never publish and nothing is charged.
It sets an age range for applicants.
Equality Act 2010 section 13, direct age discrimination.
Write instead. Say what the job needs. If it needs a licence somebody cannot hold until 21, name the licence, not the age.
It sets an age limit.
Equality Act 2010 section 13.
Write instead. Name the requirement itself. Age is almost never the requirement.
It excludes applicants by age.
Equality Act 2010 section 13.
Write instead. Remove it. There is no upper age limit for work in the UK.
It asks for a young worker.
Equality Act 2010 section 13.
Write instead. If the job is physical, describe the work. If the team is informal, say that. Neither of those is an age.
It requires English as a first language, which is a requirement about where somebody is from rather than what they can do.
Equality Act 2010 sections 13 and 19, race and nationality.
Write instead. Ask for the standard of English the work actually needs: "clear spoken English for radio and phone" is lawful and is also more useful.
It restricts applicants by nationality or race.
Equality Act 2010 section 13.
Write instead. If you mean the right to work in the UK, write "right to work in the UK required". That is lawful and it is a different thing.
It excludes people with children or a partner.
Equality Act 2010 sections 13 and 19, sex, pregnancy and maternity, and marriage and civil partnership.
Write instead. State the hours and the shift pattern. Whoever can work them will apply.
It excludes pregnant applicants.
Equality Act 2010 section 18.
Write instead. If a specific task is a risk, name the task. A pregnancy risk assessment is the employer's job after a hire, not a filter before one.
It excludes applicants by health or disability.
Equality Act 2010 sections 13 and 15, and section 60 on health questions.
Write instead. Describe what the job involves doing. The duty to consider reasonable adjustments starts before the hire, not after it.
It asks about health or disability before an offer.
Equality Act 2010 section 60.
Write instead. Section 60 lets you ask AFTER an offer, or before one only for a narrow list of reasons: checking whether an adjustment is needed for the interview, or whether somebody can do a function that is intrinsic to the job. Ask about the function, not the person's history.
It names the job by the sex of the person expected to do it.
Equality Act 2010 section 13.
Write instead. Use the job: handyperson, bar staff, waiting staff.
The exception, and how to use it
There is a real exception. Schedule 9 paragraph 1 of the Equality Act 2010 makes a requirement lawful where, having regard to the nature of the work, it is an occupational requirement, applying it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, and the person does not meet it. A women's refuge may lawfully require a woman. If that is your position, reply to us and say which requirement and why. A PERSON WILL READ IT. There is no box on this form that turns the rule off, because a box that turns a rule off is not an exception.
What is definitely allowed
Encouraging is not restricting. Sections 158 and 159 of the Equality Act 2010 let you say that applications from a under-represented group are particularly welcome, and we publish that wording without a word. What you cannot do is make it a condition.
Held for a person to read
These are usually a problem and sometimes perfectly lawful, which is exactly why a machine should not be deciding them. The advert waits, you get told which words and what would clear it, and most are published unchanged.
It asks for a recent graduate, which is a well known way of saying young without saying young.
What clears it. Say the level of experience you want. A career changer at fifty can be two years into a trade just as a graduate can.
It asks for an older worker, which is age discrimination in the other direction and equally unlawful.
What clears it. Describe the judgement or the experience you are actually after.
It requires ten or more years of experience, which excludes younger applicants and needs to be justified as proportionate.
What clears it. Ask for the skill. Most jobs that say fifteen years mean five.
It uses a job title that names one sex.
What clears it. Salesperson, supervisor, stores operative, chair. The advert reaches more people the moment you change it.
It requires general physical fitness, which is broader than any actual task and is a common way of screening out disabled applicants without meaning to.
What clears it. Name the task: "lifting up to 25kg repeatedly through a shift". That is lawful, it is clearer, and it lets somebody judge for themselves.
It asks for a standard of English above what most work needs.
What clears it. Say what the English is for. "Enough English to take instructions over the radio and read a picking list" is a real requirement and is defensible. Fluent is neither.
It restricts appearance in a way that bears on religion.
What clears it. If it is about a respirator seal, say that and say it applies to the specific task. A face fit requirement is lawful. A grooming preference is not.
It requires work on a day that matters to some religions.
What clears it. Usually fine. It is held only so we can see that the pattern is a real business need, which for shift work it almost always is.
It requires a car or a licence, which excludes some disabled applicants and is only lawful where the job needs driving.
What clears it. If the job is driving, this is fine and you can ignore this note. If it is about getting to site, say where the site is and what time the shift starts.
It uses wording that reads as a signal about age.
What clears it. Energetic is not unlawful on its own. It is held because it turns up next to the things that are.
Shorthand is not refused, but it does cost you applications
Nothing here stops you writing FLT, VNA, C+E or multidrop, and we will not edit them out: they are the trade's own words and the people who already do the job read them faster than the long version. The cost is the person who could do the work and does not know the word yet, which in this trade is a great many good drivers who learned the job in another language. What the words actually mean is published for exactly that reader, and it is linked at the bottom of every advert. Writing the term and the plain version once, as in reach truck (VNA), costs you three words and widens the field.
If you think we have it wrong
Tell us. The list is written by people and it will have mistakes in it, and a rule that cannot be argued with is a rule nobody respects. Write to hello@hiringuk.co.uk with the advert and the phrase, and if you are right we change the rule rather than making an exception for one advert.