20-07-2015, 01:06 AM
From The Equalities Act 2010. My case falls into the first of four main categories of age discrimination.
direct discrimination: treating someone less favourably because of their actual or perceived age, or because of the age of someone with whom they associate. This treatment can only be justified if it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim which means it must be appropriate and necessary, (economic factors such as business needs and efficiency may be legitimate aims).
1. I am being treated less favourably because of age by being forced to accept the 65+ title but not the 50+ title ... simply because I am 65+
2. in chess this would be legitimate if we had played NOT in one BIG Swiss event (in which all ages are competing in the same competitive environment) BUT in age-separate tournaments (then if I'd won, say the 65+ event, I couldn't have won the 50+ event or vice versa, quite legitimately).
3. While the Act applies only to 'employees', it's principles tend to be regarded as best practice more widely (and would normally be the sort of guide that one would expect a well-functioning community representative body (such as CS) to aspire and adhere to.
4. Legally matters are less clear but leaving the Act aside, the promise in the entry form does not suggest that (at the very least) someone who is the best scoring 50+ Scot (and 65+) should NOT be given the choice (none was offered) of whether they wish to 'claim' the 50+ title OR the 65+ title.
5. My view (in accordance with 2 above) is that in a single Swiss event anyone eligible for whatever number of Scottish titles should be awarded all of them (if they win them by scoring most points). I would, however, recognise that an exception might be made for any relevant money prizes (but not the actual titles), so that winning a clutch of titles isn't simply a money-spinner. I believe that this would be FIDE's view (but they only organise separate age-group tournaments for seniors and juniors).
6. Having 'won' the 50+ title, I now find that my name is expected to be expunged from the CS record, as having done so. I'm livid, all right! Something for the Standards Committee to get their teeth into?
direct discrimination: treating someone less favourably because of their actual or perceived age, or because of the age of someone with whom they associate. This treatment can only be justified if it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim which means it must be appropriate and necessary, (economic factors such as business needs and efficiency may be legitimate aims).
1. I am being treated less favourably because of age by being forced to accept the 65+ title but not the 50+ title ... simply because I am 65+
2. in chess this would be legitimate if we had played NOT in one BIG Swiss event (in which all ages are competing in the same competitive environment) BUT in age-separate tournaments (then if I'd won, say the 65+ event, I couldn't have won the 50+ event or vice versa, quite legitimately).
3. While the Act applies only to 'employees', it's principles tend to be regarded as best practice more widely (and would normally be the sort of guide that one would expect a well-functioning community representative body (such as CS) to aspire and adhere to.
4. Legally matters are less clear but leaving the Act aside, the promise in the entry form does not suggest that (at the very least) someone who is the best scoring 50+ Scot (and 65+) should NOT be given the choice (none was offered) of whether they wish to 'claim' the 50+ title OR the 65+ title.
5. My view (in accordance with 2 above) is that in a single Swiss event anyone eligible for whatever number of Scottish titles should be awarded all of them (if they win them by scoring most points). I would, however, recognise that an exception might be made for any relevant money prizes (but not the actual titles), so that winning a clutch of titles isn't simply a money-spinner. I believe that this would be FIDE's view (but they only organise separate age-group tournaments for seniors and juniors).
6. Having 'won' the 50+ title, I now find that my name is expected to be expunged from the CS record, as having done so. I'm livid, all right! Something for the Standards Committee to get their teeth into?