
| Home | Overview | Disability | Discrimination | Employment | Services | Education | PSED | Benefits | Business | Advice | Links | More... |
|
These pages do not apply outside the United Kingdom.
|
Right to be heard
Rudeness or mockery
Writing what you want to say?
Automated telephone systems
Voice analysis on insurance claims
Cost of taking longer
More examples
|
"EqA" or "Equality Act" means the Equality Act 2010 (link to legislation.gov.uk)
The "Services Code" means the 2011 Equality Act Code of Practice on services, public functions and assocations (pdf, link to EHRC website), which came into force on 6th April, 2011. |
This page gives examples of what is likely to breach the Equality Act rules on services. It focuses on services to the public, but much of it should apply also to other Part 3 rules such as public authority functions.
In general, a service provider needs to wait and give you time to speak, if they would listen to someone speaking fluently. This applies whether they are a shop assistant, a person speaking to you on the phone, or anyone else providing a service. It is normally likely to be difficult for a service provider to 'objectively justify' not giving time to speak.
It would be particularly difficult to justify putting the telephone down on someone who stammers, something which still sometimes happens.
Also, if the person who stammers wants to speak, then in most cases a service provider is likely to find it difficult to legally justify insisting on an alternative. Possible alternatives might be that the person who stammers writes down what they want to say, or gets someone else to phone or speak on their behalf, or to emails in. However, most likely a service provider would usually have difficulty under the Equality Act requiring that the person who stammers uses an alternative where they do not wish to.
See further Right to be heard, which includes examples.
Being rude to a customer in relation to their stammer should generally be a breach of the Equality Act. This would be within the scope of s.29 EqA as being a worse standard of service or some other detriment (para 11.22 of Sevices Code). Direct discrimination and other types of discrimination claim are likely to apply. It may also be unlawful as harassment.
An example is laughing at a person who stammers (or who has some other speech impairment). This happens with distressing frequency, particularly on the telephone.
Case study:
A person who stammers rang a public helpline. The lady at the other end laughed at her as she was trying to speak. When the caller said that wasn't acceptable, the lady replied: "You see, you can talk perfectly well when you want to!" The caller wrote to the helpline who responded excellently. They listened to their tape of the conversation and the lady was taken off the helpline for re-training. They also contacted the British Stammering Association for information to help them build stammering into their general training courses for helpline staff.
News report:
A person with cerebral palsy was trying to take out a subscription to a sports channel. The caller said that the person who took his call kept saying 'What?' and 'Sorry?' although they could understand him, then started to laugh at him and hung up. After the sports station was contacted, managers listened to the recorded call and took disciplinary action against the call handler. As well as giving an apology, the station offered the caller free subscription to the channel for a year.
(From the Manchester Evening News 6/10/08: 'Fan gets apology from Setanta' (external link))
Case study:
"A man with a severe speech impediment was refused service at a local pub and subjected to derogatory and insulting remarks by a member of the bar staff, who alleged he was drunk. A meeting between the two parties was set up by the Disability Rights Commission and once the issue became clear a full apology was given by the bar manager who also agreed to his staff undertaking disability training.
(This is a case resolved by the former Disability Conciliation Service.)
There are now phone systems which understand speech. However, voice recognition software is unlikely to understand someone who is stammering significantly. The software may also time out if there is a significant pause while the person tries to say the word. It may well be a reasonable adjustment to allow the caller to be transferred promptly to a real person, if the computerised system cannot cope with their speech.
For more. Voice recognition telephone systems.
It may well be a breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments, or indirect discrimination, to insist that something must be done through a particular means of communication. An example is where a business or other organisation insists that something must be done over the telephone which many who stammer find particularly difficult. See Making services accessible: provide alternative ways to communicate.
I understand it is now common for insurance companies to use voice analysis software on people phoning up to make claims, to flag up those that are likely to be dishonest, eg where speech is hesitant. Claims flagged up by the software can then be subject to particularly rigorous investigation. This raises DDA issues because of the danger of people who stammer being unfairly targeted. Similar technology is now starting to be used for benefit claims.
For more see Voice Risk Analysis.
For more examples, see 'Guidelines for service providers'.
Homepage | Equality Act in outline | Meaning of "disability" | Employment | Goods and services | Education | Human Rights Act | Proposed changes | Social security | Advice | Links | What's new | Site index | Privacy (cookies) | Disclaimer
© Allan Tyrer 1999-2012
Last updated 7th January, 2012
Services
Services FAQs
Examples on stammering
Right to be heard
Transport
Appearing in court
Prisons
Which rules apply?
Services to the public
Disputes
Public authority functions
Connection with Britain