EHRC call for evidence
on religion or belief
Dr David Perfect
Research Manager
Equality and Human Rights Commission
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Earlier EHRC work on religion or belief
Religion or belief strategy
Description of call for evidence
Call for evidence as a research tool
Results and key findings
Equality Act implications
Building on results
Earlier EHRC work on religion or belief
• Research reports: future EHRC priorities (Woodhead
with Catto, 2009); ongoing research issues (Woodhead,
2011); religious discrimination (Weller, 2011); religion
or belief, equality and human rights (Donald, 2012).
Also statistical briefing (Perfect, 2011)
• Legal: direct assistance to individuals (e.g. Hall and
Preddy) or interventions as expert adviser to domestic
courts (e.g. Johns) or ECtHR (e.g. Eweida et al)
• Policy: dialogue events on key topics (2013)
• Guidance: recognition and management of expression
of religion or belief in workplace (2013); marriage of
same sex couples (2014)
Religion or belief strategy
• Shared understandings launched Oct 2013 with 3 key
aims
• Improve understanding and practice by employers in
managing religious diversity in the workplace. Includes
how to balance right to hold and manifest a belief and
express an opinion with other rights and freedoms
• Create more balanced and reasonable public dialogue
• Assess the existing legal framework on religion or
belief, equality and human rights
• Current (2014-16) programme of work designed to
implement this strategy
Description of call for evidence
• Covered the workplace and service delivery
• Conducted by NatCen. Separate online surveys for
employees, employers, service users, service
providers, organisations, equality/advice community
• Call live between mid-August and end of October 2014
• Key aims to: 1) learn about personal experiences of
individuals 2) achieve many responses 2) find out
about a variety of issues from different perspectives 4)
hear about positive as well as negative experiences
• Key danger: identikit responses; responses based on
assumptions, not direct experience; few participants
from hard-to-reach groups; no positive examples
Call for evidence as a research tool
• Strengths: a qualitative approach so permits multiple
means of recruitment; allows hard-to reach groups
(e.g. smaller religions) to be over-represented; allows
more detailed responses
• Weaknesses: findings unrepresentative of wider
population; cannot measure extent of perceived
religious discrimination and unfair treatment; onesided perspective (e.g. of an employee) only; Press
Officers and journalists like numbers!
• Starting-point for further research to quantify religion
or belief experiences, e.g. whether freedom of
expression in the workplace more often raised as a
problem than dress codes or time off work
Results
• Report published in March 2015 on EHRC website.
Separate Executive Summary also available
• 2,483 responses in total: employees (1,636), service
users (468), organisations (181), service providers
(108), employers (67), legal/advice community (23)
• Much higher overall response than expected. Generally
a good range, although few Buddhist, Hindu or Sikh
participants
• Did hear about personal experiences of individuals and
very few identikit responses
• Some positive examples – but not as many as would
have liked
Key findings
• Some workplaces inclusive. In others, religion seen as
a private matter that should not be discussed at work
• Perceived discrimination in recruitment, working
conditions, promotion and progression, time off work
• Beliefs mocked or dismissed; some employees felt
unable to challenge discrimination and harassment
• Concerns about the balance between freedom to
express religious views and rights of others
• Divergent views about when desirable and appropriate
to discuss religious beliefs
• Fairer provision of services between religious/nonreligious groups required
• Divergent views about opt-outs from work duties
Equality Act implications
• Is the Equality Act working well if there is widespread
confusion about the law on religion or belief?
• If there is a problem, is it with the legislation (e.g. the
definition of “belief”) or is the problem how the
existing law is interpreted by the courts?
• Should the current indirect discrimination model be
replaced by something else, e.g. Canadian-style
reasonable accommodation? Should “conscientious
objection” be allowed and, if so, when?
• Should the current exceptions under the Equality Act
be widened or narrowed?
Building on the call for evidence
• Ongoing preparation by NatCen of guidance, supported
by good practice, on 15 key religion or belief topics in
the workplace and service delivery. Due to be
completed by early 2016. Draws on call for evidence
findings about good and poorer practice
• Ongoing review by Oxford Brookes University of
interpretation and effectiveness of equality and human
rights law relating to religion or belief. Draws on call
for evidence findings about views on, and
understanding of, the law
• Forthcoming EHRC report presenting recommendations
about the current law
Contact details
• Dr David Perfect (including for Religion or Belief Network)
david.perfect@equalityhumanrights.com
• Call for evidence report
http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/about-us/our-work/keyprojects/your-experiences-religion-or-belief
• Research on religion or belief (see RR no. 48, 73, 84)
http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/publications/ourresearch/research-reports
• General EHRC research inquiries
research@equalityhumanrights.com