Miriam O'Reilly wins age discrimination case against BBC
Discussion
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Was she replaced by a black/ethnic presenter? Then it would not be an own goal for the BBC but another success in their policy of 'positive'? discrimination. If you're black, white/gay, black/gay, Scots with a non-understandably broad accent, NI accent with a lisp or Welsh with a stutter then the BBC will hire you as a TV presenter. Mr/Mrs/Miss White Normal?......... please don't apply for a job there. I'm glad she won her case and I guess her win reflects money lost as a result of her dismissal, however my dad has just finished a 3yr battle due to an injury sustained at work because of a faulty vehicle being passed as safe. He can't do his job properly anymore and will prob have to take a lesser paid job in the future, what did he get, 12k. Pathetic considering all the s
t he's been through.
I really struggle to understand how the law works sometimes.
t he's been through.I really struggle to understand how the law works sometimes.
There's nothing I detest more than the compensation culture that's been created.
This wasn't age discrimination, how can you ever change anything if you're going to be accused of being ageist, racist, sexist etc, you can't win!
She didn't have a job for life ffs, although apparently she thought she did!
This wasn't age discrimination, how can you ever change anything if you're going to be accused of being ageist, racist, sexist etc, you can't win!
She didn't have a job for life ffs, although apparently she thought she did!
Every case is looked at on its own merits.
This definitely WAS a case of age discrimination because the presenter was constantly jibed about her age and her deteriorating looks by her employers. If they had kept shtum on that score she might not have had a good argument. They sowed the seed of of their own defeat at the tribunal.
As Nick Ross said, it is not unusual for shows to have a change of presenter to liven it up or to refresh the format. If the BBC had used that as their argument when they were getting rid of her, then they might not have ended up at a tribunal. However, they kept inferring that she had to go because she was getting on a bit.
It is interesting that she did not win the parallel case which was that she was discriminated against because she was a female.
This case had nothing to do with expecting "a job for life". I don't think anyone expects this any more - especially feeelancers and especially people who work in the media. But what people do expect - and the law insists - is that if someone has to go, then the reasons they are being disnissed MUST be fair and non-discriminatory.
This definitely WAS a case of age discrimination because the presenter was constantly jibed about her age and her deteriorating looks by her employers. If they had kept shtum on that score she might not have had a good argument. They sowed the seed of of their own defeat at the tribunal.
As Nick Ross said, it is not unusual for shows to have a change of presenter to liven it up or to refresh the format. If the BBC had used that as their argument when they were getting rid of her, then they might not have ended up at a tribunal. However, they kept inferring that she had to go because she was getting on a bit.
It is interesting that she did not win the parallel case which was that she was discriminated against because she was a female.
This case had nothing to do with expecting "a job for life". I don't think anyone expects this any more - especially feeelancers and especially people who work in the media. But what people do expect - and the law insists - is that if someone has to go, then the reasons they are being disnissed MUST be fair and non-discriminatory.
Edited by Eric Mc on Wednesday 12th January 08:19
The easy way round this is to make them all self employed and hire on fixed contracts. when contract ends negotiate with a new supplier in this case presenter etc.
I don't care what they look like so long as they are good at the job, in the states there is no such problem. I would rather have an educated articulate older person than a bimbo whose only asset is a nice rack.
I don't care what they look like so long as they are good at the job, in the states there is no such problem. I would rather have an educated articulate older person than a bimbo whose only asset is a nice rack.
spaximus said:
The easy way round this is to make them all self employed and hire on fixed contracts. when contract ends negotiate with a new supplier in this case presenter etc.
I don't care what they look like so long as they are good at the job, in the states there is no such problem. I would rather have an educated articulate older person than a bimbo whose only asset is a nice rack.
Many of them are.I don't care what they look like so long as they are good at the job, in the states there is no such problem. I would rather have an educated articulate older person than a bimbo whose only asset is a nice rack.
In employment tribunal cases, the length of contract isn't that important (although it can be a factor). It is the manner in which people are handled that causes the problems.
Being self-employed (as she was) is not a barrier to bringing a case to an Emplioyment Tribunal.
thinfourth2 said:
Look at chris moyles
How many other radio DJs have got on the telly
Where as Mr Moyles has a face for radio
Apart from:How many other radio DJs have got on the telly
Where as Mr Moyles has a face for radio
Steve Wright
Mark Radcliffe
Chris Evans
Jo Wiley
Zane Lowe
Reggie Yates
Fern Cotton
Colin Murray
Vernon Kay
Nihal
Nick Grimshaw
OR did you mean more from Commercial Radio, in which case most Radio presenters are former TV people anyway.
thinfourth2 said:
How do model agencies get away with hiring only young good looking girls?
They hire appropriate people for appropriate modelling jobs. All models aren't young, size zero females. Just look at the vast variety of advertising that exists and you'll see all shapes, sizes and ages.The requirements for TV presenters varies depending on the nature of the programme. No one would argue that having "pretty young things" - male or female, is approppriate for programmes that are aimed at a particular type of audience. However, when "serious" programming - news, current affairs, documentaries etc - starts to chose who to present on the basis of what they look like rather than their presentation skills, experience or knowledge of the subject matter - then there is something seriously wrong with broadcasting.
Edited by Eric Mc on Wednesday 12th January 13:15
Surely the way you appear on the box is a very important part of the job of a television presenter? I know it's harsh, but if the BBC producers felt that she was no longer up to the job in this regard then I'd say it's within reason to replace the woman with someone more "suitable".
As an earlier poster said, they should have put her on a contract.
As an earlier poster said, they should have put her on a contract.
Eric Mc said:
thinfourth2 said:
How do model agencies get away with hiring only young good looking girls?
They hire appropriate people for appropriate modelling jobs. All models aren't young, size zero females. Just look at the vast variety of advertising that exists and you'll see all shapes, sizes and ages.The rest of us just have to get by with the immortal phrase "they wouldn't fit in", in the mean time.
XJ40 said:
Surely the way you appear on the box is a very important part of the job of a television presenter? I know it's harsh, but if the BBC producers felt that she was no longer up to the job in this regard then I'd say it's within reason to replace the woman with someone more "suitable".
As an earlier poster said, they should have put her on a contract.
It doesn't have to be.As an earlier poster said, they should have put her on a contract.
There are plenty of very good presenters on TV who would not qualify as "beauties" - especially amongst males.
Prof Prolapse said:
I actually think the BBC should be allowed to descriminate based on looks.
I don't pay £145 a year to look at a some muzzled old trout.
Are you a fan of Shallow Hal?I don't pay £145 a year to look at a some muzzled old trout.
I'd hate it if institutions like Patrick Moore were ditched just because they weren't pretty enough or young enough.
Edited by Eric Mc on Wednesday 12th January 13:35
Eric Mc said:
Prof Prolapse said:
I actually think the BBC should be allowed to descriminate based on looks.
I don't pay £145 a year to look at a some muzzled old trout.
Are you a fan of Shallow Hal?I don't pay £145 a year to look at a some muzzled old trout.
I'd hate it if institutions like Patrick Moore were ditched just because they weren't pretty enough or young enough.
The countryfile team just walk around fields and interview bumpkins. It's not like there's any specific skills required other than the ability to read a card.
I personally would rather have someone asthetically pleasing doing so.
Prof Prolapse said:
[snip]
The countryfile team just walk around fields and interview bumpkins. It's not like there's any specific skills required other than the ability to read a card.
I personally would rather have someone asthetically pleasing doing so.
Are you implying Ms O'Reilly is not "asthetically pleasing", if so, methinks you complain to much.The countryfile team just walk around fields and interview bumpkins. It's not like there's any specific skills required other than the ability to read a card.
I personally would rather have someone asthetically pleasing doing so.
Prof Prolapse said:
Eric Mc said:
Prof Prolapse said:
I actually think the BBC should be allowed to descriminate based on looks.
I don't pay £145 a year to look at a some muzzled old trout.
Are you a fan of Shallow Hal?I don't pay £145 a year to look at a some muzzled old trout.
I'd hate it if institutions like Patrick Moore were ditched just because they weren't pretty enough or young enough.
The countryfile team just walk around fields and interview bumpkins. It's not like there's any specific skills required other than the ability to read a card.
I personally would rather have someone asthetically pleasing doing so.
By and large, the public prefer those types of atributes as well. Look at how popular odd looking presenters have been over the years -
Patrick Moore
Magnus Pyke
David Bellamy
Murray Walker
Peter Snow
John Sargeant
Addimitedly all male. Are we saying that there are two differnt sets of rules for how TV presenters should look - one rule for males and another set for females?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff