More controversially, the new Equalities Act will, if fully implemented, allow "positive action" (ie the desire to rectify imbalances in a workforce in which certain groups are under-represented) to be used as a "tie breaker" in recruitment decisions between two candidates of equal merit. It's not yet clear whether the new Coalition Gov't will actually bring the relevant parts of the Act into force.
Last edited by zaremba; 16-07-2010 at 02:25 AM.
Haha, kinda. Low IQ and dyslexia are pretty similar in definition, they're both something you're born with and have no control over that make basic tasks significantly more difficult. You could call having a low IQ a disability for sure.
Haha, can't tell if that's an attack on me or agreement with me.
It is an oh Uppercut who normally speaks a reasonable amount of sense comes out with a load of ****.
Happens from time to time.
Well it's not my fault no one has ever adequately explained to me the difference between being born dyslexic and being born with a low IQ- feel free to do so.
I am not expert but I always just assumed they were not related, knew plenty of people at school in higher sets for some subjects that were dyslexic
Do a quick google search if you are in doubt.
No, they're completely unrelated, that's not what I was saying. I was just comparing the two. Both are fundamental mental problems, impossible to change, that make basic tasks significantly more difficult. Yet one is considered a disability but the other isn't. Can you explain why?
Well people who have an abnormally low IQ are considered to have a disability.
That is not really the point though.
Last edited by Pothas; 16-07-2010 at 06:39 AM.
And yet they don't qualify for benefits the way dyslexic people do.
What about people with a natural (yet, like both dyslexia and a low IQ, impossible to diagnose) inability to do Maths. Should they be afforded, say, extra time in an exam?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)