Equal opportunity is a concept that refers to absence of discrimination based on sex, ethnicity or race, belief or religion, disability, age or sexual orientation. The concept of equal opportunity permits open and fair competition for resources, at the same time it does not challenge the unequal distribution of resources in society. This has led to a debate about what the meaning of a just society might be. The International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences continues:
The notion of formal equality of opportunity requires that positions, offices, and admissions in society are open to all applicants and that formal procedures are used to select candidates based on qualifications deemed relevant to successful performance in a position or program. Individual abilities and ambition are valued as criteria while factors derived from group identities assigned by birth or social class, such as race, family, caste, religion, are excluded. Equality of opportunity carries with it the promise of upward social and economic mobility due to the removal of legally protected rights and privileges for particular classes or groups. Equality of opportunity emphasizes procedural and legal means of providing equal access to social goods, in contrast to alternative approaches to equality; for example, equality of outcomes, equality of resources, and democratic equality.
Equality of opportunity assumes that it is unfair if factors beyond the control of an individual significantly shape a person’s chances in life. Formal equality of opportunity can be justified as an enhancement of individual life chances as well as a means for maximizing the well-being of society. Proponents of equality of opportunity associate it with a meritocratic system in which the most talented and ambitious are the most rewarded regardless of socioeconomic background.
In his 2014 thesis The Realisation of Human Rights for Disabled People in Higher Education in Uganda: A Critical Analysis Drawing on the UNConvention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Paul Emong discuses equal opportunity in a Ugandan context:
Formal equality (also known as identical treatment or equality of treatment) entails identical and consistent form of treatment of individuals based on an Aristotelian precept that equals be treated equally. It is premised on human understanding that fairness requires consistent treatment. Commentaries on equality law view formal equality to be of three interrelated attributes:
A breach of any of those principles amounts to direct discrimination. Discrimination which is intentional or overtly directed to particular individuals or groups and is usually grounded on prejudices or stereotypes labelled on those group(s) of individuals.
- Equality of individuals should always be symmetrical; applying with equal strength regardless whether it is directed against or in favour of a particular group. In this, formal equality presupposes that justice is an abstract, universal notion, and cannot vary to reflect different patterns of benefit and disadvantage in a particular society.
- Formal neutrality, an aspiration of individual merit, that, everyone should be treated according to his/her merits as an individual in his/ her own right in the distribution of societal benefits.
- Neutral decision-making in dispensing justice (equality before the law). For example, the state should be neutral as between its citizens, favouring no one above any other. It is also procedural justice in a sense that neutrality can be exercised through proving that there was a breach of consistency in one part.
The idea that people are on a level playing field and that everyone starts out equally helps people to come to terms with the unequal results they experience. What does mean to be equal? Take for example the simple idea of allocating equal space between men's toilets and women's toilets. Men require a simple stand up cubicle, women require a space to sit down. The sit down cubicles take up twice as much space as a simple stand up cubicle. Equality of opportunity might mean the same number of toilet spaces rather than than the same amount of space for men and women (see Wikipedia). Equality is not a simple concept. Does equal opportunity lead to equality of results? Emong continues his discussion:
Equality of results connotes that, attaining genuine equality requires treating individuals differently based on their groups in some contexts to secure equal outcomes. It is primarily concerned with achieving a fairer distribution of benefits and examines discrimination with outcome analysis. Here, specific differences are targeted and a different approach would be used in attaining specific results in a particular area. In the context of education for example, a segregated form of education or affirmative action policies in admission to higher education provide examples of equality of results approach. From that example, the limitation of equality of results in relation to achieving the overall goal of equality (non-discrimination) in education is apparent. A segregated form of education is viewed to be perpetuating exclusion of disabled people from mainstream education and moreover, conceptualized based on the medical model of disability, that, an individual disabled people is the problem not society. While affirmative action policies on the other hand are also viewed to be mainly addressing discrimination at the entry point and leave the discrimination intact beyond that point.
Degener and Quinn generally observe that equality of results approach could perpetuate injustice, because its focus is on results rather than treatment. This means that, by focusing on results, equality of results approach is limited in espousing policies that would eliminate structural discrimination embedded in society hindering the development of an inclusive society for all. Despite such an argument, treatment of disabled people presents a challenging scenario because they are not a homogenous group of people whereby no single approach to equality can bring their non-discrimination in society. Therefore, in the context of disability treating individuals differently according to their impairments, including applying the equality of results approach is necessary in some instances, particularly in education. In education, it is seen that despite critical arguments for mainstreaming, special schools are still relevant. In fact, even in what is seen to be a mainstream school, special units for particular category of disability are adopted. Therefore, no one approach can be advanced in relation to diversity of disabled people in-light of different disabling environments in education.
Equality of Opportunity: Equal opportunity steers a middle ground between formal equality and equality of results. It aims to deliver measures to eliminate all forms of institutional discrimination. It rejects policies that seek to correct discrimination by quotas or targets mainly aiming at outcome in the form of quantitative results. In the context of disability, it entails a comprehensive approach which aims at asserting disabled people‘s rights without isolating them from mainstream society. The inclusive education approach best illustrates this in education, because inclusive education requires the dismantling of systemic barriers in the institutions of education such as accessibility related challenges, ignorance of staff about specific disability needs, and provisions, criteria or practices which are historically embedded in education generally. It requires matching the needs to the appropriate support to bring about equal participation of disabled people in teaching and learning.
From explanations equality of opportunity above, its goal is removing inherent disadvantage that particular groups experience and calls for an expanded model of addressing barriers beyond the approaches of the perspective of the single perpetrator and the single victim alone. It is focus in varying degrees is on group characteristics and disadvantage, group impact, actual results, material equality and desired outcomes. Therefore, equality of opportunity concerns with three important aspects- outlawing non-intentional discrimination, removing practices embedded in institutional policies, norms and standards which are neutral in nature but discriminatory in effect and a multi-dimensional understanding of equality aimed at redressing disadvantage, accommodating difference and facilitating full participation.
 |
| Ms. Zaminah Malole, Commission Member representing PWDs making her opening remarks during a public dialogue |
This 23rd June 2015 article 100 pregnant women, PWDs barred from immigration jobs is a report about the loss of talent from the Ugandan job market. Was this an equal opportunity job interview?
Kampala- More than 100 pregnant women who turned up for fitness test for 300 jobs at Immigrations and Citizens Directorate yesterday were disqualified over not being able to participate in the exercise.
The exercise, which featured 10 km marathon, also saw more than 50 people with disabilities being disqualified.
“You know the danger Uganda is facing of money laundering, child trafficking and terrorism. You are going to be Uganda’s first line of defence.
You have to be intellectually sharp and use modern equipment to defend our nation. This is why you have to be fit to undergo some military training,” the Public Service Commission chairperson, Mr Ralph Ocan, said.
Out of the 2,133, who qualified for yesterday’s test, 1,863 turned up.
Mr Ochan warned the candidates not to take the second phase of training for granted.
A couple of weeks ago, the candidates sat for an aptitude test before advancing for the fitness exercise test. The disqualified candidates accused the ministry of Public Service officials of being corrupt and unethical.
The above article questions whether the interview was based on equal rights. The following 2015 article by Disability rights activist David Nangosi, Give PWDs equal opportunities continues questioning this attitude:
According to the report 23rd June 2015, 50 PWDs who had applied, and passed the aptitude test for the jobs, were disqualified due to their inability to take part in a 10Km marathon fitness test exercise.Equality and equal opportunity are difficult to define. The interpretation of the concept of equality requires an understanding of what equality applies to. The above article by David Nangosi illustrates the question: What does equality mean? Equal opportunity can be a means of averting discrimination. When understood correctly it ensures a level playing field for all people regardless of ethnicity, gender, race or disability. Equal opportunity underpins equal rights laws and is of great importance to PWDs.
As I have previously pointed out here in an article published on October 20, 2014, (Employ PWDs in public and private sector), unemployment in Uganda remains a challenging area, particularly for PWDs. According to The Uganda National Household Survey 2005/6, approximately 80 per cent of PWDs live below the poverty line and 46 per cent of PWDs aged 14-64 declared that they were excluded from accessing opportunities. Among the many barriers that hinder the employment of PWDs in Uganda is discrimination.
Disqualifying someone due to the inability to do a fitness test has far-reaching implications in as far as the self-esteem of the individual is concerned and the buttressing of poverty in the life of a person, and denial of opportunities of a better future for the individual affected. The practice as demonstrated by the persons assigned to execute the exercise of recruitment by the Ministry of Public Service is wrong. It defeats the spirit of the framers of the existing international and national legal frameworks that protect and promote the employment rights of PWDs, which the Government of Uganda has committed itself to fulfill.
Uganda ratified the Convention on the Rights of PWDs in September 2008 with its optional protocol without any reservations. Article 27 of the Convention provides for the promotion and protection of employment opportunities for PWDs on an equal basis with their non-disabled counterparts. This protection is elucidated in the national legal frameworks such as the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda that provides for affirmative action of PWDs in Article 32, the PWDs Act of 2006 in Part III of its provisions where prohibition of discrimination of PWDs in employment is prohibited. These provisions are also reflected in the Employment Act of 2006, National Council on Disability Act of 2003 as amended, Equal Opportunities Commission Act of 2007.
The problem lies in the implementation of the available legal frameworks. The government has established institutions such as the Equal Opportunities Commission, National Council on Disability, Uganda Human Rights Commission, whose fundamental roles are, among others, to remedy discrimination at all levels. It is a shame that a government department such as the Ministry of Public Service is the one undermining the above legislative and policy frameworks and takes the lead in promoting discrimination as reported in the article published on June 23 (see above).
No comments :
Post a Comment