• Search
  • You are here:  
  • Home
  • News
  • Labour knowingly hugely discriminating against women for PIP cuts

News

Labour knowingly hugely discriminating against women for PIP cuts

Details

The Labour Party is knowingly hugely discriminating against women by using its 4 point or higher rule to reduce the number of personal independence payment (PIP) awards. Currently, daily living component award rates for males and females are just 0.7% apart, but from November 2026 under Labour’s plans, 32% of male claimants are likely to get an award, compared to 25% of female claimants, a ten times greater difference

The shock effect of the proposal that only claimants who get 4 points or more for at least one PIP daily living activity will be eligible for an award was revealed in the response to a Freedom of Information Act request by Winnie Clark.

The DWP’s answer shows that, of those who currently receive an award of the daily living component of PIP:

1,307,000 are male, of whom 39% (507,000) are awarded less than 4 points in all daily living activities.

1,584,000 are female, of whom 52% (818,000) are awarded less than 4 points in all daily living activities.

If these claimants all receive the same points scores on review, it will mean that the number of awards to males will reduce by 509,730 whilst the number of awards to females will reduce by 823,680.

The result will be that instead of 277,000 more women than men being in receipt of PIP, when all the reviews are completed 800,000 current male claimants will still be getting PIP daily living whilst only 766,000 women will have an award. 

Male PIP awards will outnumber female awards for the first time.

According to the DWP’s StatXplore tool, at present award rates by gender are almost identical:

Male: 47.77% of claimants get an award of the daily living component.

Female:  47.08% of claimants get an award  of the daily living component.

This is a difference of 0.7%

But from November 2026:

32% of new male claimants are likely to get an award of the daily living component.

25% of new female claimants are likely to get an award of the daily living component.

This is a difference of 7%, ten times larger

So, any MP who votes in favour of Labour’s 4 point rule will knowingly be creating a benefits system that puts disabled female claimants at a very significant disadvantage compared to disabled male claimants.

It would be a shocking outcome for any MP to choose to support.

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
People in conversation:
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    The Dogmother
    · 21 days ago
    Omg my friend said for every downvote  I get she'll donate £2 to a charity of my choice. It's a Win.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Cecelia
      · 18 days ago
      @The Dogmother I wish those beastly people would stop giving you down votes.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      The Dogmother
      · 20 days ago
      @Giles @Giles Thank you..my friends gonna freak when she sees how many over the day I've got. She will be true to her word though. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      The Dogmother
      · 20 days ago
      @Anon Hahaha.. cheers @Anon 😍
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Anon
      · 20 days ago
      @The Dogmother Ah, so this is why you have so many downvotes! I'm totally downvoting you now.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Giles
      · 20 days ago
      @The Dogmother I downvoted you to help you out
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    The Dogmother
    · 21 days ago
    Every time I comment on here I get two definite down votes. I've a fair idea who from,not hard to work out. 
     I'd love to know how saying "very interesting read" to @slb comment warrants a down vote exactly???. Shared a link for others to peruse and that got a down vote? Where's the logic. Is there any or is it pure spite. Ahhh maybe at least for one of the down votes it's the wee DWP snoop.poor thing ,feeling inadequate? Or just can't swallow the fact we are gonna fight all the way until you hear us all. I'll expect the down vote for this.. do not disappoint. 😆🤣😂
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Anon
      · 20 days ago
      @The Dogmother I have noticed this with your posts too. I think you've hit the record with 11 downvotes so far :-D
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      The Dogmother
      · 21 days ago
      @rtbcpart 2 Or more than one I'd say @rtbcpart2. Must enjoy our company. It seems to rile ppl up.if you even mention down voters.  Agitates them in some way. Most peculiar. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      The Dogmother
      · 21 days ago
      @The Dogmother And there we have it... thanks for your consistency. We've had a right laugh at it. Cheers, downvoter. (S) 
      😂 There's not much to laugh about in life, but this,it's golden. We shall fight on brave warriors and let the powers that be know we won't take any of this situation to kill us off easily. ✊️
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      rtbcpart 2
      · 21 days ago
      @The Dogmother It's a Snoop Dogmother
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Anon
    · 21 days ago
    For all the downvoters, here's a link to educate yourselves on the definition of discrimination:
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      The Dogmother
      · 21 days ago
      @Anon It's a game @Anon a wee bit of power for the powerless. If you even mention down voters you get down votes. Well it makes me laugh. Ignore it. X
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    AW
    · 22 days ago
    If there are any Men out there who are still skeptical about the enormity of the problem that Women's activists are facing I suggest you take a good look at the comments and specifically the dislike numbers on some of the comments on this article. The defensiveness, the denial, the hostility towards any suggestion of the discrimination which is laid bare and irrefutable in these figures is APPALLING. Men are getting 4 points and Women are getting 2. It's so simple I don't know how much clearer we can make it. Give your heads a wobble and take them out of the sand.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Michael
    · 22 days ago
    Stop gaslighting B&W.

    There is nothing intentional going on. Simply those people it affects are most likely to be women. 

    One could, therefore, assume by logic that more women claim, or are in receipt of, the standard rate than men. So these results obviously follow trends.

    You're setting one group against the other when we are in this together.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Skippy
      · 16 days ago
      @Sam Disabled women should really be looking as a collective to sue the arse out of the DWP for gender discrimination then?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Skippy
      · 16 days ago
      @Michael Probably the fact that women get sicker than men because they go to the doctors when unwell!  Also the world is still very patriarchal and if you’re a woman then you are indeed treated as a second class citizen both within the home and workplace and not forgetting of course the government and its quangos!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Sam
      · 22 days ago
      @Michael So, if you introduce a rule that disadvantages women disproportionately compared to men but it wasn't "intentional" then that's OK in your view?

      Why do you think that this is setting one group against another?  Nobody is saying men should lose their awards, it's just highlighting the undeniable fact that more women will lose their awards than men and that is discriminatory.

      Why do you feel the need to support the DWP when it discriminates in this way?  Why do you not see it as just more evidence that everything about the Green Paper is ill thought out and should be stopped?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Moose
    · 22 days ago
    Not sure how this helps? Anyone losing their PIP because of the 4 point rule will be a victim of this travesty. The DWP hardly know which way is up on a day to day basis and for all their failings I can’t see them or the Gov setting out to specifically disadvantage one sex over another. I’m sure if you asked enough FOI questions you’d find other sectors of claimants at some further disadvantage. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Frances
      · 22 days ago
      @Moose
      @Moose, noone needs to have set out to specifically disadvantage one sex over another, but that is the projected result, or impact, of the proposed action, and that is a point which offers the opportunity for a legal challenge. If further questions were to reveal other sectors at some further disadvantage, that would be further opportunity for a legal challenge.

      The fact that a discriminatory impact has been exposed in one area also gives weight to the argument that a full impact assessment should be made before a vote on the green paper. People need to be aware what it is they would be voting for.



  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    rookie
    · 22 days ago
    I know it's the Torygraph, but could be the rebels are rising! First time I tried, I couldn't read the whole thing because of the pay wall, then it let me, so here are a few excerpts:

    "The rebellion is understood to extend into the Government, with a handful of parliamentary private secretaries (PPS), who hold the most junior ministerial rank, said to be wavering on the issue."

    "In a letter that will be sent to Alan Campbell, the Government’s Chief Whip, next week about 130 MPs have said Sir Keir must change course or risk defeat in the Commons."

    "One of the signatories, a backbencher, told The Telegraph: “There’s a lot of people who have children with quite profound disabilities and things like that. The under-22 thing has caused quite a lot of concern.

    “One of our colleagues has a child with a severe disability. Their condition isn’t going to get better from 18 to 22.”"

    "They described the welfare cuts as “Treasury capture”, adding: “This letter is something that quite explicitly says this isn’t good enough and as things stand we’re not going to vote for it from as large a group of people as possible."

    “They need to start listening. It’s as simple as that. No one’s paying any attention to the bigger picture and nobody will give us any credit if we’re mired in this kind of stuff.”

    “An independent and comprehensive analysis of all the proposals in the Pathways to Work green paper should be undertaken and made available to Parliament prior to any Bill being presented and any vote taking place

    “While these activities are undertaken, the Bill should be delayed such that it may reflect the findings."

    “We regret that we are unable to support a Bill before this has taken place.”


    https://www.google.co.uk/url?q=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/05/15/starmer-faces-benefits-rebellion-of-more-than-100-mps/&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwjh9Yrwk6aNAxWVXUEAHRWsAhAQ0PADegQICBAD&usg=AOvVaw3g2VZpoEQXHj3E_jN8bWb8
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      James
      · 21 days ago
      @SLB Those a*** holes are paid sock puppets from political parties. They have monopolised comments in the news papers to a science. If you talk about disability there will be comments about the dingys, if you talk about housing crisis, there will be comments about the dingys, if you talk anything human and humanitarian they will be against that too. What many don't realise if they are real people is that the attack is not on the disabled but on themselves. It is they who will not get help or care when they fall sick or disabled or have an accident as they are not made of steel but of flesh and blood like the rest of us!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      SLB
      · 22 days ago
      @rookie Have you seen the comments from readers at the end of that article?  Really disturbing that so many a***holes like that exist in our country, with absolutely no empathy for people in a worse position than they are.  That said, the Telegraph has become something of a joke in recent times.  You can be a right-leaning paper and still be a serious one, but so many of its stories these days feel like they have come from a tabloid.  I'm glad they're publicising the letter to Starmer, but they're not on our side, they're just happy that Starmer is getting a bashing. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      SLB
      · 22 days ago
      @rookie But if that backbencher is a signatory, why are the still wanting to be anonymous in newspapers?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      The Dogmother
      · 22 days ago
      @rookie Wow! Very interesting read. Thank you. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      James
      · 22 days ago
      @rookie https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/keir-starmer-braced-for-huge-labour-rebellion-over-welfare-cuts_uk_6825dde6e4b0a8ff0de6aecf

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    The Dogmother
    · 22 days ago
    https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/kendall-refuses-to-apologise-after-misleading-mps-four-times-in-23-minutes-about-pip-cuts/
    Not sure if anyone's interested in this or if ots already been shared 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      The Dogmother
      · 21 days ago
      @sara Fight we must @sara and we will.xx
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      sara
      · 21 days ago
      @The Dogmother All on point and worthwhile efforts @The Dogmother, and everyone. The message is filtering through, and painful though it may be, we have to keep sending it.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      The Dogmother
      · 22 days ago
      @keepingitreal And by God have they tripped themselves up repeatedly.  @Keepingitreal
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      James
      · 22 days ago
      @Pixelmum I agree she is a piece of work
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      The Dogmother
      · 22 days ago
      @Pixelmum She couldn't spell compassion. She's beneath contempt. Sick of the sight of her. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Bert
    · 22 days ago
    Maybe the NHS can patch everybody on this site up,now their making more appointments available. Then we can all look for work come November 2026.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      The Dogmother
      · 22 days ago
      @Bert Maybe they could give me an entirely fully functioning digestive system, a new brain to control my extreme migraines , new lungs, two knees, stop my chronic pain, and switch my brain off,cure my NAFLD, sort my two heart conditions out. Oh no wait... they've tried to help with all that my entire life... so nope. Not happening. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Debbs
    · 22 days ago
    I migrated from ESA support group last month to UC just received my payment breakdown it only shows standard allowance being paid nothing about limited capability for work related group ESA Support group. Sent message on my journal asking why the limited capability for work support group hasn't been put on. Had message back saying they are waiting for specialist team to transfer all my ESA information over and once they have any arrears will be issued. How long does that take living of fresh air at moment. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      James
      · 21 days ago
      @Debbs I had my New ESA Claimant call and it went well with a very supportive lady it was straight forward because I am in the support group. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Bert
      · 22 days ago
      @Debbs You should get your disability premium shortly.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      James
      · 22 days ago
      @Debbs As someone going through the migration I had the same thing and soon I had a letter I was to be put on the new style esa which is contributory based so basically you will get a basic amount on uc and the transitional support and then paid every two weeks on new esa. Seemed to me this was a complete waste of effort as I am due to retire next year, and we don't get monthly but monthly for the uc and every 2 weeks for the esa so really don't understand why all this fuss in migration in the first place!
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Alex
    · 22 days ago
    This article is pointless, I wouldn't call this discrimination at all.  I doubt they looked at the statistics and decided to target women, they have just gone after everyone and made it harder to claim PIP. 

    It's like if I was a shop owner saying I'll close my shop at 10pm, and someone coming along and saying I'm doing it to discriminate against women because in this area there's more women that shop at 11pm.  When the real reason I'm doing it is to reduce my hours. 

    And in this case, the government just wants to reduce the bill.  The real discrimination is against disabled people in general, as they always scapegoat us every time they need money.  It's disgusting, and sickening to think of how we have been treated in recent years, and it keeps getting worse.  So please, don't try to divide us even more. 

    And as I said a few weeks ago, they have decided to use the time honoured tactic of divide and conquer.  They have already split us into several groups - people under 22 are now being treated worse.  And new claimants are being treated worse.  This IS discrimination, why should a disabled person that's 21, or someone that's just starting a claim, require less money?  There is no justifiable reason for this, they are again just doing it to DIVIDE us.  Oldest trick in the book. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Sam
      · 22 days ago
      @WorkshyLayabout @workshylayabout 

      No, what is stated in the article is that, if you apply for PIP at the moment, your chances of getting an award are almost exactly equal whether you are male or female. More women than men apply for PIP, but the proportion of applicants who get it is the same regardless of gender.

      Under the planned 4 point rule, if you are a woman applying for PIP your chances of getting it are significantly lower than if you are a man. Therefore , one of the effects of the rule change, regardless of whether it was intentional or incidental, is that it discriminates against female applicants.

      This is another valid arguement against these proposals and I'm surprised that some commentors are suddenly taking the DWP's side and suggesting this is not a legitimate point of view.

      If you think gender discrimination isn't relevant then you need to explain why the DWP produced its "Spring Statement 2025 health and disability benefit reforms – Equality Analysis" on the Green Paper which goes through issues like disability, age, ethnicity, sexual orientation, pregnancy and maternity and gender reassignment.  The DWP are  supposed to ensure that their policies are not discriminatory and this one very clearly is.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Helen Galloway
      · 22 days ago
      @Sam Yes and you have to use everything to your advantage we have to use and argue everything to our advantage. So any slip up or issue that can be viewed a certain way must be used. We are dealing with ruthlessness and we fight back against them with the same . Having worked for them you’d be surprised the whole point is to stop them from taking our benefits away. If we get them to back off whatever way it’s a win 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      James
      · 22 days ago
      @Alex it can be indirect discrimination 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      WorkshyLayabout
      · 22 days ago
      @Sam PIP awards for women have always been higher than PIP awards for men, including current awards. This is stated in the article and information available on stat xplore. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Sam
      · 22 days ago
      @Alex Discrimination doesn't have to be deliberate and calculated to be discrimination. As a result of these changes, if you are a woman you are less likely to get PIP than if you are a man, whereas at the moment men and women are equally likely to get it. How is that not discrimination at all?  It's the very definition of discrimination. 

      It's an extra reason to oppose the Green Paper, not only is it unfair on all disabled claimants and it's also discriminatory.  How is that dividing us?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Bert
    · 22 days ago
    I've already invested in a new memory stick,if I have too start looking for work come November 2026.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      robbie
      · 22 days ago
      @Bert No harm in being prepared @Bert, but don't give up the fight!
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    SLB
    · 22 days ago
    Thank you to all of you who commented on my post about tagging all Labour MPs in a social media post, trying to explain the benefits system in 3 minutes!  Thanks to everyone who has offered help or already produced some.   

    I've had a rather rough day with my mental health (it's been much worse since all of this started), and so I'm going to take a few days off from fighting DWP (or try to, at least).  

    On Sunday, I'll draft the extended X post (Musk has my £10 to allow 25,000 characters!) and then send it out on Monday.  If we want to attract the attention of Labour MPs on X (or elsewhere), then I think a weekday when they're in Westminster will be a good time.   It means it would be more likely that they would talk to each other, too.  We only need a couple of them to take note for word of mouth to take effect.  It probably won't happen, but it's worth a try.  At the moment anything is worth a go.  

    Have a good few days, and I'll be back on Sunday.  :)
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      The Dogmother
      · 22 days ago
      @SLB Go easy on yourself. 
      I'm not eating nor sleeping even worse than usual too. My heads frazzled.so I get it totally. 
      Think we all need to try to be a bit  kinder to ourselves. I've not been on here much of late, but I do like very much to read what all the others including yourself comment. 
      A lot of the comments have helped me today and gave me hope. Thank you. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      keepingitreal
      · 22 days ago
      @SLB You look after yourself @SLB xx
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    The Dogmother
    · 22 days ago
    https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2025-05-06.50397.h&s=PIP+Assessments#g50397.r0
    Here's the link. To timms waffle. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      rookie
      · 22 days ago
      @The Dogmother Well he has to come up with something. The longer we keep up our resistance the more he and the rest will have to say, and the more mistakes they will make and ridiculous they'll sound.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    The Dogmother
    · 22 days ago
    Apparently, according to Timms,if you get 1,2,3 points in any activity, instead of the proposed 4 then you can be "helped" by "small" adjustments and aids. In other words minimising any conditions you suffer from. I just can't get my head around it all.
    I just read it on "They work for us".
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      The Dogmother
      · 21 days ago
      @SLB They've lost the plot. 
      They've definitely lost it.
      There's no rhyme nor reason to any of it. Stephen Timms needs to wake up...fast!! 
      This is cruelty. It's an obscenity. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      The Dogmother
      · 21 days ago
      @SLB So "Low level" functional needs. You can't dress so you can't go out to work, you can't cut your own food up or indeed cook it properly, so how do you nourish yourself to work  or indeed take pills as you generally need to eat before taking them. As for the toilet needs side ,we'll that is absolutely ridiculous too. I won't go into my friends toilet needs, except to say it gets v v messy and she can't see to herself to any satisfactory degree. Oh and if you can only wash bottom half and not top or other way round ,or dress either, do you go out half naked? Am I missing something am I wrong? Or do they honestly expect ppl to ignore their express needs and "Get on with it". Your needs don't change just because "They" change the goalposts. It's ludicrous. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Yorkie Bard
      · 21 days ago
      @SLB What an excellent letter SLB!

      Power to your typing finger for when you compose your upcoming X post. I can't wait to read it.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Anon
      · 22 days ago
      @The Dogmother A noose and a guillotine?

      Take your pick guys.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      SLB
      · 22 days ago
      @The Dogmother The letter at the following link was sent to Timms about his comments, and put on X.  It was view 50,000 times on X, but we still never got a reply.

      https://silentmovieblog.wordpress.com/2025/04/12/needing-help-to-eat-dress-wash-cook-and-use-the-toilet-are-not-low-level-functional-needs-an-open-letter-to-stephen-timms-mp/
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Gingin
    · 22 days ago
    Carers UK have published an open letter to Starmer. I know many of you will have signed countless petitions and letters but PLEASE DON’T MISS this one. 

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Sharon
      · 16 days ago
      @Gingin Signed the above open letter. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Mick
      · 22 days ago
      @Gingin Signed as well, thanks Gingin.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      WorkshyLayabout
      · 22 days ago
      @Gingin Without carer's allowance, those being cared for will likely have to move into care homes. Firstly this means people will lose any independence they have, and, secondly, will costs £1000s per person per week. An unaffordable amount of money for many thus leading to even higher council tax*. Thirdly, carers will lose much of their income and end up claiming other benefits to compensate.  

      Taking away carer's allowance will end up costing the government more. No analogy is perfectly but it reminds me of claimants who had their mobility part of PIP removed and were no longer eligible for a motability car. So these people had to take taxis which the (previous) government paid for. And the cost of taxi fares far outweighed the PIP costs.

      *There are working people who agree with these cuts. In fact any cuts to the benefits system. They may agree slightly less when they work out social care costs will increase and so will council tax to help pay for them. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Moose
      · 22 days ago
      @Gingin Signed
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Pixelmum
      · 22 days ago
      @Gingin Done.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    SLB
    · 22 days ago
    I've got to say that I think the whole male vs female, and North vs South divides are just a remarkably unhelpful distraction.  If you lose your benefits it doesn't matter how many other people share your gender or location.  A person is a person.   

    This report isn't talking about discrimination of any kind.  The 4 point system wasn't designed to hit one or another gender.  It just falls that way, partly because men and women are more or less likely to have certain conditions.   It would be discrimination if the eligibility rules were different for men and women.  They're not.  I know that we are trying to get attention from MPs and the public as much as possible, but in this instance it looks like desperation on our part, and we would be much better concentrating on what actually matters.  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      keepingitreal
      · 22 days ago
      @SLB Whether or not the 4 point system were intended to hit one group more than another, might it not be deemed discriminatory if the impact were ignored, though, now it is known? The outcome of the cuts would be discriminatory, hitting women more than men. The discrimination does not have to have been intentional. I think that is what B&W are saying:

      "It would be a shocking outcome for any MP to choose to support" what they now know would be discriminatory.

      The value in identifying discrimination is not to assert the rights of one claimant over another, it's to use a flaw in the proposition which gives us a chance to challenge the entire green paper.


    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Sam
      · 22 days ago
      @SLB  How do you know "It just falls that way, partly because men and women are more or less likely to have certain conditions." rather than say, because assessors are more likely to assess men as having more serious needs than women and thus be more likely to award them four points?

      If it looks desperate to point out that this is discriminatory then why did the DWP do an impact assessment that looked at how the changes would affect claimants on the basis of gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability and many other issues? And why didn't they highlight this issue in their impact assessment?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    AW
    · 22 days ago
    To put it plainly then, the effects of a disability on a Man's life are being more highly valued than those same effects on a Woman's life. In other words, assessors and decision makers believe Men more than they believe Women. Same old story of medical gaslighting as weve always had. Hopefully this should open the door to further research as this cannot be left uninvestigated. It's clearly a breach of equality law.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    keepingitreal
    · 22 days ago
    WorkshyLayabout As I have posted under the previous article: I don't think it is helpful to set one area of entitlement against another. IT ALL NEEDS TO BE STOPPED.

    However, I do think there is value in seizing any feature of the proposals which could expose them to a charge of discrimination. Anything we can challenge in law could build and take down the whole green paper.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Laura
      · 22 days ago
      @godgivemestrength I agree, very suspect.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      godgivemestrength
      · 22 days ago
      @keepingitreal I've always thought it interesting that the pm appointed so many women to senior roles - Rayner, Reeves, Cooper, Kendall, McGovern. Does Starmer think they are more likely to toe the line?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Dave Dee
    · 22 days ago
    Wasn't it Rosie Duffield who alleged that Keir Starmer has a problem with Women? She resigned the Labour whip only last year to my knowledge, there's no smoke without fire.

    Labour on the opposition benches hollered and cried about social justice, about equality and inclusion and when they go into government they suddenly go further than the Tories ever wanted to go on cuts. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      alzon
      · 22 days ago
      @Dave Dee "go further than the Tories ever wanted to go on cuts" 

      this again. the Tories

      i see nowhere is safe from misinformation.

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

Over 110,000 claimants and professionals subscribe to the UK's leading source of benefits news.

 
iContact

Latest news

We use cookies

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential for the operation of the site, while others help us to improve this site and the user experience (tracking cookies). You can decide for yourself whether you want to allow cookies or not. Please note that if you reject them, you may not be able to use all the functionalities of the site.

Ok Decline
More about cookies