Equality from first principles?

[purpletigron]

So ... how about axioms-based equality laws? Where should the lines lay in law for illegal discrimiation?

For example, if the core tasks of a job require the employee to do X, and a candidate for that job cannot currently do X, nor reasonably be expected to be able to do X even with realistic training, technological support etc., then it would presumably be justifiable not to consider them further for employment.

Where can we draw legal lines from first principles?

What would be your fundamental determining principles for when differential treatment is justified?

Comments

[purpletigron.livejournal.com]

"For a any skill, if the job requires X and a candidate does not possess the skill, the employer can look elsewhere, unless they view the role as a development one, and advertise it as such."

I believe that the current situation in UK employment law would be like that for attributes (not limited to skills) listed as 'Essential' in the job role advertised.

"Its never going to be practical to write a job spec that always gives exactly one suitable candidate, which is the kind of requirement needed for a legalistic approach."

I don't think I agree: I agree that it's not practical to write a job specification to give exactly one suitable candidate a priori - unless you're pulling a fix! I disagree that 'identify exactly one suitable candidate' should be the aim of a job specification :-)

ETA: Challenge zero, facilitate applications from a range of candidates fairly reflecting the distribution of suitable potential applicants.

Challenge one, the employer has to fairly identify the 'suitable candidate' pool from the set of all applicants.

Challenge two, the employer has to fairly identify one 'first choice candidate' from the set of suitable candidates. It may be that a truly random method may be the only fair way to approach challenge two?

Just to be clear I wasn't intending to limit this discussion to employment law. In most situations, there will be clearly valid reasons for differential treatment, and clearly invalid discrimination. I'm wondering whether reasonably formal logical thinking from axioms will help us map 'differential treatment space'.