The Ref Stop

White Brits pay more for Ref course

Donate to RefChat

Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Ref Stop
Controversial topic. I can see why it may be done if the right reasons behind it and done the right way.

Many years ago when I was more involved, for several years we offered free female only courses. To top it up we only took a bond on equupment (shirt, short, socks, whistle and flag) and returned it after 20 games in centre or on line. This increased our active female membership from around 1% to close to 10%.
 
Such a good response, it appeared three times after a server glitch😕😁
Pembroke said:
Discrimination based upon race is not legal under the 2010 equalities act.
Click to expand...
The legislation includes:

Positive Action: This is lawful and involves taking steps to improve equality and representation in the workplace. For example, employers can implement targeted recruitment strategies to attract candidates from underrepresented backgrounds or provide training to help these groups overcome barriers.
 
Kent Ref said:
One day somebody is going to challenge this ridiculous practice.

Just charge everybody £40 - then you'll get al those not interested plus those that are interested in being a referee. Win-Win!
Click to expand...
One would need to understand why it is done that way. Once it is understood it wont be difficult to accept it.

In our case of female referees, our assosiation had a player participation rate of aound 25% far higher than the rate for referee. Of course if participation rate and inclusivity is not an issue or a priority then no reason for doing anything different. If dis the course for everyo e for free (win-win) we not only would have had budgetting issues but regardless I doubt it would have changed the participation rate.
 
Pembroke said:
And could you highlight how people are being disadvantaged by the FA? If this criteria is not met the positive action becomes positive discrimination and this is not legal..
Click to expand...
This is wrong.

"evidence of the disadvantage, particular need or disproportionately low levels of participation, as appropriate, and an analysis of the causes"

There is clear evidence of the disproportionate levels of participation, so it meets the criteria to be considered as positive action.

The level of referees from BAME backgrounds that referee, especially when correlated against participants that play are very clearly imbalanced.

One of the barriers, and I would imagine the FA have done their research, is the cost of the course. Unfortunately if you are a white male and the barrier is cost you aren't in an underrepresented group. If the cost is reduced for everyone then the risk is that the participation levels won't change.
 
JamesL said:
This is wrong.

"evidence of the disadvantage, particular need or disproportionately low levels of participation, as appropriate, and an analysis of the causes"

There is clear evidence of the disproportionate levels of participation, so it meets the criteria to be considered as positive action.

The level of referees from BAME backgrounds that referee, especially when correlated against participants that play are very clearly imbalanced.

One of the barriers, and I would imagine the FA have done their research, is the cost of the course. Unfortunately if you are a white male and the barrier is cost you aren't in an underrepresented group. If the cost is reduced for everyone then the risk is that the participation levels won't change.
Click to expand...

Then the FA are discriminating against people based upon their race. Disadvantage is not exclusive. Today I will be in BS4 Bristol, Knowle West an area noted for social deprivation .. Imagine going to that sports centre down the road for a coaching/refs courses and telling people they will pay three times more than somebody else based upon their race. Image the kids clubs that are charities telling parents your kid and kids pay more or less dependant on their colour ..
 
Pembroke said:
And could you highlight how people are being disadvantaged by the FA? If this criteria is not met the positive action becomes positive discrimination and this is not legal..
Click to expand...
How did you come up with that criteria?

Replace the FA by society and youd have you criteria.

blackref said:
I dont want a discount because of my colour and neither do I wanna pay more.
Click to expand...
And everyone should respect that. You should be able to pay full fee if you did the course. However note that others within your race may not feel the same. Also need to point out, it's not the colour that is the reason for discount, it's the participation rate of that colour. The dicount is to improve that rate.
 
Pembroke said:
Then the FA are discriminating against people based upon their race. Disadvantage is not exclusive. Today I will be in BS4 Bristol, Knowle West an area noted for social deprivation .. Imagine going to that sports centre down the road for a coaching/refs courses and telling people they will pay three times more than somebody else based upon their race. Image the kids clubs that are charities telling parents your kid and kids pay more or less dependant on their colour ..
Click to expand...
No they aren't. You've been given the official guidance on the gov.uk website, you can't just say that is wrong because you don't agree with it. One of the permitted usage of positive action is defined as ...

Enabling or encouraging people who share the protected characteristic to participate in an activity where they are disproportionately underrepresented

Based on the latest data around 4% of referees in England identify as BAME. In SG1, SG2 and the national group 247 are white, only 7 are from minority ethnic backgrounds. No sane person could argue that those numbers are representative of the general population, therefore referees from ethnic minorities are by definition disproportionately represented and positive action is permitted.

The same would apply for discounted courses for female referees. As of last year 6% of referees in England are female, compared to 51% of the population being female, that makes it impossible to argue that they are not disproportionately represented.

I do understand your point about people living in social deprivation, but income and living standards aren't protected characteristics and therefore positive action doesn't apply. But I do know that some CFAs have run free or discounted courses in such areas.
 
Discount schemes like should be means tested the biggest barrier to people doing the referee course is money not race.

@RustyRef Where are you getting your stats from? It was more than double that percentage of BAME refs before these discount schemes became so prevalent
 
bester said:
Discount schemes like should be means tested the biggest barrier to people doing the referee course is money not race.

@RustyRef Where are you getting your stats from? It was more than double that percentage of BAME refs before these discount schemes became so prevalent
Click to expand...
A live article on the FA website, although granted it may be out of date, rather unhelpfully doesn't have a date on it.

That said, even with whatever the current numbers may be ethnic minority groups would still be disproportionately represented based on general society.
 
Pembroke said:
Then the FA are discriminating against people based upon their race. Disadvantage is not exclusive. Today I will be in BS4 Bristol, Knowle West an area noted for social deprivation .. Imagine going to that sports centre down the road for a coaching/refs courses and telling people they will pay three times more than somebody else based upon their race. Image the kids clubs that are charities telling parents your kid and kids pay more or less dependant on their colour ..
Click to expand...
2021 census shows 18% of English and Welsh population is BAME. Given that Wales is 90.6% white British in that census, the percentage of BAME individuals in England is higher than that 18%. Yet as per the linked document in the above post, less than 11% of referees in England are BAME. Disproportionally low, therefore positive action is quite reasonable.

If you have something useful to say about how other disadvantaged people are being overlooked for referee courses and your proposed solutions, might I suggest addressing your concerns and suggestions to The FA, rather than complaining about it on here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top