Recruitment Guide

What the Equality Act 2010 means for your recruitment

The Equality Act 2010 makes it unlawful to discriminate against job applicants because of nine protected characteristics, and this applies at every stage of recruitment, from advertising through to the final decision. Employers must avoid asking about health or disability before a job offer (with narrow exceptions), must make reasonable adjustments for disabled candidates, and may only use positive action, not positive discrimination, to address underrepresentation. Getting this right means reviewing job adverts, application questions, interview practices, and any diversity-focused hiring initiatives against these specific legal boundaries.

What the Equality Act 2010 actually requires from your recruitment process, step by step

Written by Adam Gray, Digital Director at CJA Group. Adam leads employer marketing strategy at CJA, including EVP development and the careers sites that give clients a strong digital presence.

The Equality Act 2010 doesn’t just apply once someone is employed. Acas is explicit that the law protects anyone who works for an employer, contractors and self-employed people hired to personally do the work, job applicants, and former workers — meaning obligations start the moment a role is advertised, not once someone is hired.

The nine protected characteristics

Recruitment decisions must not be influenced, directly or indirectly, by any of the characteristics protected under the Act: age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation.

What you can and can’t ask about health or disability

This is one of the most commonly misunderstood parts of the Act. The legislation’s own explanatory notes set out the position clearly: an employer would not be permitted to ask an applicant health questions until they have offered the candidate a job, other than to establish whether a reasonable adjustment is needed for the recruitment process itself, or to check whether the applicant can undertake a function that is intrinsic to the job.

Acas confirms the same principle from the employer’s practical obligation: employers must make reasonable adjustments for job applicants or interviewees if they are disabled, and this can be relevant at any stage of the recruitment process, such as providing an application form in a different format.

Positive action versus positive discrimination

This is the distinction that causes the most confusion, and getting it wrong carries real legal risk. Section 159 of the Act permits positive action only in a specific, narrow circumstance. Per the Act’s own explanatory notes, an employer may take a protected characteristic into consideration when deciding whom to recruit, where people with that characteristic are at a disadvantage or under-represented, but only where the candidates are as qualified as each other, and the employer must not have a policy of automatically treating anyone with a protected characteristic more favourably.

In practice, this means positive action can only ever act as a genuine tie-breaker between two equally qualified candidates, not a quota, a reserved shortlist, or a policy of automatic preference. Anything beyond that tips into unlawful positive discrimination, which is exactly why widening reach through our Diversity & Inclusion Recruitment approach has to be built on genuinely lawful foundations, not shortcuts.

What this means for job adverts and the wider process

Taken together, the practical requirements for a compliant recruitment process are:

  1. Ensure job adverts don’t directly or indirectly exclude candidates based on any protected characteristic
  2. Remove any health or disability questions from application forms, except where needed to arrange a reasonable adjustment or assess a core, intrinsic job function
  3. Build in reasonable adjustments as standard practice, not as an exception handled case by case
  4. If using positive action, ensure it only ever applies as a tie-breaker between equally qualified candidates, never as an automatic preference or quota
  5. Keep records showing recruitment decisions were made on merit and role-relevant criteria, not protected characteristics

Getting this right across the whole process, from advertising to interview to offer, is exactly the kind of compliance-aware practical audit we build into our Recruitment Outsourcing / RPO service, as well as our Diversity & Inclusion Recruitment approach.

Frequently asked questions

Only in narrow circumstances: to establish whether a reasonable adjustment is needed for the recruitment process itself, or to check whether they can perform a function that is intrinsic to the role. General health questions must wait until after a job offer has been made.

Yes to monitoring, but reasonable adjustments work differently. Monitoring forms must be kept entirely separate from the application form and CV and must not be seen by anyone involved in shortlisting, since they're for aggregate reporting only. Reasonable adjustments, by contrast, do need to reach the people running the process, since they're used to act on requests like an accessible interview format or extra time in an assessment, and an employer can proactively ask about this at any stage, unlike general health questions.

No. Section 159 only permits positive action as a tie-breaker between candidates who are equally qualified. A policy of automatically favouring anyone with a protected characteristic, including quotas, is not covered by this provision and would likely constitute unlawful positive discrimination.

Yes. The Equality Act 2010's recruitment protections apply to employers across all sectors. Public sector organisations also carry the Public Sector Equality Duty, an additional requirement to actively consider equality impacts in their decisions.

Yes. The obligations apply at every stage of recruitment, from the advert itself through to the final hiring decision.