In a radio interview, Keys referred cryptically to “dark forces” being at work at Sky. Well, that could be true if Mr Murdoch gets his hands on the 61% of the company he doesn’t already own – but that’s another story, for another blog!

As to this story, as I said on Monday, I see a lot of positives in the fact that the FA and Sky were both quick to react to Gray and Keys’ comments about assistant Ref, Sian Massey – but I find certain aspects of the whole thing a bit uncomfortable.

I’ve seen and heard a lot of discussions this week, with a woman on one side and a white man on the other (his colour is relevant here). When the man has tried to say he can’t see what all the fuss is about, the woman has, quite rightly, come back and said,
“That’s because you’re highly unlikely to experience discrimination in your career”.

It’s very difficult, if not impossible, to appreciate the demoralising effect of constantly being defined by just one dimension of who you are, if you’ve never experienced it.

Well (again, as I said on Monday) I’ve seen it firsthand – discrimination on the grounds of my eye-sight seriously got in the way of my progress up the legal career ladder in the early days. Pre-DDA, I was openly told by one employer that
“You can stay here as long as you like, provided you don’t expect to progress beyond the typewriter – we couldn’t take that risk”.
As a young woman in the law, I was once told (by a middle-aged, white Solicitor I dared to argue with),
“Go away, dear, have a cream cake and calm down – there’s a good girl!” Yes – really! One of the most satisfying days of my nineteen-year legal career was the day I got the result I wanted for my client in that particular case!

I don’t like discrimination in any form – but one thing I realised when I worked with the Disability Discrimination Act is that it is a fact of life, whether we like it or not. Human beings will always judge each other on the most obvious aspects of who we are – including race, gender and disability. That might not be a particularly palatable idea for a lot of us in the 21st century, but it’s true. When I trained employers in how to work with the DDA, I used to start by acknowledging this – then point out that the way to deal with it is to:
“be honest with yourself about your own prejudices – because then you can make a conscious effort to put them to one side and not let them drive your decision-making processes”.

You can’t legislate for attitudes – never could, never will. Changing ingrained views which are learnt from the cradle, and so changing cultures, takes time and education.

Sky and the FA have been very clear about the culture they’re trying to create – and good on both of them for that!; but two things make me uncomfortable about the issue of Gray and Keys:

1 – the fact remains that their comments were off-air – it was effectively a private conversation. They expressed outdated, ill-informed views in an unpleasant way, but they didn’t intend what they said to be for public consumption and their views won’t (or shouldn’t) impact on Ms Massey’s career prospects. It wasn’t the first offence – but to my knowledge, previous cock-ups didn’t make the national news. Why did this grab the attention particularly? Is there anything in the timing of it, I wonder?

2 – why did the FA remove Sian Massey from her next scheduled match? Surely their support of her and other female officials should have extended to letting her get on with her job? One argument could be that they were trying to protect her from a lot of media attention and/or abuse from the terraces – but personally, I think protection is a dangerous route to take. She’d done nothing wrong, so why was she not allowed to carry on as normal? The risk of too much protection of someone who’s open to discrimination is that it sometimes happens, unwittingly, at the expense of respect – respect, in this case, of this woman as a professional in her chosen field (no pun intended!).

What I don’t know – and if you do, I’d love to hear from you – is whether Sian Massey herself asked not to officiate at that next match?

http://www.inttradefinsolns.co.uk

Tomorrow, “Foreign Exchange Options?”.  Today, a Case Study.

No names, etc., but here’s an overview of an issue that I was recently asked for help.  A relatively new business, started up by a young woman who was born and brought up

in China, but had been in the UK for the past 12 years or so, was looking to expand and reduce overheads by importing directly from China as opposed to using a UK distributor.  Her main issues were that she would have the direct relationship with the manufacturer, how best to structure the deal from a cashflow point of view and foreign exchange

issues. 

The first was perhaps less of an issue, given her ethnicity.  Nevertheless, the need to undertake fact finding trips and to keep in regular contact is essential.  On the other 2 points, I explained the different options available [partly referring to the 'Risk Ladder' - which I talked about last month] and illustrated to her the effect on cashflow.  Typically, many Far East suppliers need funds ‘up front’ to allow them to manufacture.  Correct contract structuring at this point in the process can often avoid any physical cash prepayment, which is important. 

Buying in US Dollars and selling in Sterling meant that she had to keep an eye on her expected profit margin from the whole deal, so we discussed how she could do this whilst retaining

some flexibility to allow for delays in shipment, etc.  All in all, over the course of a couple of weeks [not intensive], she was able to decide how best to structure

this particular opportunity to the benefit of both her business and that of the seller.

If this sounds like something your business, or someone you know could benefit from, let me know.