White men 'blocked' from applying for jobs at Premier League clubs including Man United and Liverpool, as they advertise 'only to women and ethnic minority candidates'
Proper news from Britain - News from Britain you won’t find anywhere else. Not the tosh the big media force-feed you every day!
- Man United and Liverpool posted roles for ethnic minorities and women only
- The scheme was first launched by the Premier League in the 2020-21 season
- LISTEN NOW: It's All Kicking Off!, available wherever you get your podcasts. New episodes every Monday and Thursday
The Premier League is under fire after job listings at top clubs including Manchester United and Liverpool stated that only ethnic minority candidates and women could apply - a move that some believe breaches equality laws.
The controversy centres on a league-funded scheme designed to boost representation in full-time coaching positions. Known as the Coach Inclusion and Diversity Scheme (CIDS), the initiative was launched four seasons ago and is intended to address the underrepresentation of certain groups in professional football.
According to the Premier League, the scheme is aimed at 'increasing the number of female coaches and male Black, Asian and mixed heritage coaches from a variety of backgrounds in full-time coaching positions in English professional football'.
But the way that goal has been implemented has raised alarm - particularly in job adverts, uncovered by the Telegraph, that explicitly restrict who can apply.
A expired listing from Manchester United, advertising a 23-month youth coaching role, stated: 'Coaches who are currently under-represented within the English professional game – individuals from Black, Asian and Mixed Heritage backgrounds, including women from all backgrounds.
'This is a positive action scheme aimed at addressing under-represented groups in football coaching. Applications will only be accepted from individuals from those backgrounds.'
Similarly, Liverpool's advert for a similar role reads: 'We will only consider coaches who are currently under-represented within the English professional game – individuals from Black, Asian and Mixed Heritage backgrounds, including women from all backgrounds.'
The wording used in both cases has also appeared in recruitment adverts posted by a number of other clubs - including Tottenham Hotspur, Aston Villa, Everton, Newcastle United, West Ham United, Leicester City, Brighton & Hove Albion, and Bournemouth, along with Championship sides Leeds United and Norwich City.
Some clubs have said the language came from a Premier League-provided template, which they claim has since been amended. Updated versions, they say, no longer include statements that explicitly prohibit white men from applying.
Ipswich Town and Fulham have used the revised version, though Ipswich removed its ad following internal review. Sources told Telegraph Sport the ad had been withdrawn due to concerns over 'poorly worded' content. Liverpool are expected to post a new advert soon using the updated format.
The Premier League states the scheme is open to Professional Footballers' Association (PFA) members at any level, but also notes: 'non-PFA members may also apply as long as they are a coach from a Black, Asian or mixed-heritage background, they have achieved a minimum coaching qualification of the UEFA B licence and have no previous full-time coaching experience in English professional football'.
The issue at hand is whether some adverts cross the line from lawful positive action into positive discrimination, which is prohibited under the Equality Act 2010.
According to Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) guidance: 'It is not unlawful to address disadvantage or underrepresentation by encouraging groups who share a particular protected characteristic to apply for vacancies. This is called positive action. Positive action is lawful if it is reasonable to think that people with a particular protected characteristic are underrepresented or face disadvantage and the action taken will address this and is proportionate.
'If an employer wants to take positive action in this way, the advert should clearly state the employer is seeking applications from everyone but wishes to encourage applications from people with a particular protected characteristic on the basis that they are underrepresented or face disadvantage.
'Positive action in recruitment can only be used to make people from protected characteristic groups aware of recruitment opportunities and encourage them to apply for a job. It cannot be used to restrict the job opportunity to someone with a particular protected characteristic or result in an applicant being treated more favourably during the recruitment process because they have a protected characteristic. However, if the two best candidates for a job are equally qualified, the candidate from a disadvantaged or underrepresented group can be given preference for the job if this is a proportionate means of helping to address the disadvantage or increase the group's participation.'
The backlash hasn't just been legal - political figures have weighed in too. Rupert Lowe, Independent MP for Great Yarmouth and former Southampton chairman, condemned the ads as 'disgusting anti-white racism'
Although the scheme is aimed at addressing long-standing diversity gaps in English football, the wording of the adverts - particularly the outright exclusion of some applicants - has reignited the debate over how far organisations can go in pursuing representation goals.
The Premier League has been approached for comment.
