Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
As published
131 Assessment of whether work is of equal value
(1) This section applies to proceedings before an employment tribunal on—
(a) a complaint relating to a breach of an equality clause or rule, or
(b) a question referred to the tribunal by virtue of section 128(2).
(2) Where a question arises in the proceedings as to whether one person's work is of equal value to another's, the tribunal may, before determining the question, require a member of the panel of independent experts to prepare a report on the question.
(3) The tribunal may withdraw a requirement that it makes under subsection (2); and, if it does so, it may—
(a) request the panel member to provide it with specified documentation;
(b) make such other requests to that member as are connected with the withdrawal of the requirement.
(4) If the tribunal requires the preparation of a report under subsection (2) (and does not withdraw the requirement), it must not determine the question unless it has received the report.
(5) Subsection (6) applies where—
(a) a question arises in the proceedings as to whether the work of one person (A) is of equal value to the work of another (B), and
(b) A's work and B's work have been given different values by a job evaluation study.
(6) The tribunal must determine that A's work is not of equal value to B's work unless it has reasonable grounds for suspecting that the evaluation contained in the study—
(a) was based on a system that discriminates because of sex, or
(b) is otherwise unreliable.
(7) For the purposes of subsection (6)(a), a system discriminates because of sex if a difference (or coincidence) between values that the system sets on different demands is not justifiable regardless of the sex of the person on whom the demands are made.
(8) A reference to a member of the panel of independent experts is a reference to a person—
(a) who is for the time being designated as such by the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) for the purposes of this section, and
(b) who is neither a member of the Council of ACAS nor one of its officers or members of staff.
(9) “Job evaluation study” has the meaning given in section 80(5).
Your change, as a redline
131 Assessment of whether work is of equal value
(1) This section applies to proceedings before an employment tribunal on—
(a) a complaint relating to a breach of an equality clause or rule, or
(b) a question referred to the tribunal by virtue of section 128(2).
(2) Where a question arises in the proceedings as to whether one person's work is of equal value to another's, the tribunal may, before determining the question, require a member of the panel of independent experts to prepare a report on the question.
(3) The tribunal may withdraw a requirement that it makes under subsection (2); and, if it does so, it may—
(a) request the panel member to provide it with specified documentation;
(b) make such other requests to that member as are connected with the withdrawal of the requirement.
(4) If the tribunal requires the preparation of a report under subsection (2) (and does not withdraw the requirement), it must not determine the question unless it has received the report.
(5) Subsection (6) applies where—
(a) a question arises in the proceedings as to whether the work of one person (A) is of equal value to the work of another (B), and
(b) A's work and B's work have been given different values by a job evaluation study.
(6) The tribunal must determine that A's work is not of equal value to B's work unless it has reasonable grounds for suspecting that the evaluation contained in the study—
(a) was based on a system that discriminates because of sex, or
(b) is otherwise unreliable.
(7) For the purposes of subsection (6)(a), a system discriminates because of sex if a difference (or coincidence) between values that the system sets on different demands is not justifiable regardless of the sex of the person on whom the demands are made.
(8) A reference to a member of the panel of independent experts is a reference to a person—
(a) who is for the time being designated as such by the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) for the purposes of this section, and
(b) who is neither a member of the Council of ACAS nor one of its officers or members of staff.
(9) “Job evaluation study” has the meaning given in section 80(5).
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.