A media narrative that seems to occur on a biannual basis is that of diversity issues in the workplace. Newspapers draft in a small, two hundred word article abundant with statistics indicating the ever lingering diversity problems.

These articles usually conclude that whilst diversity is increasing in the workplace it could be a lot better, this is the twenty-first century after all, right? Let's pull our finger out and get fair! Yet, what many seem to overlook is that the source of any diversity problems in the workplace arises from discrimination in employment. It is this first phase after all where candidates are picked and this is what we should be concentrating on.

It is important to note that discrimination is not always something like raw sexism, in fact thankfully the large majority of it is precisely not that. Instead, most discrimination in recruitment is that of an almost subconscious calibre, which does not make it excusable but means that the possibility of employers being educated about their subliminal prejudices and consequentially amending their employment processes, is very likely.

A good example of a group that often faces 'subliminal discrimination' are the blind and partially sighted. I recently spoke on air to InSight Radio's Simon Pauley about the issues blind graduates face when job hunting. He told me that many people simply assume that those without sight cannot do the job that they are advertising, and nine times out of ten that is not true.

Something the general public are more aware of is sexual discrimination, especially against women and the reason is usually attributed to the potential of maternity leave. Much debate continues as to whether this is 'justified' from a business perspective but the fact remains that it makes a woman's task of landing the job she wants and deserves harder than a man's. Something that I think most will agree, is simply not fair, especially if the woman is a better candidate for the vacancy than her male competition.

The factor that will effect the most people who are registered on graduate-jobs.com is that of age discrimination. Even if you are qualified and have the right experience many people feel that their youth works against them. Ageism is rather accepted in modern day society maybe because it is a quality of one that changes unlike race, gender or disability. Usually it is nothing more than a flippant joke from one generation to another. However, when the stereotypes of younger people (naive, lazy, topically unaware, etc.) begin to affect employment prospects the matter gets serious.

Again, it is simply a matter of education and the availability of measures to work against these prejudices. graduate-jobs.com is, in its nature, a website that fights against age discrimination because every employer on the site is looking for young graduates who are fresh out of university. Additionally, the site's AA Accessibility rating makes it fully compatible with screen readers - another example of a measure that acts as a springboard for a discriminated group to reach their deserved level of equality. Finally, with the launch of graduate-women.com (coming soon!) we are creating a place where women know the recruiters are looking for them and will not place them second because of their gender.

Equality is a human right but unfortunately it is not always enough to simply say "everyone is equal" we have to actively pursue it. What do you think of the above issues? Is there such a thing as 'justified discrimination'? Have you had any experience of prejudice when job hunting? Let us know below.