It is unlawful for a person, in relation to employment by him at an establishment in Great Britain, to discriminate against a woman—
(a) in the arrangements he makes for the purpose of determining who should be offered that employment, or
(b) in the terms on which he offers her that employment, or
(c) by refusing or deliberately omitting to offer her that employment.
It is unlawful for a person, in the case of a woman employed by him at an establishment in Great Britain, to discriminate against her—
(a) in the way he affords her access to opportunities for promotion, transfer or training, or to any other benefits, facilities or services, or by refusing or deliberately omitting to afford her access to them, or
(b) by dismissing her, or subjecting her to any other detriment.
It is unlawful for an employer, in relation to employment by him at an establishment in Great Britain, to subject to harassment—
(a) a woman whom he employs, or
(b) a woman who has applied to him for employment.
For the purposes of subsection (2A), the circumstances in which an employer is to be treated as subjecting a woman to harassment shall include those where—
(a) a third party subjects the woman to harassment in the course of her employment, and
(b) the employer has failed to take such steps as would have been reasonably practicable to prevent the third party from doing so.
Subsection (2B) does not apply unless the employer knows that the woman has been subject to harassment in the course of her employment on at least two other occasions by a third party.
In subsections (2B) and (2C), “third party” means a person other than—
(a) the employer, or
(b) a person whom the employer employs,
and for the purposes of those subsections it is immaterial whether the third party is the same or a different person on each occasion.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Subsections (1)(b) and (2) do not render it unlawful for a person to discriminate against a woman in relation to her membership of, or rights under, an occupational pension scheme in such a way that, were any term of the scheme to provide for discrimination in that way, then, by reason only of any provision made by or under sections 62 to 64 of the Pensions Act 1995 (equal treatment), an equal treatment rule would not operate in relation to that term.
In subsection (4), “occupational pension scheme” has the same meaning as in the Pension Schemes Act 1993 and “equal treatment rule” has the meaning given by section 62 of the Pensions Act 1995
Subject to section 8(3), subsection (1)(b) does not apply to any provision for the payment of money which, if the woman in question were given the employment, would be included (directly . . . or otherwise) in the contract under which she was employed.
Subsection (2) does not apply to benefits consisting of the payment of money when the provision of those benefits is regulated by the woman’s contract of employment.
Subsection (2) does not apply to benefits, facilities or services of any description if the employer is concerned with the provision (for payment or not) of benefits, facilities or services of that description to the public, or to a section of the public comprising the woman in question, unless—
(a) that provision differs in a material respect from the provision of the benefits, facilities or services by the employer to his employees, or
(b) the provision of the benefits, facilities or services to the woman in question is regulated by her contract of employment, or
(c) the benefits, facilities or services relate to training.
In its application to any discrimination falling within section 2A, this section shall have effect with the omission of subsections (4) to (6).