New government guidance is calling on UK employers to reconsider the language used in job advertisements — raising important questions about equality law, recruitment practice, and what businesses are actually required to do.
The Office for Equality and Opportunity has published guidance advising recruiters to remove ‘stereotypically masculine’ language from job adverts. Words such as competitive, ambitious, dominant, strong, and leader have been identified as potentially deterring women from applying — particularly for mid-to-senior management positions.
The move forms part of a broader ‘evidence-informed’ strategy unveiled by the Women and Equalities Minister ahead of International Women’s Day. The government says the guidance is designed to remove ‘invisible barriers’ in the hiring process and help businesses access the widest possible talent pool.
What Do the Guidelines Actually Say?
Under the new recommendations, employers are encouraged to replace so-called ‘masculine-coded’ terms with neutral or ‘feminine-coded’ alternatives when writing job descriptions. The government points to research suggesting that certain character traits commonly used in recruitment are subconsciously associated with male stereotypes, which may discourage female applicants from putting themselves forward.
The guidance also raises concerns about AI-powered recruitment tools, noting that these systems often learn from historical data embedded with gender bias — and risk replicating those prejudices in newly generated job descriptions. Employers using such tools are advised to review how they are trained and what outputs they produce.
The key question for employers is not simply whether to follow this guidance, but whether their recruitment processes — taken as a whole — are genuinely free from unlawful discrimination.
How Has the Business Community Responded?
The reaction from employers and commentators has been mixed. Some have welcomed the spirit of the guidance and the broader conversation it opens about inclusive hiring. Others have questioned whether adjusting the language in a job advert is sufficient to address the deeper, structural barriers that continue to affect women’s progression in the workplace.
A number of business voices have argued that the real drivers of gender inequality — such as the gender pay gap, lack of flexible working, and inconsistent promotion pathways — deserve equal, if not greater, attention. The concern is that a focus on vocabulary risks oversimplifying a genuinely complex issue.
Critics have also suggested that implying certain words are too masculine for women to relate to risks being counterproductive — potentially reinforcing the very stereotypes the guidance seeks to dismantle. Supporters, meanwhile, point to evidence that language choices in recruitment materials can subtly shape who feels welcome to apply, and that even small changes can have a meaningful cumulative effect on diversity.
Opposition politicians have been more dismissive, describing the advice as patronising, while the government maintains that the guidance is grounded in evidence and is intended to complement — not replace — wider efforts to improve gender equality at work.
What Does This Mean for Your Business?
It is important to understand that this guidance is non-statutory — it does not create new legal obligations in itself. Employers are not legally required to follow these specific recommendations. However, the broader legal framework under the Equality Act 2010 already imposes significant duties on businesses throughout the recruitment process, and those obligations remain very much in force.
Key Legal Considerations for Employers
- Job adverts must not directly or indirectly discriminate on grounds of sex, race, age, disability, or any other protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010.
- Indirect discrimination can arise where a neutral-seeming requirement or practice places one group at a particular disadvantage — and this can include the language used in job descriptions.
- Employers using AI-assisted recruitment tools should review how those systems are trained and whether they may introduce unlawful bias into the selection process.
- Conducting equality impact assessments on recruitment processes is considered best practice and can help identify potential barriers before they become legal liabilities.
- Equal pay obligations apply from the first day of employment — regular gender pay audits are best practice and, for larger employers, a legal requirement.
- Flexible working requests and reasonable adjustments for health needs must be handled lawfully — these are areas the government has also identified as priorities for reform.
A Broader Debate Worth Taking Seriously
Regardless of one’s view on this specific guidance, the underlying question is a legitimate one: does the language used in job adverts influence who applies — and does that carry legal and commercial consequences for employers?
Research does suggest that language can shape applicant behaviour. However, the barriers facing women in the workplace extend well beyond vocabulary. Flexible working arrangements, transparent pay structures, genuine promotion pathways, and inclusive workplace cultures are widely regarded as the structural factors that make the most meaningful and lasting difference.
For employers, this guidance is a useful prompt to review recruitment processes holistically — not as a tick-box exercise, but as a genuine opportunity to ensure you are attracting the best possible candidates from across the workforce, while managing your legal obligations effectively.
Need Advice on Equality & Recruitment Law?
Whether you are reviewing your hiring practices, responding to a discrimination claim, or seeking guidance on your obligations under the Equality Act 2010, our experienced solicitors are here to help.