Can't help you with the religion question, I'm afraid as I struggle wit it myself.

But a bit of advice for anyone who's filling in application forms for a local government job anywhere in England, but especially London and Birmingham.

Whatever your political reservations, if you want the job, tick "Irish" for ethnicity.
Once you start working for Lambeth,Camden or whoever, you can go back to being an Ulsterman,Northern Irish, Ulster-Scottish or just plain British.

I would have thought that kind of question was illegal on an application form. They are in the 26 counties - you'd have the Equality Authority down on you like a ton of bricks.

Or you could go to your sermons your darn heathen! ; >
I think the context and content of these (rather intrusive) personal information monitoring forms show the susceptibility of the common societal drive for equality to political trends and aspirations of the governing bodies of any given area or era, it may sound obvious, but in a truly egalitarian society , rather than a gerrymandered one, why would this information matter at all ?

I think Ulster Scots is the one i'll go for in future, we should mope like rapscallions until its on every moniter and cencus form in the country......

(thats only half in jest)

"Whatever you’re political reservations, if you want the job, tick "Irish" for ethnicity"

I have to say; in my experience what Paul is saying is very true,
Lambeth council are shockingly and blatantly partisan on a variety of highly contentious issues (admitting your a Jew is a no-no and all........)
Equality aspirations are subjected to political trends and bias? I do honestly think so These people sit in their safe and secure bohemian London town house's and judge the entire world in terms of which groups they find compelling (the amount of tarquin's running around in Yassah Arifat scarves after 9/11 is proof, in my opinion, that their idea of political righteousness is not as moralistic or humanitarian, in conventional terms, as you might think....

aonghus that's not illegal, it's mandatory. Although for religion most forms these days say "Regardless of whether we practise our religion, most of us are identified as coming from a particular community" followed by "I am a member of the Protestant community" with Catholic or neither as options - that's why this one asking specifically about religion (not community) threw me. No neither, just "other please specify". Still tempted to use "Jedi".

By the way officially the monitoring forms are separate from the application forms and they're not supposed to use them in recruitment. In fact with a lot of NI based companies you've to post back the monitoring forms in separate evelopes.

There is a disclaimer saying "This information will not be used by [us] as part of the recruitment selection process." Whether that's true or not, I don't think very many people believe it.

I don't think I would either. After all, once they have the information, how do you prove it wasn't used.

Unfortunate. And, as I said, as far as I know illegal in the south. We got a pep talk in my last job (where I had a role in recruiting people) about what questions to avoid in interviews. Personally I don't see what religion/community/ethnicity has to do with any job, except perhaps minister of religion or teacher in a denominational school.

The sooner it is irrelevant in your part of the world, the better - but I can see it will take a while, given those weasel words:

"Regardless of whether we practise our religion, most of us are identified as coming from a particular community"

I'm assuming interviewers here would be under the same guidelines Aonghus, for example in our Professional Practice module at university we're advised not to put what school we went to on our CVs since that's often a giveaway. Anyway, with a lack of any other suggestions for religion I guess Atheist will have to do, although I still have a really strong urge to write Jedi!

The School's method was one of the primary ways to identify someone's 'community'. I don't think they use that anymore.

The residuary method is the main one now, based on where you live. Naturally.

Beano, What's so offensive about describing yourself as Irish. If you are born in Ireland (in whichever of the juristictions) you are, and are entitled to call yourself Irish. Whether you wish to describe yourself in addition as Ulster Irish, or Scots-Ulster Irish, or British-Irish, or Anglo-Irish or indeed Connacht Irish or Polish-Irish or Nigerian-Irish or whatever, is largely irrelevant and a matter for yourself. Why should Irish be perceived as being a narrow definition that roughly equates with 'Gaelic' Irish? And why should you allow Irishness to be perceived by yourself as that? Are our national women's hockey team (who represented us so well in last week's European championships) or our showjumpers or our rugby players somewhat less Irish than the others by virtue or the corner or the country where they were born and their religion? I certainly don't think so. Irishnessshould be defined in broad and outward looking terms, particularly in this age of reasonable prosperity in this country, which has resulted in immigration (the coming of the 'new' Irish) (thankfully) replacing forced emigration. Let's celebrate our common and diverse Irishness and not allow others with a narrower view take from that.

Ed, nothing offensive at all. I don't think I suggested that and certainly didn't intend to.

"Why should Irish be perceived as being a narrow definition that roughly equates with 'Gaelic' Irish?"

It shouldn't, but it more often than not, is.

"Irishnessshould be defined in broad and outward looking terms"

Again I think I tend towards agreeing with you but having grown up spending 21 years thinking Irishness implied 'otherness' ie not me, it's not the sort of feeling you change overnight. Perhaps it's better to accept that we are Irish (while helping redefine what it means) than to fight it.

Or maybe the whole reason people gave up on it was because separating Irish from Gaelic is a job for King Canute?

Sure beano, point taken.

Its just that I’ve heard some Ulster people (including David Irvine if I remember correctly) say how their grandparents, who lived (and in many cases fought) during the Great War when Ireland was united (under British rule), felt more Irish than their grandchildren do today.

I think this is a pity, albeit probably an inevitable consequence of several decades of conflict which has led to more polarization than mutual understanding between the two principal traditions on this Isle. Perhaps now in a post conflict age, a more inclusive and broad sense of Irishness will emerge among all. I suspect this is already well on the way to becoming a reality south of the border, though it might take a lot longer to happen in some of the places where it really matters.

On the issue or the mutual exclusivity of ‘Gaelic’ and ‘Irish’, one only has to look across at our nearest neighbours. Gaelic culture and tradition is lives on in the Highlands of Scotland in terms of games, music, dance clan names, dress, language, etc. This culture is seen as inclusive and threatens no-one. This is the same culture that exists in Ireland through language (Gaelic), sport (hurling/shinty) and social expression (Ceilidh dance). Of course Scottish Gaelic culture is expressed in parallel with the Presbyterian faith of many Gaels there and is largely loyal to United Kingdom (see the many commemorative monuments to the wars fought by highlanders in the British army) and can accommodate both (Scottish) unionist and nationalist opinion. Gaelic culture in Ireland meanwhile has grown to be associated with the Catholic faith and with (Irish) nationalism.

Thus my point is that since Gaelic culture predates both the reformation and partition it can and does incorporate both Catholicism and Protestantism/Presbyterianism and can also accommodate either unionist or nationalist viewpoints.

Similarly for Ireland and Irishness.

Of course these points are largely academic and if you Irishness is continuously associated with a certain constitutional viewpoint or religion then it become harder to assert your right to proclaim Irishness. Though it’s a nice thought that some day we might all feel comfortable with it and that it would come to be more an inclusive than a divisive tag.

One of the advantages of being an Irish speaker is thare are two words to describe identity: Gaelach (corresponding to Gaelic) and Éireannach (corresponding to Irish, i.e belonging to Ireland).

But I think the broader problem is that we need a much looser definition of identity. I find it odd to have someone (not specifically Beano) who does not believe in God identify themselves as "protestant" which is a denominational stream within Christianity. (not even a specific Church).

We need to recognise that identity is many faceted, not monolithic.

(From an Irish-German-English speaking Green Party voting conservative practising roman catholic who is an Irish citizen and lives in the 26 counties. And oh, I am a software engineer to boot)