Diversity In Action

CRE’s , long goodbye- A lot done, a lot to do

Although the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) is preparing to close its doors in October its agenda will live on, and not just as part of the new Commission for Equality and Human rights.

The CRE is leaving a legacy in the form of legal action against fifteen prominent government departments, that it claims have failed to fulfil their duty under race equality legislation.

Once the legal action begins the new CEHR will be forced to see it through to its conclusion. Although it may cause some headaches for the new integrated commission this is certainly one way to see that the race/ethnicity agenda remains front and centre in the new set-up and in the governments thinking.

The second part of their legacy is their final swansong report entitled ‘A lot done, a lot to do- Our vision for an integrated Britain’. This report presents
a forward-looking strategic roadmap for addressing the disquiet about difference that is increasingly prevalent in modern day Britain.

“Our society is fracturing. The pace of change in Britain over the last few years has unsettled many, and caused people to retreat into and reinforce narrower ethnic and religious ties. Bonds of solidarity across different groups have reduced and tensions between people have increased. Such tensions often arise from the fear of difference, and Britain's diversity, which should be a source of strength, risks becoming one of division.”

The report sets out our the following priorities for change:

developing and enforcing existing and new powerful legal tools to promote racial, and religious, equality;

reducing racism and extremism;

tackling racial inequalities in education, health, criminal justice, housing and employment;

andpromoting interaction between people of all ages and backgrounds and increased participation in local community work by people from all ethnic groups.

You can download the full report:  a lot done a lot to do.pdf here.

Diversity, a big issue for small companies

Usually it’s the big organisations with HR departments that lead the way when it comes to adopting Diversity best practice. Given the amount of people that work for smaller companies that’s a crying shame.

It’s a common story for the small organisations to be left behind bemoaning the fact they would like to do things right but it’s just not practical.  This is a misconception, the ideas and actions heralded by diversity best practice are even more important if you only have a few people. If you only have a small team it’s essential that you understand how to get the most out of every individual.  A single industrial tribunal that goes awry can spell curtains for a small organisation so it’s vital that mistakes are avoided.

The key to implementing diversity best practice in an SME is to stick to the fundamentals. You don’t have to be an expert in diversity theory to get things going and it doesn’t have to be a bureaucratic nightmare either.

All it takes is an appreciation that:

• All organisations even those with less then fifteen members are now covered by discrimination legislation and that those who don’t account for this could be in big trouble.
• If you do it right putting diversity best practice into effect can help make your organisation no matter how small stronger and more robust.
• Understanding and managing diversity has something to offer everyone. It’s not a niche issue; even if your company only has two people modern diversity best practice and theory has something valuable to contribute.
• Diversity best practice needs to be embedded in every day activity. The theories and ideas need to be transparent for real people to use in their every day jobs.

Easier said than done you may say but an effective training programme is a great way to get started and that’s exactly what the Liverpool chamber of commerce is offering to the small businesses of the northwest. 

With the  'Beyond Equal Opportunities' courses Learning Inc and the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce are providing a series of half and full day subsidised events to help the region’s smaller companies get to grips with thorny practical diversity issues.

Read on  to find out  why: It's importat that the SME goes Beyond  Equal Opportunites.

If you want help or advice relating to your diversity or training then Learning Inc can help.

A New DAWN in Diversity best practice on the Horizon

Apologies for not posting for a while but Learning Inc have a new web based social network resource launching this month called DAWN (the ‘Diversity At Work Network’). This is a collaboration and communication tool aimed at helping organisations and individuals who are committed to diversity develop and disseminate best practice.

I’ve been flat out working on it and haven’t had time to devote to the blog of late but now we are in the final stages of beta testing I can devote a bit more time to diversity in action.
 
I’m really excited about the upcoming launch, DAWN will be more than just a blog aggregator and discussion forum. We are populating it with actual training resources and discussion pieces (video and learning materials from our resource library). If time and money allow we will also create new content to respond to requests from the diversity community (reactions to changing legislation, gov positions etc).   As you know learning Inc are devoted to making the most engaging and innovative diversity training available. With DAWN, we are taking things to the next level by adding community interaction and online networking to the mix.  Our aim is to turn the learning process into a dialogue we want members to benefit from all the work we have done with the likes of learndirect and DEFRA, while also giving them a forum to share their experiences. So watch out for the launch and sign up soon, I will make announcement here when it goes live.

US court says no to Affirmative action- To discriminate or not to discriminate that is the question?

Well things are looking up, the predominantly right wing US Supreme court decided to strike a blow against discrimination ? Surely a good thing? Discrimination is bad right?  As you would expect the situation is a bit more complicated than it first appears.

The ruling in question revoked the rights of educational establishments to use race as a criteria for admission.  The rub is that it was the parents of white children who were claiming discrimination (thus prompting the ruling) and it was the affirmative action policies of the school boards that were being ruled against. [ You can read the bbc report here ]

Using 'Brown vs Board of education' to increase segregation?

Quotas are by nature unfair but in many states where the quotas are no longer in place there has been an observable decline in the racial mix of students. The one black justice, Bush(senior) appointee Clarence Thomas ruled with the majority explaining his thinking by controversially  paraphrasing brown vs board of education and saying  "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discrimination on the basis of race." The fact that the black judge came down against polices that were benefiting ethnic minorities has not gone over well with the liberal press or with the black body politic.

It’s tempting to say criteria like race, ethnicity or colour shouldn’t matter when it comes to getting into the school of your choice, the fact however is that they do and perhaps for societies sake they should. Our school years have a massive influence on our perceptions and our assumptions. Mixing with people of different ethnic backgrounds from our own while we are learning about the world is a great way to address wrongheaded assumptions. A school made up entirely of one type of people be they black or white is hardly the ideal environment to engender and promote understanding (I’m not a big fan of single faith schools either but don’t get me started on that).

Two wrongs don’t make a right?
There is no denying that the social climate has changed from that when the polices were adopted (during the civil rights movement of the 50’s).  On the other hand I’m sure the rules were doing some good In forcing schools to look that bit harder for candidates and make that extra effort to ensure their ethnic mix wasn’t monotone. 

My instincts say that in theory the ruling is right “affirmative action is wrong” but that removing the policy may have some unanticipated and unsavoury effects in practice.  Nature abhors a vacuum and I’m not convinced taking no action will produce the best results? If the polices are banned what will replace them? Will the schools make the extra effort to attain a demographic mix through positive action or will they just go with the flow? If they do will the race situation in the states be set back or moved forward? I worry that the cold turkey withdrawal of affirmative action may result in no action at all to redress some real and significant imbalances in the provision of a quality education for all.

Affirmative action is illegal in the Uk. But taking action to improve the demographic mix of your organisation is not. This whole issue has a tendency to get confusing and it can be a legal minefield. I will post an article about affirmative action, positive discrimination and positive action in relation to the workplace as soon as I get the time.

If you want help or advice relating to diversity training then Learning Inc can help.

Diversity Training: Beating the backlash

Despite being embraced by the executives of many of the UK’s top organisations diversity training still has a bad reputation in some quarters. Even after attending a training session many of the workers at the coalface are left feeling that it’s nothing more than a politically correct legal manoeuvre. What can we do to make sure diversity training makes a real difference?

   
When people who haven’t met me before discover I’m a corporate diversity trainer I tend to get one of two responses. It’s usually ‘right on brother, its good to help the minorities’ or I’m asked by someone who’s a bit sceptical whether its really that relevant to most modern workplaces (or given the fact that I’m black I’m often asked whether racism Is still a big issue?).

None of these responses demonstrates an understanding of what managing diversity in the workplace is really about. As a lot of these guys have already been sent though some kind of mandatory diversity training I find it disappointing that this is still the majority view. So this is my attempt to set the record straight while doling out a little advice to all the diversity-training commissioners out there.

To get the ball rolling here are some diversity ground rules, apply them to the diversity training you commission and make sure your diversity trainers have something satisfactory to say about every one of them before you give them the job: 

• Diversity is not just about racism or gender it encompasses adapting effectively to differences of all kinds. 
• Diversity best practice is just as relevant to the white middle class males as it is to minority groups.
• Demonising anyone even a majority group is counter to the philosophy and edicts of diversity good practice.
• Diversity is not an exercise in political correctness, if it is then somebody’s making a mistake.
• A commitment to diversity can and should drive an organisation forward not hold it back.
• Diversity is not just about complying with equal opportunities legislation. Organisations that focus on the box-ticking miss the benefits and just get the costs.
• Effective diversity training should help individuals and teams become more effective at work (it’s not just about being nice).

Read on  to find out  why: diversity training is about more than just good manners.

If you want help or advice relating to your diversity or training strategy then Learning Inc can help.

Diversity Training from Hell

The Office - "Diversity Day" Deleted Scenes.

I’m a big fan of the office, both the British and American versions.  Here are some outtakes from a US episode about diversity. It’s both amusing and educational in terms of what not to do.

Some Lessons to learn from the Dunder Mifflin Paper Company

• "We have about an hour" - ‘Diversity day’ at Dunder Miffin is in fact supposed to be 1hr awareness raising session. It’s almost like saying I know this is a waste of your time; I’ll get it out of the way quickly. Is a single hour in isolation really going to change bad practice across the board or is it just a corporate exercise in covering their rear?  Would a single day never mind an hour really address their needs?
• "I’m a salesman and I don’t think we should be doing this in prime sales hours" – A lot of people would agree with this statement, its up to the trainer to make this case. The training should be relevant and should take place at a time and place where people will be giving it their full attention. If you are training a sales team then they need to understand how diversity can make them more effective salespeople. 
• "It’s Easy to be a HERO" – Honesty, Empathy, Respect, Open-mindedness are all good principles. There is more to diversity however than memorising an acronym. Is this all there is to managing diversity?  Is it really going to be that easy to master and put in place? What does it mean to these people in this particular place? Do they have the understanding to make any real progress? Is diversity in the workplace really about being a HERO?
• "Signed Daffy duck" – It becomes clear that the real objective of this whole exercise was to get the manager Michael Scott to sign a pledge indicating that he has learned from his mistakes. A pledge if someone makes it indicates a real promise relating to practical actions. It’s clear here however that no-one (Michael, the company or even the diversity trainer) is really serious about making this pledge anything more than a legal exercise.

The whole episode is even more enlightening when it comes to how an organisation shouldn’t address diversity.  So if you can spare it take some time out to watch the office, if the boss asks what you are doing you can say I said it’s educational ;).

We specialise in fun yet challenging video inspired learning and training. If you want help or advice relating to 'diversity in the office' then Learning Inc can help with onsite or offsite bespoke training that makes you really think about what diversity means practically to your organisation.

Positive benefits of migration : TUC Report

A new Migration story hit the news wires recently; it was a positive story for a change so I thought I’d do my bit to spread the message.

The TUC issued a detailed report on the economics of migration.

Findings of the report

• Migrant workers pay more in taxes than the value of the public services they receive.
• When considered from the perspective of the UK as  a whole levels of employment and wages are slightly higher as a result of immigration.
• Overall, freer migration offers significant benefits to home countries, host countries and migrants themselves, but realising these benefits is not an automatic process.

The report makes a clear well argued cased based on reliable statistics that the usual negative hyperbole regarding migrants stealing jobs, being a burden on the state and generally causing massive social upheaval is as it has always been a fallacy.

Click here to Download migration.pdf.

A Cohesive and integrated strategy?

Final Report published by the commission on Integration & cohesion

The commission was created to re-envision the nature of modern social Britain along integrated lines. Broadly speaking they were looking to present a cohesive strategic alternative to the previously much touted multicultural Britain. The findings of this report if accepted will be used as both inspiration and justification for future policy initiatives that will affect us all.

Now they have reported are we any further forward towards a more integrated and cohesive Britain?

What does it say?  : ‘Our shared future’ in a nutshell
Ok reading between the lines, this is my ultra quick overview of what the report is trying to say.

• The way forward is to promote and reinforce the bits of the culture under government control (or influence) that reinforce or support cohesion and integration.
• We don’t like the fact that communities are becoming isolated, but we appreciate we can’t force people to be integrated. We will try to paint a shared picture of the way forward and hope we can get buy-in.
• We will use the current tools and mechanisms we have in place to try to promote and encourage the integration and cohesion agenda where possible. 
• We will strengthen and support the citizenship initiatives both in schools and with immigrants.
• We will try to spread knowledge about community based best practice where we can while making those concerned more media savvy about communicating what they do.
• Ultimately we will devolve responsibility for implementation to local government but try to direct progress with a national framework.
• Our most effective tool for influencing behaviour is funding and commissioning, so we will lay down new guidelines to encourage those dealing with the public sector to align their activities with the integration cohesion initiatives.

For a more official overview of the reports contents click here: Our Shared Future Summary

Integration & cohesion what does it mean for your business?

The workplace is a core driver both in terms of migration/immigration and providing a climate of opportunity.

Recommendations relating specifically to business indicate:

• A change in attitude to funding and commissioning – Initiatives that benefit single community groups will find it much harder to get funding. Organisations that are bidding for public sector work need to demonstrate both a commitment to diversity and cohesion/integration.
• Improved skills development – all employers in the UK are being encouraged to make a skills pledge. This will be a specific promise to the workforce that every eligible employee will be helped to gain basic skills qualifications  (Level 2 literacy and numeracy).
• More direct involvement in combating discrimination – The government want businesses to become more engaged with discrimination issues, they are looking for active programs to elicit change for the better not just equality statements.
• More time-off for community work – In an effort to encourage more community participation they want large businesses to give workers three additional days off per year to take part in civic projects or charity work that relate to this new agenda.

You can get full pdf copies of the report our_shared_future.pdf and the integration_and_cohesion_case_studies.pdf here.

I will add some detailed commentary later.

A Fairer Way for Private Golf Clubs: New government green paper looks to unify discrimination legislation

The press adopted a surreal approach  when it came to reporting the government’s latest green paper reviewing discrimination (imaginatively titled “the discrimination law review’). 

The papers and TV media went golf club crazy. Fascinating  though the prospect of Tiger woods and Michelle Wie finally being allowed to share a drink at the local club bar is, the spin did deflect attention from some pretty interesting and useful ideas (hmm maybe it had something to do with the US open kicking off in the same week? No surely not ?).

Anyone just paying casual attention would think the most important findings and recommendations referred to the changes in permission for private members clubs, they don’t. The paper did cover mixed private members clubs of all types (they won’t be allowed to discriminate on gender terms anymore) but far and way the most intriguing  bits referred to the elimination of age discrimination in the provision of goods and services and to overall legal reform. 

Unification, Simplification and Women Breastfeeding at the Bar

The Green paper targets the introduction of a single equalities bill that would unify and simplify discrimination law. The idea is to reform the myriad of related bills and acres of amendments that make up UK law at the moment. A move that was clearly signposted by the government when they set up the CEHR as the long terms successor to the individual niche sector bodies, a move I heartily agree with.

In summary the main proposals refer to:

• The introduction of umbrella legislation covering all types of discrimination to replace current separate legislation.
• A new duty for landlords to make reasonable adjustments to their properties at the request of disabled tenants.  (install access ramps etc - although tenants would have to pay)
• Legal protection for Women to breasfeed in public.
• Introducing age legislation to combat age discrimination in the provision of goods and services.
• Preventing gender discrimination by mixed private members associations (including golf clubs, labour cubs etc) when it comes to access, services or club administration etc. The proposals don’t affect clubs that are single gender only.

The green paper is a consultation document and there is a long way to go before it becomes law. In my view it is a bit weak in certain areas but it makes a half decent stab at unifying the discrimination agenda. In case you are wondering even if the proposals become law the rules won’t be changing on the course, it seems women will still be able to hit the balls from closer to the hole ;)

Click here for an : Overivew of Current UK Discrimination legislation

If you want help or advice relating to Discrimination legislation Learning Inc can help with onsite or offsite bespoke training.

 

The Apprentice, Bad interviewing 101 – Oh Sugar!

I’m going to confess a guilty little secret; I love ‘The Apprentice’. Although I’m not a big fan of Sir Alan Sugar or any of the contestants (this season in particular) I find the show compulsive viewing.  Now a reality TV show is hardly the best place to look for organisational best practice but I was surprised to see just how blatant some of the bad practice on show could be.

What happened?
The scene was set, after eliminating over 10,000 applicants they were down to the last five contestants. Three would be eliminated after a gruelling series of interviews.  Two of the interviewees however were treated unfairly. Both were women with children and they were directly put on the spot regarding their childcare arrangements. A direct-line was then drawn between their commitment to the job and their caring requirements as mothers. The commitment of the three male applicants was not similarly questioned.

Both Sir Allen and one of his top managers adopted this approach; the sex discrimination act (1975) explicitly makes this kind of practice at interview and selection illegal. 

Being pragmatic doesn’t mean being unfair
Sir Allen is renowned for speaking his mind and having a hardnosed approach to business.  This pragmatic attitude is not inconsistent with diversity legislation or business best practice. Getting people who are committed to the organisation is important; it’s just a case of being careful to get what you want, without being unfair.

If you want to find out about commitment ask everyone. Don’t make assumptions that a women would be less committed or that they will be assuming more caring responsibilities than a male applicant.  It’s important to be specific when it comes to generic terms like ‘commitment’. What does commitment mean in a particular job role ?  Is it about being willing to spend a number of hours in a specific office per day, contactability or the ability to travel on short notice? Remember just because the single male you employ today doesn’t have any outside commitments now is no guarantee that his circumstances won’t change unexpectedly tomorrow.

Click here for some : Effective Interviewing hints and tips

If you want help or advice relating to interviewing or recruitment then Learning Inc can help with onsite or offsite bespoke training.

Big Brother - your pushing it aren’t you Nigger!

Hot on the heels of the Shilpa Shetty fiasco the recent Emily Parr Big Brother scandal has meant race issues are hitting the headlines again.

What happened?
The slightly posh, young white female reality TV contestant Emily Parr used the term in conversation with two black contestants.  Both of these contestants were shocked but not particularly insulted. Channel 4 removed Emily from the show for the use of inappropriate and racist language and the debate has been raging since.

The debate – what’s good for the goose
The public use of the term  ‘Nigger’ has spawned acres of newsprint and hours of on- air discussion.  The principal argument seems to be if the girl isn’t a racist and she was not using the term in an overtly racist sense then its not fair to remove her when a black girl (one of the women she was talking to) had previously used the term without incident.  Surely if the black person is willing to use the term when referring to themselves it’s ok for everyone to use it?

Things were further complicated by a recent ofcom ruling against channel 4 relating to the ‘allegedly racist bullying’ of Shilpa Shetty in celebrity big brother. This resulted in the comment that channel 4 and Big Brother were being politically correct and oversensitive.

My Response

First things first, I think Channel 4 were right to respond. It’s my opinion that in this instance they reacted appropriately whereas with Shilpa Shetty they let themselves down. It was Channel 4 ‘s failure to respond to the Shilpa incident in a serious and considered way that caused them problems a few months back.  If we hadn’t seen the way they reacted then I doubt we would be questioning their motives for removing Emily in quite the same way now.

It was essential that they did something. Organisations have to take a stand against abusive behaviour and in a public forum this needs to be explicit and public. In a reality TV show removing the contestant from the publicity they seek and renouncing the behaviour seems appropriate. It’s not a question of political correctness, this kind of language will offend and the reality is that this offence will be increased if the person using it is not black.

As for Emily I don’t think it makes sense to demonise her. She was a young woman out of her comfort zone that made a mistake while trying to fit in. In a more normal situation it’s likely things would have been smoothed over and the three girls would have sorted it out among themselves. Context is king however and if you use offensive language on a show that goes out to millions then you should be aware of the consequences.  As a responsible media provider who purports to advance diversity it’s Channel 4's role to make sure there are consequences when contestants go too far.

click here for some advice on: The power of language in the workplace

If you want help or advice relating to language in the workplace or diversity sensitivity training then Learning Inc can help.

A Girl Like Me - worth watching

In the 50's  Dr  Kenneth Clark conducted a dolls test with a series of black children.  A white doll and a black doll were given to the children and they were asked to choose which one they preferred the majority chose the white doll. In this great video we get to see a reapeat of this experiment.

The majority are still choosing the white doll! Still al lot work to do it seems.