 |
 |
Is your organisation doing its bit to encourage diversity? And - more controversially - do you care? I can't say I do.
10 September 2007 15:28
Type 'diversity' into Personneltoday.com, and you'll be swamped by 7,500-plus articles. But what does it actually mean? It seems even the 'diversity practitioners' themselves aren't sure. But it won't stop them trying to form a professional association. Not surprisingly, Trevor Phillips - who is to head up the soon-to-be-launched Commission for Equality and Human Rights <http://www.cehr.org.uk/content/commissioners.rhtm> - gives it his support <http://www.personneltoday.com/Articles/2007/08/16/41923/diversity-tsar-trevor-phillips-welcomes-proposed-creation-of-diversity-association.html> (Personnel Today, 21 August).
I doubt many people mourn the demise of the mono-cultural workplace, but there seems to be an unquestioning orthodoxy that a 'diverse' workforce is automatically a good thing.
In my experience, the best work environments are those where the majority of people get along - and by and large, this means employing people of a similar outlook. A shy, retiring type is unlikely to flourish in an office where boisterous banter is the norm. So if you are seeking staff for such an environment, should you employ wallflowers simply for the sake of diversity? Obviously not.
So what is this 'diversity' for which we must now strive? If it is equality of opportunity in the workplace, regardless of age, gender, race, religion, disability or sexuality, we already have shelves full of legislation in place to help us strike the right balance.
Let us resist the siren call of the diversity brigade. Our jobs are hard enough as it is without adding another spurious specialism.
Michael Hollick
----------------
Disability Discrimination
18 September 2007 08:40
<http://adserver.adtech.de/?adlink|2.0|289|111037|1|277|KEY=ADTECH;loc=300;>
<http://adserver.adtech.de/?adlink|2.0|289|111037|1|277|KEY=ADTECH;loc=300;>
Walsall Council has been heavily criticised for a "range of failings" that led to a £650,000 payout to a former employee.
Peter Francis was awarded the cash after taking the council to an employment tribunal claiming constructive dismissal and disability discrimination.
He said he had suffered as a result of blowing the whistle about misuse of council funding.
He reached an out-of-court settlement with the council in December 2006 <http://icbirmingham.icnetwork.co.uk/birminghampost/news/tm_headline=whistleblower-s--650k-payout&method=full&objectid=18216386&siteid=50002-name_page.html>.
A report by district auditor John Gregory <http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/pir/downloads/108792.pdf>, published last week, concluded that Walsall Council failed to consider whether or not the Disability Discrimination Act <http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/DisabledPeople/RightsAndObligations/DisabilityRights/DG_4001068> applied to Francis, and did not consider making 'reasonable adjustments'.