*Apologies for cross-posting*
Equality Challenge Unit Briefing
The Equality Bill – Impact on
Higher Education
On the 26 June 2008 Harriet Harman,
Minister for Women and Equality, made a statement in the House of Commons
setting out the main themes of the Equality Bill which will be announced in the
Queen’s speech in November and is due for publication in Spring 2009.
While the Commons statement may not have contained much fine detail, it did
make certain priorities clear.
An Equality Duty
The document confirms that a new ‘Equality Duty’ on public
bodies will replace the current race, disability and gender duties. The new
streamlined duty will cover not only those three areas, but also gender
reassignment, age, sexual orientation and religion and belief. The Government
will be discussing with relevant organisations how the new duty will work in
practice, especially in relation to religion and belief.
What this is likely to mean for higher education institutions is that
they will need to take proactive steps to eliminate any unlawful discrimination
against both staff and students on the new grounds, and probably also take
steps to promote good relations for those groups and also between the groups.
This would not require institutions to arbitrate between the different
interests of – for example – certain fundamentalist religious
groups and gay and lesbian staff and students. But it might provide a clearer
and more transparent framework in which consensus could be sought.
In many respects, the higher education sector is well-positioned for
the new duty. It is already unlawful for institutions to discriminate against
not just staff but also students, so the impact on the sector may be less than
for other sectors where the law has only to date extended to staff issues.
Further, many institutions are already actively engaged in ensuring that their
institutions attract and engage with students of all ages and that students
from different religious backgrounds are supported. A duty to promote good
relations between the groups is already something that is integral to many
institutions’ approaches to promoting good campus relations.
But where the duty is likely to have impact is in terms of requiring a
more systematic and evidence based approach to all the equality areas. Engaging
with issues such as the impact of religion or sexual orientation on campus will
no longer be optional or just a question of ‘good practice’, but
will require a more strategic and systematic approach.
Working with a range of higher education institutions, Equality
Challenge Unit has already anticipated the extension of the public sector
duties to all the equality areas:
·
The
UUK/GuildHE/ECU publication Promoting Good
Campus Relations, 2007 sets out advice and guidance, with many case
studies from existing practice within institutions, of the promotion of good
relations across all equality areas. This publication was extended in 2008 to
focus specifically on issues of religion and belief;
·
The Unit has
recently commissioned the University of Leeds to carry out research into what
the barriers are, if any, faced by gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender staff
and students in higher education which will assist institutions in determining
what the priorities might be in terms of complying with the duty in relation to
issues of sexual orientation (anticipated publication date January 2009);
·
Trans Staff and Students in Higher Education published in 2008 describes the steps that institutions might choose
to take to support members of staff or students who have decided to change
their gender, again illustrated with extensive case studies of inclusive
practice from the sector.
·
General Guidance Note on Age and Student Issues, 2006, contains advice and case studies of a
range of good practice in relation to age issues on campus.
Positive Action
The Bill will look to extend the scope of
‘Positive Action’ to allow institutions
to take under-representation into account when selecting between two equally
qualified candidates in the area of staff recruitment. This provision will be
optional, not mandatory. It is likely to prove one of the most controversial
elements of the new Bill. This power is already in use elsewhere in
sex (in this case women), when applicants are otherwise equal.’
The difficulty is that in practice it is unusual for applicant to be
‘equal’ and it remains to be seen how and in what ways higher
education institutions might choose to use the new powers.
It is disappointing that the Statement does not suggest that the
positive action provision should extend to students. This is an area where
institutions have expressed a need to have more freedom in treating different
groups of students differently to enable them to compensate for past
disadvantage, for example by offering student bursaries to underrepresented
Black and Minority Ethnic applicants. Equality Challenge Unit has previously
raised this issue with Government in their response to the Government’s
original consultation (available on the ECU website www.ecu.ac.uk), and will
continue to make this point prior to the Bill being published.
Pay Audits
A great deal of joint work relating to equal pay has already been
conducted, with employers and unions working together across the sector to
achieve equal pay practices. Pay already forms an integral part of the
Framework Agreement process, and for many institutions data on the pay gap is
already in the public domain. Institutions will be expected to conduct equal
pay job evaluation audits and publish the percentage difference in the average
pay of men and women. It remains to be seen whether the percentage difference
that is required to be published will include all pay, including market
supplements, ex gratia payment and bonuses, and merit pay.
Procurement
The Bill will also be placing a duty on some private companies in relation
to procurement, and will look to private companies working with institutions to produce audits showing the extent of their gender pay gap, as well
as the proportions of their staff that come from ethnic minorities or who are
disabled. This information may then impact on the institutions’
engagement with the private provider, and feed into their approach to the new
equality duty.
Next steps
A more comprehensive paper on the content of the Bill, and the
Government’s response to the consultation, Discrimination Law Review; A Framework for
Fairness: Proposals for a Single Equality Bill for Great Britain’ will be published
by the Government Equality Office shortly. This will offer more clarity on
details for implementation of the Bill and the time allowed for institutions to
review their practices.
Equality Challenge Unit will continue to work with the sector to
clarify the implications of the Bill for the sector. The Unit have launched an Equality Bill homepage
containing information on developments of the Bill and their relevance to the
Higher Education Sector.
About the Equality Challenge Unit
Equality Challenge Unit supports the higher education sector in its mission
to realise the potential of all staff and students whatever their race, gender,
disability, sexual orientation, religion and belief, or age, to the benefit of
those individuals, higher educations institutions and society
For further information and advice on equality and diversity in higher
education
T: +44 (0) 20 7438 1010
Anna Roberts
Communications
Manager
Equality Challenge Unit
7th Floor,
55/56
Tel: +44 (0)20 7438 1010
Fax: +44 (0)20 7438 1011
DDI: +44 (0)20 7438 1018
Email: [log in to unmask]
Web: www.ecu.ac.uk
________________________________________________________________
Equality Challenge Unit
Company limited by guarantee, number 05689975
Registered charity, number 1114417
Registered office: 7th floor, Queens House, 55/56 Lincoln’s Inn Fields,
London WC2A 3LJ, United Kingdom.
Equality Challenge Unit (
Although every effort is
made to ensure that the information contained within this email is accurate and
up to date,
This message is
confidential. If you are not the intended recipient you should not copy or
disclose this message to anyone but should kindly notify the sender and delete
the message. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message
that do not relate to the official business of
Neither