The most difficult thing in writing about the law is realizing that no sooner is the ink dry than the chapter must be rewritten.
|
|
- Rosamund Garrison
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Assessment and the law These guidelines are intended to help you understand what your legal responsibilities are as a user of psychometric based assessments The most difficult thing in writing about the law is realizing that no sooner is the ink dry than the chapter must be rewritten. (Landy, 2005) The above reference was taken from a well-respected book on employment discrimination litigation in the USA and highlights the constantly changing landscape in this area. Add to that the variation across geographical territories and one can begin to understand why these guidelines cannot serve as a fully comprehensive guide to the law. We provide our clients with advice that enables them to operate in line with best practice across locations globally. However, we do not profess to provide legal advice or to replace the specific local advice that may be available from legally trained professionals operating within one s own locality. You must contact your organizations legal department for specific legal guidance. As a test developer, we uphold best practice standards in our approach and we provide our clients with a vast array of supporting documentation to support our assessment (all of which can be downloaded from the Talent Q Learning Centre). However, this is not sufficient to prevent legal claims from being made against those using our tests. Test users should be prepared to demonstrate that the process within which the test is used is fair and justified, and the onus lies upon the organization deploying the tests to ensure their practices are aligned with the legal requirements of the jurisdiction in which they operate. We firmly believe that if an organization knows their legal obligations and consistently follows them, test takers will feel they have been treated fairly, objectively and transparently. This leads to a positive test taker experience and creates a situation where they do not feel the need to question the use of the tests. Legal challenges Over the last 40 years there have been numerous cases brought against employers where an applicant felt that they had been unfairly discriminated against. Whilst a full review of all geographical territories is outside the confines of this document, a snapshot of activity is provided by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in the USA (Hartstein et al. 2012). In 2011, the EEOC received 99,947 discrimination charges the highest in its 46-year history, attributed to the economic situation in and the fact that more and more employees have lost their jobs during this period. Of these, 261 lawsuits were deemed appropriate for filing 1. Whilst data is not easily available to inform whether these cases related specifically to psychometric testing, it is clear that when broken down by type almost 50% related to issues such as retaliation and harassment, leaving a further 50% being discrimination cases. Many of these discrimination cases are likely to be based on criteria outside of psychometric testing for example, some of the most noteworthy EEOC settlements in the same year relating to discrimination (outside of retaliation and harassment) included situations where employers had failed to make accommodation for employees with disabilities, failed to hire on the grounds of race and systematically discharged pregnant employees. Some, however, involve assessments. 1 They covered a variety of Acts including Title VII, Americans with Disabilities, Age Discrimination in Employment and Equal Pay. 1 Korn Ferry All right reserved.
2 A few examples of high profile cases from the UK and the US over the last 20 years are: International Brothers of Electrical Workers versus Mississippi Power (2006): The plaintiffs alleged that the employer had engaged in employment practices with a racially disparate impact. The complaint wasn t about the use of an ability test per se, rather the increase in the pass score that had been introduced. It was ultimately held that raising the pass score was justified as the employer showed that by doing so, the employees who passed demonstrated above average performance on the job. British Rail (1994): Eight guards brought an action against British Rail with the support of the Commission for Racial Equality (a public body in the UK which aimed to tackle racial discrimination and promote racial equality). The action alleged racial discrimination after they had failed the train driver assessment process. The process included psychometric aptitude tests (an ability test widely used in the transport industry at the time) and a personality questionnaire, followed by an interview. A review of test scores indicated that the tests, particularly those of verbal comprehension, had an adverse impact on ethnic minority applicants, which allegedly amounted to indirect discrimination. An out of court settlement was reached and British Rail agreed to review their assessment process. The Commission for Racial Equality had identified a similar problem with the same aptitude tests, which were also used as part of the assessment process used by London Underground for management appointments. Legal challenges may come from individuals or groups who claim that the processes and assessments being used are not legally valid. Employers should be prepared to prove that their assessment processes are defensible in a court of law. Whilst there is not one globally agreed legal standard that relates to testing, there are many commonalities between those that are in existence. Existing guidelines and principles Whilst we cannot give an exhaustive list across all geographical territories, examples of guidelines and standards that have been in place for a number of years include: Uniform guidelines on employment selection procedures. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, U. S. Civil Service Commission, U. S. Department of Labor, & U. S. Department of Justice (1978). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association & National Council on Measurement in Education (1999). International guidelines for test use. International Test Commission (2000). Guidelines for computer-based testing. Association of Test Publishers (2002). Guidelines for the development and use of computer-based assessments. British Psychological Society Psychological Testing Centre (2002). Principles for the validation and use of personnel selection procedures. Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (2003). International guidelines on computer-based and internet delivered testing. International Test Commission (2005). Using online assessment tools for recruitment. Psychological Testing Centre (2006). Psychological testing: A user s guide. Psychological Testing Centre (2007). Legal principles Despite the multitude of guidelines and principles outlined above, there are a number of common themes: Reliability and validity The International Test Commission (ITC) Guidelines on Test Use state that: Tests should be supported by evidence of reliability and validity for their intended purpose. Evidence should be provided to support the inferences that may be drawn from the scores on the test. All trained test users will have sufficient knowledge of where to seek such information on any test, but the key is that test users need to look for information on whether the test is a reliable measurement and whether it measures what it purports to measure. This information should be provided by test suppliers. In order for a selection test to be deemed relevant, the skill or attribute being tested must be critical or important to the job and the test should be a valid measure of the relevant skill or attribute. This is the key first point of defense in justifying the applicability of an assessment, because it will help identify people who will demonstrate superior performance in the role. Interpretation Whilst more and more tests are being delivered via technology it is still important that the test user understands how 2 Korn Ferry All right reserved.
3 raw scores are converted into standard scores and why. The supporting documentation for the tests should provide this information and should also provide the test user with guidelines on how to interpret the scores. Fairness and bias Common terms in test guidelines and standards are discrimination and adverse impact. The intention of all tests is to show up real differences between test takers, but to remain within legal guidelines they should do so fairly and in a manner which does not lead to unfair discrimination. Put simply, tests should not show differences where they do not exist. For many years test developers have been researching ways to evaluate whether a test score is biased against different groups of people. Suppliers of psychometric tests should include the methods they have used for evaluating potential bias and should provide evidence to show that there is no bias occurring. Direct and indirect discrimination Whilst test manuals should include information relating to evidence of bias within the test, the onus is still upon the test user to ensure that they do not use the test in a way which causes unfair discrimination. Unfair discrimination can be classed as direct and indirect. Direct discrimination is intentionally to discriminate unfairly purely on the basis of a protected characteristic 2. Whereas indirect discrimination consists of treatment which although apparently neutral cannot be justified, and in practice disproportionately disadvantages and is detrimental to one group more than another on any of the protected characteristics. If it is found that this occurs to a significant degree and one group is treated less favorably than another, then adverse impact may be said to have occurred. If an employer were to select women who score above 40 on an aptitude test, but only men who score 50 or more, then that would amount to direct discrimination. Whereas if an employer uses a particularly high cut-off score for all applicants but the nature of the test means that a considerably smaller proportion of women can pass, this could be indirect discrimination. This may be lawful if the employer can justify the requirement, for example, by demonstrating a correlation between scores on the test and job performance such as, by looking at whether higher test scores predict subsequently higher ratings on key performance measures in the role. The use of a firm cut-off should be justified and there are a number of ways to do so. A very strong way is to conduct a validation study to assess whether high test scores equate to superior job performance. Test publishers should also provide general evidence of validity that can be used to assess a test s suitability. Further advice on setting cut-offs can be found in the Dimensions and Elements Practitioner Guides (available to download from the Talent Q Learning Centre). Put simply, aptitude tests which require a benchmark score to be passed can sometimes be said to unfairly discriminate if inherently different passing rates are achieved by different groups and the test and passing score cannot be justified. Therefore, the first step is to look for tests that provide evidence that there are no or comparatively little group differences. Further, justification of why a benchmark score has been applied should be documented. Defining adverse impact In the US, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidance states that employment practices may be considered discriminatory and illegal if they have a disproportionate adverse impact on members of a minority group and the practices cannot be justified. The EEOC s Uniform guidelines on employment selection procedures define adverse impact as occurring when the selection rate for a lower scoring group is less than four-fifths (or eighty per cent) of the rate for the group with the highest rate. The guidelines state that if this occurs: [it] will generally be regarded by the Federal enforcement agencies as evidence of adverse impact, while a greater than four-fifths rate will generally not be regarded by Federal enforcement agencies as evidence of adverse impact. Smaller differences in selection rate may nevertheless constitute adverse impact, where they are significant in both statistical and 2 Protected characteristics vary from country to country for example, in the US the Civil Rights Act (1964) outlawed discrimination against anyone based on race, ethnic origin, nationality, religious affiliation or gender; this was closely followed by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (1967) and then more recently the Americans with Disabilities Act (1990). The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has taken the position that the Title VII protection against sex discrimination extends to discrimination based on sexual orientation and sexual identity. Some states have also banned discrimination based on sexual orientation and some based on sexual identity. In the UK the Equality Act 2010 sets out the protected characteristics as being age, disability, gender reassignment, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation, marriage and civil partnership, and finally pregnancy and maternity. 3 Korn Ferry All right reserved.
4 practical terms or where a user s actions have discouraged applicants disproportionately on grounds of race, sex, or ethnic group. Greater differences in selection rate may not constitute adverse impact where the differences are based on small numbers and are not statistically significant, or where special recruiting or other programs cause the pool of minority or female candidates to be atypical of the normal pool of applicants from that group. The general conclusion from the above is that whilst there are clear guidelines in the USA on what constitutes adverse impact there are of course exceptions. As a test user it is vital to consider the existing data available on a test, to fully understand the requirements of a job and where possible to conduct a validation study. A key determinant of unlawful adverse impact is whether or not the requirement that was applied can be justified. It is therefore important to document the rationale for the practices and processes you have in place. If the requirement cannot be justified the adverse impact is unlawful. If it is justified, the adverse impact may be due to a real difference between the groups capacity to do the job in question and hence justifiable on the basis of validity 3. A key point to note here is that factors such as variability in the quality of education that is received by different groups can lead to differences in performance on tests. It may be this issue rather than the test itself which is causing the observed differences in test performance, and similar effects may be seen across other assessment processes such as interviews and assessment centers. This diagram provides an overview of the possible steps leading to unfair discrimination: Requirement applied All groups have equal chance of meeting the requirement e.g. males and females score equally well on the test One group more able to comply than another E.g. males pass at a higher rate than females No adverse impact or discrimination Requirement justified? E.g. validation study shows high scorers perform better on the job Requirement unjustified? E.g. no validity evidence to show that the assessment is jobrelated or that high scorers perform any better on the job Evidence of adverse impact but not discrimination. The requirement is justified. Evidence of indirect discrimination. The requirement may not be justified 3 Under US law, in an age discrimination case, the user need not show validity or business necessity. A lower standard, of reasonableness provides a defence in disparate impact age discrimination cases. 4 Korn Ferry All right reserved.
5 How can we support you? The assessments: As previously mentioned, we pride ourselves on developing tests that are reliable, valid and fair. We document our approach and findings in both the Dimensions and Elements Psychometric Reviews, and we are undertaking an ongoing programme to ensure our products meet well respected external standards for example, the EFPA Review Model for the Description and Evaluation of Psychological Tests (Lindley et al. 2008). Advice: Our global team of experienced practitioners can support you locally. We have experts across the world that can help you to understand the implications of using tests within your own jurisdiction. Analysis: As has been discussed above, it is clear that to reduce the likelihood of a potential legal claim being made, our clients are encouraged to conduct upfront validation studies (where possible). Where this is not possible, we advise them to undertake other means of obtaining proof of validity and to continually monitor selection ratios for adverse impact. We have a team of experts who can support you in running a validation study, or can manage the entire study on your behalf. Furthermore, we can review data from your assessment processes to look for evidence of any bias. We have immediate access to all test data and we can extract and analyze it for you in line with data protection requirements. Where potential issues are found, we can work with you to address them. Consultancy: Our team of occupational psychologists can provide support for you across all aspects of the process surrounding test use. This can range from job analysis, through to designing an assessment process and defining decisionmaking criteria. We can also support you in the delivery of your assessments. Training: We can offer you training across many of the areas outlined above for example, job analysis and assessment design so that you are enabled to work proficiently and legally. Supporting materials: Everyone trained by Talent Q has access to all of the related online materials via the Talent Q Learning Centre. Also available to download are a series of more practical guidelines relating to fairness in testing. Expert witness testimony: In the unlikely event that one of our clients is required to defend the use of their selection process we can support you by providing the expertise of one of our experienced directors and consultants (many of whom were in involved in the development and deployment of our assessments). We will discuss your requirements with you and provide appropriate provision to suit the circumstances. Within the UK, for example, we work within the guidance set out by the British Psychological Society (and Psychological Testing Centre) in the Statement on the Conduct of Psychologists providing Expert Psychometric Evidence to Courts and Lawyers. References Hartstein, B.A., Coulter, J.G., Douglas, S.M., Gaur, J., McGovern, M.L., Mita, B.R., Murphy, T.F., Petesch, P.J. and Schuman, I.W. (2012) Annual report on EEOC Developments: Fiscal Year Landy, F.J. (2005) Employment Discrimination Litigation: Behavioral, Quantitative, and Legal Perspectives. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Lindley, P., Bartram, D. and Kennedy, N. (2008) EFPA Review Model for the Description and Evaluation of Psychological Tests. Psychological Testing Centre (2007) Statement on the Conduct of Psychologists providing Expert Psychometric Evidence to Courts and Lawyers. About Korn Ferry Korn Ferry is the preeminent global people and organizational advisory firm. We help leaders, organizations, and societies succeed by releasing the full power and potential of people. Our nearly 7,000 colleagues deliver services through our Executive Search, Hay Group and Futurestep divisions. Visit kornferry.com for more information. 5 Korn Ferry All right reserved.
Equality & Diversity Policy and Procedure
Equality & Diversity Policy and Procedure Contents 1. Policy Statement 2. Purpose and Scope 3. The Definition of Equality and Diversity 4. Forms of Discrimination 5. Legislative and Regulatory Context
More informationCHAPTER 2 Understanding the Legal Context of Assessment- Employment Laws and Regulations with Implications for Assessment
CHAPTER 2 Understanding the Legal Context of Assessment- Employment Laws and Regulations with Implications for Assessment The number of laws and regulations governing the employment process has increased
More informationRESEARCH COUNCIL EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY POLICY
RESEARCH COUNCIL EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY POLICY Content Policy statement 1. Principles 2. Definitions 3. Research Council commitment 4. Employee accountabilities and responsibilities 5. Recruitment 6. Training
More informationGROUP EQUALITY & DIVERSITY POLICY
GROUP EQUALITY & DIVERSITY POLICY Group Equality & Diversity Policy Introduction Fair treatment is a moral and legal duty. Employers who treat employees fairly and flexibly will be best placed to recruit
More informationEquality, Diversity and Dignity Policy
Equality, Diversity and Dignity Policy This document articulates operational and performance guidance for Northgate Information Solutions companies, employees and business partners. This Policy does not
More informationCrown & Mehria Solicitors: Equality & Diversity Policy
Crown & Mehria Solicitors: Equality & Diversity Policy The principles of equality and diversity are inherent in our values. They are part of the culture of Crown & Mehria Solicitors and are fundamental
More informationEQUAL OPPORTUNITIES POLICY
EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES POLICY Policy statement The Company is an equal opportunity employer and is committed to a policy of treating all its employees and job applicants equally. The Company will avoid unlawful
More informationEQUALITY, DIVERSITY AND DIGNITY POLICY January 2017
EQUALITY, DIVERSITY AND DIGNITY POLICY www.ngahr.com Document Control Document Information INFORMATION Document Id Equality, Diversity and Dignity Policy Document Owner SVP, Human Resources Document Author
More informationEquality & Diversity Policy
Equality & Diversity Policy The Equality Act 2010 is the law which bans unfair treatment and helps achieve equal opportunities in the workplace and in wider society. The act replaced previous antidiscrimination
More informationEquality and Diversity Policy
Equality and Diversity Policy Policy Statement BIC Innovation is committed to encouraging diversity and eliminating discrimination in both its role as an employer and as a provider of services. BIC Innovation
More informationEquality and Diversity Policy
Equality and Diversity Policy Department Owner Operations (National) Section Owner HR Approver E-ACT Education & Personnel Committee Date Approved July 2015 Review Date July 2017 Policy Statement 1 E-ACT
More informationLegal Issues Overview
Legal Issues Overview When in the least bit of doubt, consult with an attorney who specializes in employment law! You and your organization can be sued for your actions as an HR manager! Protected Class:
More informationEquality and Diversity Policy
Equality and Diversity in Employment Policy Document Type Author Owner (Dept) Equality and Diversity Policy HR Director Human Resources Date of Review May 2015 Version 2 Page 1 of 6 Contents Page No 1.
More informationLegal Issues Overview
Legal Issues Overview When in the least bit of doubt, consult with an attorney who specializes in employment law! You and your organization can be sued for your actions as an HR manager! Protected Class:
More informationEqual Opportunities Policy
Equal Opportunities Policy June 2013 Equal Opportunities Policy Issue date June 2013, Revision date June 2014 1 Contents 1. Policy statement... 3 2. Aim and purpose of the policy... 3 3. Scope of policy...
More informationCPR EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES POLICY
CPR EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES POLICY Compass Point Recruitment Limited is committed to a policy of equal opportunities for all. We do not discriminate on grounds of race, colour, sexual orientation, gender reassignment,
More informationEqual Opportunities (Staff) Policy
Equal Opportunities (Staff) Policy Academy Transformation Trust Further Education (ATT FE) Policy reviewed by Academy Transformation Trust on 25/07/13 Policy consulted on with Unions on 25/07/13 Policy
More informationImplementing Equal Employment Opportunity
Implementing Equal Employment Opportunity Chapter 3 McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright 2008 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Chapter Overview EEOC Compliance Affirmative Action Plans Bona
More informationEQUALITY & DIVERSITY. CORE POLICY In accordance with its statement of intent, the company commits itself to the following:
EQUALITY & DIVERSITY KNIGHTS BROWN Knights Brown recognises that its underlying success depends on recruiting and retaining the right people and encouraging them to reach their full potential. We recognise
More informationHow to Avoid Sex Discrimination Claims. A guide for employers
How to Avoid Sex Discrimination Claims A guide for employers Employment disputes can be disruptive, costly, and stressful for everyone involved. Not to mention damaging to business reputations. With no
More informationEquality and Diversity Policy
Introduction Vicks Enforcement embraces diversity because we firmly believe that what makes us different makes us stronger. We are committed to reflecting diversity and delivering equality in all aspects
More informationEQUALITY AND DIVERSITY POLICY JANUARY 2016
EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY POLICY JANUARY 2016 1 Contents Page no. Wireless CCTV Ltd 3 Statement of Intent 3 Core Policy 4 Forms of discrimination principles 5 Equality and diversity in recruitment, selection,
More information8. EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES POLICY
8. EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES POLICY 1. POLICY STATEMENT 1.1 (referred to as the Club) is committed to promoting equality of opportunity for all staff and job applicants. We aim to create a working environment
More informationEquality & Diversity Policy - Employment
Equality & Diversity Policy - Employment Last Updated : April 2009 BIELD HOUSING ASSOCIATION LIMITED Registered Office: 79 Hopetoun Street, Edinburgh EH7 4QF Scottish Charity No SC006878 11.9 EQUALITY
More informationDIVERSITY AND INCLUSION POLICY
DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION POLICY Definition Carillion will make every effort to ensure that staff and job applicants are treated with courtesy, dignity and respect irrespective of race (including colour,
More informationEquality of Opportunity in the Workplace
This is an official Northern Trust policy and should not be edited in any way Equality of Opportunity in the Workplace Reference Number: NHSCT/09/220 Target audience: All Trust Staff Sources of advice
More informationEqual Opportunities & Race Equality Policy September 2005
Equal Opportunities & Race Equality Policy September 2005 1. EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES POLICY Our Commitment We are committed to the achievement of equal opportunities. This is central to our mission as a University
More informationEMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION
EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC): The federal agency charged with enforcing Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other federal statutes and regulations
More informationEqual opportunities policy
Equal opportunities policy 1. Policy statement 1.1 The Company is committed to promoting equality of opportunity for all staff and job applicants. We aim to create a working environment in which all individuals
More informationEquality and Diversity Policy
Equality and Diversity Policy Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire and Luton Clinical Commissioning Groups Page 1 of 15 DOCUMENT CONTROL SHEET Document Owner: Director of Workforce Document Author(s): Louise Thomas,
More informationEQUAL OPPORTUNITIES AND DIVERSITY POLICY
EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES AND DIVERSITY POLICY Definition Carillion will make every effort to ensure that all employees are treated with courtesy, dignity and respect irrespective of gender, race, religion,
More informationCOVER SHEET. Title: Equal Opportunities Policy Ratified by Policy Committee: Yes / Publication Date: July 2007 Review due: July 2008
Policy Code : BHSC-MPH- Equal Opportunities-2007:1 COVER SHEET Title: Equal Opportunities Policy Ratified by Policy Committee: Yes / Ownership: Belfast Health and Social Care Trust Publication Date: July
More informationEQUAL OPPORTUNITIES & DIVERSITY POLICY
EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES & DIVERSITY POLICY 1. Policy Statement: J. Coffey Construction is committed to achieving a working environment which provides equality of opportunity and freedom from unlawful discrimination
More informationEqual Opportunities and Diversity Policy
Policy Code: HR8 Policy Start Date: July 2015 Policy Review Date: April 2018 Please read this policy in conjunction with the policies listed below: TL1 Access to Fair Assessment Policy SW6 Anti-Bullying
More informationEQUAL OPPORTUNITIES POLICY
EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES 1. Introduction POLICY 1.1 This policy applies to all members of the Trust/school community i.e. directors (sometimes referred to as Trustees), governors, employees, casual workers,
More informationDiversity & Inclusion Training
Diversity & Inclusion Training greatwithtalent ltd 2013 great{with}diversity is a trademark of greatwithtalent ltd which is registered in the United Kingdom and other countries. hello@greatwithdiversity.com
More informationB1 Single Equality Policy
B1 Single Equality Policy Version: 1 Lead Officer(s): Approved By: Operations Director Board of Trustees Approval Date: 21 st November 2016 Date Issued: 22 nd November 2016 Review Date: 21 st November
More informationEqual Opportunities Policy
Equal Opportunities Policy [Company Name] Drafted by Solicitors Contents Clause 1. Policy statement... 1 2. Who is covered by the policy?... 1 3. Who is responsible for this policy?... 1 4. Scope and purpose
More informationBRITANNIA BUSINESS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Equal Opportunities Policy
COMPANY POLICY STATEMENT Britannia committed to promoting equality of opportunity for all staff and job applicants. We aim to create a working environment in which all individuals are able to make best
More informationEQUAL OPPORTUNITIES AND DIVERSITY POLICY
EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES AND DIVERSITY POLICY BMAT 1 EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES AND DIVERSITY POLICY 1. Scope and Purpose of this Policy 1.1 The Trust is committed to promoting and achieving equality of opportunity
More informationHERTFORD REGIONAL COLLEGE. Single Equality Scheme
HERTFORD REGIONAL COLLEGE Single Equality Scheme 1 Contents Scope & Purpose Statement of Policy Legal Framework College Values Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Aims Organisational Targets Roles and Responsibilities
More informationEQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY POLICY
EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY POLICY Updated: June 2013 Version History Date Version Author/Editor Comments 17 Sept 2012 1.1 Draft Anthony Vage 25 Sept 2012 1.2 Draft Anthony Vage 20 March 2013 Initial first
More informationEquality of Opportunity in Employment Policy
Equality of Opportunity in Employment Policy DOCUMENT INFORMATION CATEGORY: THEME: Policy Workforce Inclusion, Equality and Diversity DOCUMENT REFERENCE: 3.12 POLICY LEAD: DIRECTOR LEAD: Associate Director
More informationEquality and Diversity Policy
Equality and Diversity Policy 1. Purpose 1.1 Stoll is committed to eliminating discrimination and encouraging diversity amongst our workforce and our service users. 2. Objectives 2.1 Stoll strives to create
More informationEquality and Inclusion policy
Equality and Inclusion policy Version: 2.0 : March 2017 Our commitment Alzheimer s Society recognises that dementia does not discriminate. It impacts upon the lives of individuals, groups, and communities,
More informationPEOPLE POLICIES EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES
PEOPLE POLICIES EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES The Elliott Group Limited is committed to providing equal opportunities in employment and to avoiding unlawful discrimination in employment and against customers. This
More informationEqual Opportunities and Diversity Policy
Equal Opportunities and Diversity Policy 1. Introduction This policy has been aligned to the University of Gloucestershire s Promotion of Equalities Policy. Norland is committed to providing equal access
More informationSAXON WEALD EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY POLICY
SAXON WEALD EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY POLICY First Approved: May 2002 Author: Tom d Auvergne Last Revision: September 2014 Next Review: September 2017 1.0 Introduction and aims 1.1 This policy sets out our
More informationAdverse Impact: What is it? How do you calculate it?
Adverse Impact: What is it? How do you calculate it? Kyle E. Brink Jeffrey L. Crenshaw Personnel Board of Jefferson County www.adverseimpact.org What is Adverse Impact? A substantially different rate of
More informationEqual Opportunities POLICY AND PROCEDURE. Solihull Life Opportunities INTRODUCTION
Solihull Life Opportunities POLICY AND PROCEDURE Equal Opportunities 38 Walnut Close, Chelmsley Wood, Birmingham, B37 7PU Charity No. 1102297 England Company No. 5025939 INTRODUCTION Solihull Life Opportunities
More informationNorth Devon Homes Ltd. Recruitment and Selection Policy
North Devon Homes Ltd Recruitment and Selection Policy Contents Page Number 1 Summary 2 2 Policy aims 2 3 Legal Requirements 3 4 Recruitment & Selection Procedures 3 5 Review 3 6 Equality and Diversity
More informationSQA Equality Strategy
SQA Equality Strategy 2013 17 Publication Date: April 2013 Publication Code: FE6577 Published by the Scottish Qualifications Authority The Optima Building, 58 Robertson Street, Glasgow G2 8DQ Lowden, 24
More informationEQUALITY, DIVERSITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS POLICY
EQUALITY, DIVERSITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS POLICY 1.0 STATEMENT OF INTENT Equality, diversity and human rights are integral to the work of PBHA, and form a key part of our vision and mission. Our principles
More informationSCHOOLS MODEL EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY POLICY FOR SCHOOL BASED STAFF
SCHOOLS MODEL EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY POLICY FOR SCHOOL BASED STAFF Adopted by Oakwood Primary Academy Governing Body in November 13 To be reviewed by Governors in November 15 Contents 1. Policy Summary
More informationEquality and Fairness Policy
Equality and Fairness Policy Royal Mail Group is committed to ensuring that equality, diversity and fairness are at the heart of our values, policies and everyday practices of our employees. This policy
More informationFALKIRK COMMUNITY TRUST EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES POLICY
FALKIRK COMMUNITY TRUST EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES POLICY INDEX PART 1 POLICY STATEMENT Page Number 1.1 Policy Statement 3 PART 2 PROCEDURE 2.1 Introduction 3 2.2 Scope 3 2.3 Service Delivery 4 2.4 Employment
More informationEQUAL OPPORTUNITIES POLICY
Tauheedul Education Trust This policy is in line with the Mission Statement of the Trust Inspired by progressive Islamic and British values, we aspire to create outstanding organisations that develop learners
More informationEqual Opportunities Policy
Equal Opportunities Policy Approved by the Board: 2 December 2011 Contents Clause Page 1. Policy statement... 1 2. Who is covered by the policy?... 1 3. Who is responsible for this policy?... 1 4. Scope
More informationEmployment Guide: Sex Discrimination in the Workplace
Employment Guide: Sex Discrimination in the Workplace Note: This Employment Guide is intended to provide general guidance only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as doing
More informationEquality and Diversity Policy and Procedure
Equality and Diversity Policy and Procedure Date approved by Trustees 5 th May 2016 Date for next review 5 th May 2018 Compliance lead Director of Organisational Development Agreed Policy file name Equality
More informationEQUALITY AND DIVERSITY POLICY
EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY POLICY Date of Review: January 2015 Approved by: Trust Board Next Review Date: January 2018 Contents 1. Policy Summary and Guiding Principles 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Scope 1.3 Objectives
More informationEQUAL OPPORTUNITIES POLICY. Issued: May 2016 Reviewed: August 2017 Next Review Due: August Page 1 of 7
EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES POLICY Issued: May 2016 Reviewed: August 2017 Next Review Due: August 2020 Page 1 of 7 CONTENTS Page No 1. Policy statement 3 2. Who is covered by the policy? 3 3. Who is responsible
More informationMODEL EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES AND DIVERSITY POLICY
inspired MODEL EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES AND DIVERSITY POLICY 1. GENERAL 1.1 Inspired Recruitment embraces diversity and will seek to promote the benefits of diversity in all of our business activities. We will
More informationDate Last Reviewed - November Equal Opportunities Policy Competition Service
Date Last Reviewed - November 2010 Equal Opportunities Policy Competition Service Table of Contents 1 POLICY STATEMENT... 3 2 AIM AND SCOPE... 4 3 LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK... 5 4 THE LAW... 6 4.1 PROTECTED
More informationEQUALITY AND DIVERSITY POLICY
EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY POLICY 1 Introduction Edinburgh Women s Aid is a women only feminist organisation which exists to provide services to women, children and young people experiencing or at risk of
More informationEqual Employment Opportunity AP 3420
Reference: Education Code Sections 87100 et seq.; Title 5 Sections 53000 et seq. and Sections 59300 et seq.; ACCJC Accreditation Standard III.A.12 The Shasta-Tehama-Trinity Joint Community College District
More informationCONFIRMATION OF TRAINING FOR DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT
CONFIRMATION OF TRAINING FOR DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT By signing this document, I confirm that I participated in a training session regarding Discrimination and Harassment, including Sexual Harassment,
More informationEqual Opportunities and Dignity at Work Policy
RIVERSIDE SCHOOL Equal Opportunities and Dignity at Work Policy APPROVED BY GOVERNORS RESPONSIBLE PERSON HEADTEACHER 1. Policy statement Riverside School is committed to promoting equality of opportunity
More informationNorwood Primary School
Norwood Primary School Equality and Diversity Policy Name of Committee: Finance and Resources Reviewed Date: May 2013 Approved Date: May 2013 Proposed Date for Next Review: May 2016 1 Policy 1.1 The Governing
More informationEQUALITY AND DIVERSITY POLICY AND PROCEDURE FOR SCHOOLS
EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY POLICY AND PROCEDURE FOR SCHOOLS This model policy will apply to both teaching and non-teaching staff working in Wiltshire Schools / Academies and has been agreed with the following
More informationControlled Document Number: Version Number: 002. On: October Review Date: October 2020 Distribution: Essential Reading for: Page 1 of 12
Equality and Diversity in Employment Policy CONTROLLED DOCUMENT CATEGORY: CLASSIFICATION: PURPOSE Controlled Document Number: Policy Version Number: 002 Controlled Document Sponsor: Controlled Document
More informationWorkforce Equality and Diversity Policy
Type of Document Code: Policy Sponsor Lead Executive Recommended by: Workforce Equality and Diversity Policy Policy STHK0088 Deputy Human Resources Director Human Resources Director Policy Sub-Group Date
More informationXTP Recruitment Ltd ( the Company ) Model equal opportunities and diversity policy
Company Name: XTP Recruitment Ltd ( the Company ) Model Policy No. XTP001 Model Policy Name: Model equal opportunities and diversity policy Date: January 2014 OUR POLICY XTP Recruitment Ltd embraces diversity
More informationFair Access and Equality of Opportunity Policy
Fair Access and Equality of Opportunity Policy Version 4 Issue date: July 2016 Approved externally by SFJ Awards Quality & Standards Committee 19/01/2017 Contents 1 Purpose 2 Definition 3 Roles and Responsibilities
More informationEquality and Inclusion Statement & Equal Opportunities Policy
Equality and Inclusion Statement & Equal Opportunities Policy Human Resources Department CONTENTS Page NIFRS Equality and Inclusion Statement NIFRS Equal Opportunities Policy 1. Policy Scope 1 2. Legal
More informationCatch22 policy Equality and Diversity
Catch22 policy Equality and Diversity Contents 1. What is the Equality & Diversity policy statement about? 2 2. What is the policy for? 2 3. Policy statement 2 4. Definitions 3 5. Legislation 4 6. How
More informationEQUALITY & DIVERSITY POLICY STATEMENT
FERGAL CONTRACTING COMPANY LIMITED Downs Road, Standlake, Witney, Oxon, OX29 7YP OBJECTIVES EQUALITY & DIVERSITY POLICY STATEMENT To ensure that the talents and resources of employees are utilised to the
More informationEquality and Diversity Policy
Equality and Diversity Policy September 2017 Approving authority: Professional Services Board Consultation via: EDAG Approval date: 6 September 2017 Effective date: 6 September 2017 Review period: 3 years
More informationSt Mark s CE Primary School Ramslye Road Tunbridge Wells TN4 8LN EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES POLICY
St Mark s CE Primary School Ramslye Road Tunbridge Wells TN4 8LN EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES POLICY Headteacher: Robin Dungate Chair of Governors: Karen Stevenson Created: 2009 Updated: March 2013 Revised: Ratified:
More informationThis is a brief summary of both the University s broad Equal Opportunities Policy and Race Equality Policy.
Equal Opportunity Policies This is a brief summary of both the University s broad Equal Opportunities Policy and Race Equality Policy. Scope The University seeks to ensure equality of opportunity and treatment
More informationEquality and Diversity Policy
Equality and Diversity Policy Author HR Manager Date September 2016 Person Responsible Vice Principal Finance and Resources Approval/ review bodies Equal Opportunities and Diversity Committee/SLT /Corporate
More informationThe Equality Act s provisions cover all aspects of school life such as the treatment of:
Equality Policy Introduction This policy sets out The Sheffield Park Academy approach to promoting equality, as defined within the Equality Act (2010). We understand equality to mean treating everyone
More informationHamp Academy. Equal Opportunities Policy. Version 2.0. Policy Created Date: 1 st September Andy Berry on behalf of the Sponsor.
Hamp Academy Equal Opportunities Policy Version 2.0 Written By: Policy Created Date: Peter Elliott 1 st September 2012 Signature Andy Berry on behalf of the Sponsor Signature Chief Executive Officer Bridgwater
More informationTitle VII Case Study: Plaintiff v. U.S. City
Title VII Case Study: Plaintiff v. U.S. City Defending Interviews Against a Title VII Adverse Impact Claim February 16, 2011 Visit BCGi Online If you enjoy this webinar, Don t forget to check out our other
More informationEquality, Diversity & Inclusion Policy Statement
Equality, Diversity & Inclusion Policy Statement Written By: Fiona Burke Head of HR Verified By: Sean McGinley Director Document Reference: EDI Signed: Signed: Date: 01/08/2016 Date: 01/08/2016 Issue:
More informationDIVERSITY AND EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY POLICY
DIVERSITY AND EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY POLICY Document Title Diversity and Equality of Opportunity Policy Document Number 2011/47 v1 Authors Viv Stirrup/Claire Matthews Author s Job Title Independent Advisor/Assistant
More informationEquality And Diversity Policy And Procedure For Schools / Academies. Wardour Catholic Primary School Adopted 19 th May 2016
Equality And Diversity Policy And Procedure For Schools / Academies Wardour Catholic Primary School Adopted 19 th May 2016 This policy will apply to both teaching and non-teaching staff working in Wiltshire
More informationAssessing impact and the Public Sector Equality Duty Prejudice and
Equality and Human Rights Commission Equality and Human Rights Commission Assessing impact and the Public Sector Equality Duty Prejudice and A guide for public authorities in Scotland Dominic Abrams, Hannah
More informationDiscrimination and prejudice in selection
Discrimination and prejudice in selection (Taken from the Recruitment and Selection Toolkit, Brighton and Hove County Council) Good recruitment is based on following legislation, policies and procedures,
More informationEquality and Diversity Policy. August 2015
Equality and Diversity Policy August 2015 Contents Page no. Kier Group Plc 3 Statement of Intent 3 Core Policy 4 Forms of discrimination principles 4 Equality and diversity in recruitment, selection, development
More informationEquality and Diversity Policy
Equality and Diversity Policy Author/owner: Principals/Directors Date adopted: Summer 2016 Anticipated review: Summer 2019 Contents 1. Introduction... 3 2. Scope and purpose... 3 3. Roles and responsibilities...
More informationEQUAL OPPORTUNITY POLICY. 1. Introduction
1. Introduction Throughout this Policy, the words Translink Company and/or the Group refer to all corporate entities under the ownership of the Northern Ireland Transport Holding Company (NITHC). This
More informationReport on the diversity profile of Ofcom colleagues
Report on the diversity profile of Ofcom colleagues Publication date: 2014 About this document This document is a report on the diversity profile of Ofcom colleagues. It provides analysis on the age, disability,
More informationEquality, Diversity and Inclusion Policy
Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Policy Approval date February 2016 Review date February 2019 www.linkhousing.org.uk This policy applies to Link Group Link Housing Link Living Link Property Horizon Larkfield
More informationEquality and Diversity Policy
Equality and Diversity Policy Approved by: Board of Governors Date last approved: December 2014 Review period: 3 years Date reviewed: Owner: Director of HR STATEMENT FROM THE VICE CHANCELLOR Our new Strategic
More informationEQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
AP 3420 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY References: Education Code Sections 87100 et seq.; Title 5 Sections 53000 et seq. and Sections 59300 et seq.; ACCJC Accreditation Standard III.A.11 Equal Employment
More informationEquality and Diversity Policy
Equality and Diversity Policy Cheshire Academies Trust Cheshire Academies Trust This policy was written in November 2015 by the Trustees in line with Bowne Jacobson HR guidance. The Board of Cheshire Academies
More information1.2 GBWBA will ensure that there will be open access to all those who wish to participate in the sport and that they are treated fairly.
Great Britain Wheelchair Basketball Equality Policy 1. Statement of Intent 1.1 Great Britain Wheelchair Basketball Association (GBWBA) is fully committed to the principles of the equality of opportunity
More information