Final Report of the Equality Impact Assessment on GTA/Demonstrator Recruitment and Conditions of Service
November 2007
The following report details the
recommendations of the Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) panel, established by
Equality and Diversity Committee (EaDC).
This is the final report of the Equality Impact
Assessment panel to EaDC and should be considered in conjunction with the
attached completed EIA pro-forma.
2.
Membership and Terms of Reference of the Equality
Impact Assessment panel
Membership
Dr Wyn Johnson (Chair)
Professor Ian Colbeck
Ms Ellen Sample
Ms Jennifer Swanston (GTA representative)
Ms Paula Rothero
Ms Stephanie Dennett (Secretary)
Terms of Reference
·
To
review the recruitment, selection and terms and conditions of service for
GTAs/Demonstrators throughout the University, and to assess whether these
procedures, policies and practices have a differential impact on equality target
groups
·
To consider appropriate
data;
·
To consult as appropriate;
·
To make recommendations for
change as appropriate;
·
To report to Equality and
Diversity Committee;
·
To feed back to EDC on the
process of conducting an EIA, and on the usefulness of the guidance
documentation provided.
3.
Meetings
The Equality Impact Assessment panel met on three
occasions: 25th
May 2007 (initial scoping meeting), 28th
June 2007, and 19th
October 2007.
Syd Kent (Equality and Diversity Officer) and
Melanie Mitchell (Equality Impact Assessment Working Group Secretary) were
present at the initial scoping meeting.
A consultation meeting with Departmental
Administrators was held on
4.
Details of the Equality Impact Assessment
The attached completed report pro-forma details the evidence and consultation considered by the panel.
5.
Types of Recommendation
During the course of the Equality
Impact Assessment it became clear that a number of issues on the recruitment and
terms of service of GTAs/Demonstrators were not directly Equality and Diversity
related.
The Equality Impact Assessment panel has therefore made
recommendations to both EaDC and the GTA Sub-Committee.
6.
Recommendations to EaDC
The Equality Impact Assessment panel makes the following
recommendations to EaDC:
Recommendation:
that EaDC consider annually statistics on
GTAs/Demonstrators by
Department and equality target groups alongside statistics on postgraduate
students by Department and equality target groups.
Recommendation:
that EaDC consider whether the timing of the
teaching timetable being released could have a negative effect on equality
target groups.
(The late release of the timetable was raised as
an issue that affects GTAs with childcare responsibilities, meaning that they
are left little time to book childcare.
The EIA panel believe that this could be an issue
affecting the wider University community).
7.
Recommendations to GTA Sub-Committee
The following recommendations have been referred to GTA
Sub-Committee:
Recommendation:
that GTA Sub-Committee consider reviewing the
formula for calculating GTA pay, to ensure that the multipliers remain
appropriate and fair across departments.
Recommendation:
that the GTA Sub-Committee consider reviewing the
Code of Practice on Teaching and Demonstrating by Graduate Students to ensure
that it is being adhered to across departments.
Recommendation:
that the GTA Sub-Committee consider whether GTA
teaching should be limited to a number of days.
(It appeared from the Impact Assessment that some
GTAs can be teaching as many as five days per week).
8.
Feedback on the EIA Process and the Usefulness of
the Guidance Documentation Provided
Having conducted the pilot Equality Impact Assessment, the panel give the following feedback on the process and the guidance documentation:
i) The size of the panel was felt to be appropriate.
ii) The fact that the meetings were spread over a relatively long period of time meant that the workload was manageable for panel members, and took up a reasonable amount of time. The panel would be mindful of tighter timescales, as this might make it hard to find willing panel members.
iii) The panel identified relevant information and data at their initial scoping meeting, and this was considered at the second meeting. To speed the process up, it was felt that relevant information could be identified by the Chair and Secretary beforehand, and it could be considered at the first meeting.
iv) Whilst the Equality Impact Assessment manual would be helpful at a management level, some panel members felt that it did make the process seem complicated and daunting. It was thought that the manual gave the impression that panel members would be ‘bogged down’ with set procedures, whilst in fact this wasn’t the case. It is suggested that it is important for the Chair and Secretary to have a good understanding of the manual, but that perhaps panel members might find it most useful towards the end of the process, using it as a checklist to ensure that discussions had covered all of the areas.
v) As was the case with the previous Equal Opportunity Reviews, many important issues arose in this EIA that were not directly related to Equality and Diversity. The guidelines for membership of EIA panels recommend that one panel member be a current or past member of EaDC, in order that there is Equality and Diversity expertise. This EIA panel re-iterate the importance of having as much Equality and Diversity expertise as possible in the panel, in order to keep the review as focussed on these issues as possible.
vi)
As the bulk of the EIA panel’s work
was on the consultation, the panel recommend that EaDC be mindful of timing when
planning EIAs, to ensure that the target groups will be available for
consultation.
For example, it would be best if EIAs involving
consultation with students were not carried out during vacation periods when
students are not there to consult with.
Dr Wyn Johnson (Chair)
Ms Stephanie Dennett (Secretary)
November 2007