Equality Impact Assessment - Recruitment and Selection

• Home
• Your Council
• Equalities
• Equality Impact Assessments
• Equality Impact Assessments - Chief Executives Directorate
• Equality Impact Assessment - Recruitment and Selection

Function being assessed:

Recruitment and selection

Is this a new function or a review of an existing function?

Existing

What are the aims/purpose of the function?

Extract from RBK Recruitment Strategy 2008: ‘We remain convinced that our people are the key differentiator in providing excellent services for Kingston.  For this reason our recruitment activities are essential for us to remain successful, creating an attractive image, encouraging diversity and ensuring an efficient, robust procedure from application to induction.’

A key part of any equality in employment policy is to remove any barriers to the employment of people from any sector of our community.  A fair and effective recruitment process will result in the selection of the most suitable person for the job.

In an increasingly competitive labour market, it is important that RBK constantly reviews and revises its methods for attracting and recruiting staff.  From May 2006 RBK joined with other London boroughs in the London Boroughs Recruitment Partnership to access London-wide contracts, share best practice and benchmarking purposes.

Is the function designed to meet specific needs such as the needs of minority ethnic groups, older people, disabled people etc?

RBK’s aim is to employ a workforce that accurately reflects the community it serves and, by doing so, is able to effectively deliver the services that are required.  The recruitment process is designed to be inclusive and non-discriminatory.  This ranges from where and how jobs are advertised through to the effective shortlisting of candidates, appointing the successful candidate followed by a comprehensive induction process.

The introduction of an on-line application form from 22 August 2008 has given improved choice in the method of application.  This method of applying for jobs, whilst making it better for all users, may be of particular help and make it easier for some disabled applicants, e.g.  

• Completion of the on-line application form can be done in stages and saved before being forwarded.
• After registration, information such as employment history can be completed once and this is then subsequently displayed on all applications made.
• Email alerts can be set up so that job seekers are informed when a particular type of job is advertised.  This prevents the need to keep logging onto the jobs pages to see what is new.

What information has been gathered on this function? (Indicate the type of information gathered e.g. statistics, consultation, other monitoring information)? Attach a summary or refer to where the evidence can be found.

From 1986 RBK has monitored by gender, disability and ethnicity and reported the findings to the Equalities Forum on a six-monthly basis.  The change of response handling to an alternative contractor Tribal from1 April 2007 assisted with the data collection.  From September 2008 an on –line application form was introduced as part of a new e-recruitment system – Recruit.  This new process included the monitoring of religion, belief and sexual orientation.   

Does your analysis of the information show different outcomes for different groups (higher or lower uptake/failure to access/receive a poorer or inferior service)? If yes, indicate which groups and which aspects of the policy or function.

The data has been analysed by:

• Grade and gender
• Grade and ethnic background
• Grade and people with disabilities
• Applications and appointments by ethnic background
• Applications and appointments by gender
• Applications and appointment by disability

Although the analysis undertaken has shown numbers and trends, it has failed to reveal ‘why?’ and put in place any plans to tackle this.  This has now been picked up in HR’s Equality and Action Plan for 2009/10 - see Appendix B

Are these differences justified (e.g. are there legislative or other constraints)? If they are, explain in what way.

No.

What action needs to be taken as a result of this Equality Impact Assessment to address any detrimental impacts or meet previously unidentified need? Include here any reasonable adjustments for access by disabled people. Include dates by which action will be taken. Attach an action plan if necessary.

Please see Appendix B – Action Plan

When will you evaluate the impact of action taken? Give review dates.

Please see Appendix B – Action Plan

Assessment completed by:

NAME: Tricia Macmillan, HR Adviser

SERVICE: Human Resources

DATE: 12 March 2009

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX B

RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION – EQUALITY ACTION PLAN – 2009/2010

Ref	Action	By when	By whom	What will be different	Outcome/evidence
1.	To further analyse recruitment data at each stage of the process – application, shortlisting and appointment on a quarterly basis and carry out differential impact assessments as necessary.	Q1 Apr – Jun 09 31/7/09 Q2 Jul – Sep 09 30/9/09 Q3 Oct – Dec 09 31/1/10 Q4 Jan – Mar 10 30/4/10	HR Manager, Front Line Services	Possible reasons behind the data will be known and steps can be taken to tackle any problem areas.	Information will be available to assist resource planning.
2.	To carry out sampling activity of completed recruitment files on a quarterly basis to check for: Use of model forms for shortlisting Panel member/s on HR’s register of recruiters	Q1 Apr – Jun 09 31/7/09 Q2 Jul – Sep 09 30/9/09 Q3 Oct – Dec 09 31/1/10 Q4 Jan – Mar 10 30/4/10	HR Manager, Front Line Services	Best practice processes in place for shortlisting and ensuring one or more panel member has received RBK’s specialist training prior to interviewing.	Fair and transparent recruitment process achieved with information to refute discrimination claims.
3.	Develop RBK workforce composition targets as necessary, e.g. target of 45% of top 5% earners to be women (Old BVPI 11a)	Apr 09	HR Management Team	Strategies can target problem or key areas.	Targets are met.
Ref	Action	By when	By whom	What will be different	Outcome/evidence
4.	Compare RBK performance with that of other London and adjoining Boroughs using the new performance framework for local authorities and local authority partnerships	Jul 09	HR Manager, Front Line Services	Enable benchmarking to take place.	Review resources available to effect change.
5.	Review data capture on disability and increase awareness of what constitutes a disability for declaration purposes.	Oct 09	HR Manager, Front Line Services with HR Manager, H&S	Improve accuracy of numbers of people with disabilities	Impact on disability related targets.
6.	Positive action for BME staff in non-supervisory roles in areas where BME staff are under represented in management.	Dec 09	HR Manager, Front Line Services with HR Manager, Specialist Services	Targetted action to increase number of BME staff in higher grades	Increased number of BME staff in higher grades
7.	Review impact of introduction of monitoring for sexual orientation.  What percentage of applicants have declared or have preferred not to say.	Jan 10	HR Manager, Front Line Services with HR Manager, Specialist Services	Review whether the opportunity to state sexual orientation has been taken up.	Opportunity to become a Stonewall Diversity Champion.

Ref	Action	By when	By whom	What will be different	Outcome/evidence
8.	Review guidance documents used in the recruitment and selection process to ensure race/gender/disability equality is promoted: Job description guidance Recruitment advertising process –where/how? Short listing for interview guidance Panel decision making	Sep 09	HR Manager, Front Line Services	Information will be consistent and out-of-date information will be removed.	Available information is accurate, dated and a system is in place to review it either when legislation changes or on a timetabled basis.
9.	To review recruitment related information available on line – both intranet and internet.	Sep 09	HR Manager, Front Line Services	Information will be consistent and out-of-date information will be removed.	Available information is accurate, dated and a system is in place to review it either when legislation changes or on a timetabled basis.