Equality and Diversity in the Royal Mail Sector Essay

essay B
  • Words: 8322
  • Category: Database

  • Pages: 31

Get Full Essay

Get access to this section to get all the help you need with your essay and educational goals.

Get Access

The Disability Action Centre was established in 1993 to supply aid and advice on disablement related issues to all employees and our sub-postmasters. As one of the UK’s largest service suppliers and employers, acquiring things right for our handicapped clients and employees is critical, both because it makes concern sense and it’s the right thing to make. Our purpose is, wherever possible, to heighten the services we provide to handicapped people populating and working in our community. I do trust you bask the site.’David J Mills, Chief Executive, Post Office Ltd, 2004.

Purpose

The chief aims of this thesis are to look into the effectivity of diverseness and equal chance consciousness within the royal mail sector. To look into the statute law that guides equal chance for handicapped people at work topographic points. To set up the alterations the statute law has brought to the degree of employment for the handicapped compared to the last 10 old ages. To set up the degree of consciousness the statute law has created within the royal mail constitution. To see how disablement issues has been managed within the royal mail constitution.

Contentss

  1. Introduction

1.1Diversity 4

1.2The Royal Mail 5

  1. The Law on Disability

1.3The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 6

1.4The Human Rights Act 19989

1.5The Incidence of Disabled Employees 14

  1. Diversity Training

1.6The Effect and Benefit of Diversity Training 15

1.7Problems and Troubles with Diversity 17

  1. Royal Mail’s Diversity Policy and Training

1.8Royal Mail’s Diversity Policy 19

1.9The Disability Training Modules 22

  1. Methodology

1.10Introduction 24

1.11Research Plan 24

1.12Secondary Research 25

1.13Primary Research 25

  1. Decisions and Findingss

6.1 Decision 27

Bibliography29

Appendix 1 – Royal Mail ; Disability Discrimination 33

Appendix 2 – Royal Mail ; Employing Deaf People 35

Appendix 3 – Royal Mail: Equal Opportunities 37

Appendix 4 – Royal Mail ; Disability Training Modules 39

1.Introduction

1.1Diverseness

In the most general footings, diverseness refers to the many ways people in organisations differ. Stated definitions of organisational diverseness acknowledge a broad scope of features – including race, faith, age, personality properties, working manner, organisational section, and many other factors.( Overmyer Day:1995 ) .In the workplace, diverseness describes the attack to concern that values human differences for the critical parts they can do to organisational success. Properly managed, diverseness optimizes the willingness and ability of all employees to lend to that success, and encourages each to pull to the full on the endowments, different points of position, accomplishments and patterns that benefit both the person and the organisation. When organisations create diverseness enterprises that tie to their vision, strategic aims, and communicating plans and staffing marks, they will more readily actuate, develop and retain their employees.( Toma:2004 )At its best, diverseness encompasses all the nucleus individualities that make us alone while promoting the inclusiveness that values both our similarities and our differences. The end of diverseness is non to number people by class merely to take safety in the Numberss – it is to profit from the best mixture of people irrespective of class ; to pull people with an array of endowments, experiences and positions, and so separately and aggregately to authorise them to give everything they have in order to achieve concern aims. When organisations create diverseness enterprises that tie to their vision, strategic aims, and communicating plans and staffing marks, they will more readily actuate, develop and retain their employees. Milliken and Martins ( 1996 ) point out that the word diverseness, although frequently emotionally charged, merely means “ assortment ” and the grade that things differ. Therefore, diverseness direction implies the ability to pull off heterogenous groups.

1.2The Royal Mail

The Royal Mail Group comprises the Post Office, Royal Mail and Parcelforce Worldwide and employ over 200,000 employees. Harmonizing to their web site they handle around 82 million letters cards and packages every twelvemonth and deliver to the UK’s 27 million references at a unvarying and low-cost monetary value.

The Royal Mail claim to hold an active and comprehensive diverseness programme which comprises diverseness preparation, and specific solutions to get the better of troubles when using handicapped individuals. They claim to hold a higher than norm handicapped work force and have set up a separate Disability Action Commission. A staff questionnaire “Have your Say” identified the figure of handicapped employees at Royal Mail was presently at 6 % and they suggest that they wish to better upon this figure. ( Royal Mail 2004 )

2.The Law on Disability

2. 1 The Disability Discrimination Act 1995

Under s 1 of theDisability Discrimination Act 1995a individual is defined as handicapped who:

“… . Has a physical or mental damage which has a significant and long-run inauspicious consequence on his ability to transport out normal daily activities”

The damage may be physical or mental. Whilst the conventional position of disablement is that of physical disablement theDisability Discrimination Act 1995recognises both those with recognized mental unwellness and those with learning troubles. The consequence of the disablement must be significant. The term significant is defined in the counsel issued under s2 as intending more than child or trivial.

The consequence must be long term. This is besides farther defined in the counsel as intending probably to last for 12 months or more or for the remainder of the person’s life. Furthermore, past disablement besides brings the individuals within the definition. So, those one time measure uping as handicapped remain protected for the remainder of their lives. Harmonizing to the EAT inGreenwood V British Airways [ 1999 ] ICR 969,the employment court is entitled to do this appraisal of the likely continuance of the consequence on the footing of information available at the day of the month of the hearing.

The consequence of any disablement must be on normal twenty-four hours to twenty-four hours activities and hence a individual will non be disabled if they are enduring from an damage which simply limits exceptionally strenuous activities or merely specific sorts of occupations.

The combined consequence of these elements of the definition has been to include many more people than most Human Resources directors would likely expected. In peculiar, the courts have taken a wide attack to depression and other metal unwellnesss, so that many employers have found themselves supporting ailments of unjust dismissal against appliers they have ne’er regarded as handicapped. InGoodwin v The Patent Office [ 1999 ] ICR 302the applier was a paranoid schizophrenic but managed to care for himself, mostly satisfactorily, at place. The employment court had held that the consequence of his damage was non significant and he was accordingly non disabled. The EAT disagreed and in making so gave drawn-out and elaborate counsel for the courts on how to near the inquiry of whether an applier is disabled. The proper attack is to concentrate on things that the applier can make or can non make merely with trouble and non simply on things that he can make.

The definition of favoritism under s5 ( 1 ) is similar to that under the other favoritism legislative acts: handling a handicapped individual less favorably than others who are non handicapped and in this instance making so for a ground related to the person’s disablement. It will non be a defense mechanism for the employer to keep that he did non cognize of the person’s disablement. In the instance ofO’Neill v Symm & A ; Co Ltd [ 1988 ] ICR 481the EAT ignored that skip and held that the employer’s dismissal was non improper favoritism under DDA 1995. The employers knew merely that the employee suffered from a viral unwellness and non that it was more serious, so that she was in fact disabled. However inH J Heinz Co Ltd V Kenrick [ 2000 ] ICR 49the EAT reviewed the determination in visible radiation of the determination of the Court of Appeal inClark V Novacold [ 1999 ] ICR 951and efficaciously decided it was incorrect: the trial was nonsubjective and non subjective. The employer dismissed Mr Kenrick for inordinate absence and hence clearly knew of his symptoms ; it was immaterial that a medical diagnosing of chronic weariness syndrome merely came subsequently.

Another country of trouble is the proper comparing. InClark V Novacold [ 1999 ] ICR 951, Mr Clark was dismissed for long-run illness absence and his incapableness resulted from disablement. Was the trial of less favorable intervention to be a comparing with a non-disabled individual with a comparable degree of absence or with person who because non disabled had non been absent? The Court of Appeal took the first of those options, but the instance was so appealed. The Court of Appeal contrasted the linguistic communication of the DDA 1995 with RRA 1976 and SDA 1975 and concluded that it did non necessitate the same like-for-like comparing. Others with C’s disablement would non hold been absent to the same extent and would non hold been dismissed. That was plenty to set up that his intervention was less favorable. A similar attack had earlier been taken by a different division of the EAT inBritish Sugar PLC V Kirker [ 1998 ] IRLR 624

From 1 October 2004, theDisability Discrimination Act 1995applied to all employers, irrespective of their size.

The Disability Discrimination Actis alone among the UK ‘s favoritism Torahs. Not merely does it forbid less favorable intervention on evidences of an employee ‘s disablement, it requires employers to do “ sensible accommodations ” to a handicapped employee ‘s working agreements to forestall them from being placed at a disadvantage. They duty to do sensible accommodations appears in s6 ( 1 ) ofDisability Discrimination Acy 1995. The employer is required to take stairss that are sensible in all the fortunes to forestall a handicapped individual from being placed at a significant disadvantage compared with others. In s6 ( 4 ) there is a list of factors that may be taken into history in make up one’s minding whether a peculiar measure is sensible.

The Disability Rights Commission Act 1999 led to the constitution of the DRC in April 2000. It sets out the DRC ‘s statutory responsibilities:

oTo work to extinguish favoritism against handicapped people.

oTo promote equal chances for handicapped people.

oTo encourage good pattern in the intervention of handicapped people.

oTo rede the Government on the working of disablement statute law – the Disability Discrimination Act ( DDA ) 1995 and the Disability Rights Commission Act 1999.

2.2 The Human Rights Act 1998

When the UK Government introduced the Human Rights Act 1998 it said that its purpose was to make more than necessitate authorities and public governments to follow with the European Convention. It wanted to make a ‘human rights culture’ among public governments and among the populace at big.

Disabled people have the same human rights as non-disabled people. This is non a rule that can be taken for granted. The predominating doctrine towards disabled people was one of segregation and dependance on charity or province public assistance. Disability was seen as a medical job. Institutionalised favoritism was embedded in economic and societal life.

A turning civil rights motion among handicapped people has brought about alteration. Disabled people have insisted on the right to self-government and to non-discrimination. They have advanced a societal theoretical account of disablement, which highlights the barriers society concepts instead than one based on medical damages.

However, handicapped people still see bias, maltreatment and societal exclusion. After more than a century of state-provided instruction, some handicapped kids and immature people are still non having the same sort of schooling as their non-disabled equals ; nor do they go forth instruction with tantamount makings. The bulk of farther and higher instruction colleges are unable to suit them in a mainstream scene. Disabled people face dual the degree of unemployment of non-disabled people. (The unemployment rate for handicapped people is 10.7 % compared with 5.7 % for non-disabled people. ONS Omnibus Survey 1998 ) They have lower than mean income degrees. They are seven times more likely than non-disabled people to be out of work and claiming benefits. Many have important troubles in utilizing basic services.

The Disability Discrimination Act has brought about of import alterations in society and societies attitudes. There is an increased willingness among employers and service suppliers to larn about handicapped people’s lives and demands, and of handicapped people to be sensible in their outlooks is striking.

Article 14 of theHuman Rights Act 1998provides farther protection for the handicapped and sets out that “The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set Forth in this Convention shall be secured without favoritism on any land such as sex, race, coloring material, linguistic communication, faith, political or other sentiment, national or societal beginning, association with a national minority, belongings, birth or other status” .

Article 14 is non a freestanding right to equality and must be pleaded with another ailment in order to be a successful ailment under Human Rights Act. Therefore it must be used in combination with a substantial right in order to claim that in regard of that right the public authorization has acted with favoritism. A instance can win under Article 14 even though it fails under the substantial right, every bit long as the facts complained autumn within the ‘ambit’ of the right.

For illustration, inAbdulaziz Cabales and Balkandali ( 1985 ) 7 EHRR 47the appliers were for good resident in the UK. Their hubbies were refused entry to fall in them. The European Court found no misdemeanor of Article 8 ( vouching the right to household life ) taken entirely. They did happen a breach of Article 14 taken in concurrence with Article 8. The Court found that it was legitimate to curtail the admittance of non-national partners but non to distinguish between hubbies and married womans.

There is no expressed mention to disablement in the Human Rights Act. Therefore disablement favoritism is covered by the land of other position. “Other status” has been used to cover sexual orientation, matrimonial position, position as a trade brotherhood, military position, professional position, bastard position, and imprisonment. There is small uncertainty that disablement would number as another “status” given that the Convention is a ‘living instrument’ to be interpreted harmonizing to alterations in societal conditions and beliefs and that disablement favoritism is now accepted as improper in domestic jurisprudence. It is besides a land covered by Article 13 of the Treaty of Amsterdam.

Because the European Convention on Human Rights does non specifically mention disablement tribunals construing it have non considered its significance. Therefore UK tribunals are likely to look to the significance given to it in the Disability Discrimination Act.

The Disability Discrimination Act defines disablement as a “physical or mental damage which has a significant and long-run inauspicious consequence on his ability to transport out normal twenty-four hours to twenty-four hours activities” . The definition is amplified in the Agenda to the Act and in separate statutory Guidance. It covers a great diverseness of damages but excludes some conditions such as alcohol addiction and kleptomania.

Disability does non nevertheless have a individual significance in the contexts of public assistance rights or other societal security entitlements can hold a alternate significance. Under the Human Right Act therefore is likely to hold a different significance depending on the peculiar fortunes of the instance. Discrimination might besides happen against a specific group of handicapped people, for case wheelchair users or people with larning troubles. This besides should be plenty to convey Article 14 into issue.

The DDA contains a construct of favoritism that is in some respects different from that under the Sex Discrimination Act 1976 and the Race Relations Act 1976. Both the European Court of Justice and the Court of Human Rights have besides developed the construct of favoritism in the European context. The application of these rules to discrimination on evidences of disablement will be a undertaking for the tribunals when the first instance comes before them.

Broadly, for favoritism to be established there must be persons in similar or correspondent state of affairss to others but who are subjected to differential intervention which can non be justified on sensible and nonsubjective evidences. Many instances fail because the applier is unable to demo that the chosen comparator is non in fact in a relevantly similar place.

The Court has non yet ruled on whether ‘indirect’ favoritism is covered by the Convention as it is under domestic sex and race favoritism jurisprudence and under European Community jurisprudence. Indirect favoritism, as loosely understood, is discrimination ensuing from a regulation or pattern which applies to everyone without distinction but which has a disproportional inauspicious impact on a peculiar group. So far it has merely been used where there is besides a covert discriminatory purpose behind the patterns or policies which apply to everyone without differentiation.

It would be a utile construct for handicapped people as favoritism frequently arises in this manner. Policies might unconsciously know apart. Until the DDA, the demands of handicapped people were non by and large foremost in the heads of authorities policy-makers outside the specialized countries such as public assistance benefits.

Practices applied every bit to everyone frequently overlooked the barriers that would do it impossible for handicapped people to entree rights and services. For case, entree to the tribunals is impossible for a wheelchair user if there are no inclines or accessible lavatories or the physical layout of the premises otherwise prevents them from engagement in the instance. Freedom of information is meaningless if it is unavailable in formats that visually impaired or deaf people can utilize.

The responsibility to do sensible accommodations covers most of the land of indirect favoritism.

Unlike the DDA, which merely gives rights to handicapped people, Article 14 applies to non-disabled people. However, the Court has found that particular steps or positive action for the benefit of a disadvantaged group does non pique Article 14 every bit long as it has a sensible and nonsubjective justification. Thus the responsibility to do sensible accommodations under the DDA is improbable to be incompatible with the HRA. A more hard issue is whether Article 14 might itself necessitate positive steps for the benefit of handicapped people or a group of handicapped people.

In order for a difference in intervention to be justified it must be in chase of a ‘legitimate aim’ , for illustration protecting the effectivity of the labor market, back uping the household or advancing lingual integrity. The agencies used must be proportionate to the terminal to be achieved.

This demand will non be met unless there is nonsubjective grounds to back up the statement. Generalizations about handicapped people are common, for case, that physically handicapped adult females are less able to be effectual parents than non-disabled adult females and should non be adoptive parents ; or that a unsighted individual can non measure character every bit good as a sighted individual and should non function on a jury. These would wholly be instantly fishy authorities policy-makers outside the specialized countries such as public assistance benefits.

Practices applied every bit to everyone frequently overlooked the barriers that would do it impossible for handicapped people to entree rights and services. For case, entree to the tribunals is impossible for a wheelchair user if there are no inclines or accessible lavatories or the physical layout of the premises otherwise prevents them from engagement in the instance. Freedom of information is meaningless if it is unavailable in formats that visually impaired or deaf people can utilize.

The responsibility to do sensible accommodations covers most of the land of indirect favoritism.

Unlike the DDA, which merely gives rights to handicapped people, Article 14 applies to non-disabled people. However, the Court has found that particular steps or positive action for the benefit of a disadvantaged group does non pique Article 14 every bit long as it has a sensible and nonsubjective justification. Thus the responsibility to do sensible accommodations under the DDA is improbable to be incompatible with the HRA. A more hard issue is whether Article 14 might itself necessitate positive steps for the benefit of handicapped people or a group of handicapped people.

In order for a difference in intervention to be justified it must be in chase of a ‘legitimate aim’ , for illustration protecting the effectivity of the labor market, back uping the household or advancing lingual integrity. The agencies used must be proportionate to the terminal to be achieved.

2.3The Incidence of Disabled Employees across Great Britain

Harmonizing to the Royal Mail ( 2004: Appendix 4 ) There are 8.7 million handicapped people in the UK. 18 % of the on the job age population are disabled. Seven out of 10 handicapped people in employment get their disablement during their on the job lives. Fewer than 5 % of handicapped people are wheelchair users. This challenges our construct of handicapped individuals and many people will be of the position that as there is no 1 in their workplace that is in a wheelchair so there is cipher that is disabled, this is progressively non the instance. However as pointed out by Dr Stephen Duckworth, OBE “Disability lies in the barriers that are created by society … non in the existent mental or physical disability” – ( Royal Mail 2004 ; Appendix 4 )

3.Diversity Training

3.1The Effect and Benefit of Diversity Training

Rynes & A ; Rosen: ( 1995 ) identified some cardinal elements in relation to diverseness preparation and identified when and how it works for some administrations but non for others. First they identified that acceptance of diverseness preparation is frequently positively associated with organisational size and that, albeit instead obvious that acceptance of diverseness preparation will be more common in houses with a diverseness director place

Rynes and Rosen identified that Diversity preparation will be more prevailing in organisations that ( a ) have more diverse top direction squads and ( B ) have experienced recent additions in employee diverseness and that Diversity preparation is more likely to be adopted where top corporate executives: ( a ) clasp positive beliefs about the productiveness, cost, public dealingss, and morale deductions of a more diverse work force, ( B ) act as strong seeable protagonists of diverseness enterprises, and ( degree Celsius ) topographic point a higher strategic precedence on diverseness, comparative to other viing precedences.

Akin with the Royal Mail, ( as will be discussed subsequently ) Rynes and Rosen note that Diversity preparation is more likely to be adopted in organisations that already have a assortment of other diversity-supportive policies and programs.Training will be more successful where attending is compulsory instead than voluntary for both ( a ) directors and ( B ) non-managerial employees

Diversity preparation will be more successful in organisations where a larger proportion of the preparation budget is devoted to it. Training plan length will be positively associated with higher grades of preparation success. Training will be more successful where both ( a ) immediate and ( B ) long-run ratings are conducted

Diversity preparation will be more successful where a more comprehensive scope of subjects is discussed in greater deepness as faculties and clip devoted to one peculiar component in preparation. Diversity preparation will be more successful in houses that have: ( a ) active, seeable top direction support for diverseness, ( B ) a big figure of other diversity-supportive plans and policies, and ( degree Celsius ) explicit managerial wagess for bettering diverseness results. Diversity preparation will be more successful in houses that embrace a wide definition of diverseness instead than one that includes merely racial or cultural minorities, or minorities and adult females. This is of class because the administration will be demonstrative of a diverse and accepting administration and employees who are more broad in their attack will be employed. Those that do non portion such an attitude are non likely to stay with the company really long, as such companies have really elaborate disciplinary processs in regard of this sort of thing.

Training should be good planned by guaranting that the necessary support systems and policies are in topographic point, that the changing demands of the diverse work force are considered and that plan inputs from all sectors are solicited. A trial tally of the plan should besides be conducted to measure its public presentation. It is recommended that companies to seek outside audience. The most effectual manner is to hold a balanced mix of external and internal beginnings. Last, companies are advised to incorporate diverseness plans into current plans like orientation, gross revenues and direction accomplishments preparation.( Delatte & A ; Baytos:1993 )

3.2 Problems and Difficulties with Diversity

Many directors have a negative position of corporate diverseness preparation plans because there have been grounds that these plans are a waste of valuable clip and can even worsen the jobs they are intended to work out. The common defects of diverseness enterprises include their deficiency of touchable criterions, failure to recommend struggle declaration, publicity of stereotyping, failure to see single differences and increased legal hazard. To be effectual, a diverseness developing plan should be closely linked to civil rights conformity and just employment patterns. It should clearly convey a committedness to fair intervention, concentrate on employees ‘ similarities, identify and prohibit unacceptable behavior, Teach regulations of civil behavior, and dainty diverseness and favoritism of concern issues.( Paskoff:1996 )

Another trouble with diverseness plans is that they are merely one beginning of influence for persons. Many persons besides are influenced by beginnings of their ain choosing, which may or may non reflect the position endorsed by the organisation. In fact, many of the influences can be rather polarizing and extenuate the consequence of formal diversity-training plans. Unless these influences are explored and recognized, we believe that diverseness plans will discontinue to be, irrespective of their honorable purpose or efficaciousness.( Nemetz & A ; Christensen:1996 )

Diversity programmes besides fail to turn to of import facets of diverseness reference merely those traits that characterize groups protected by jurisprudence from favoritism – such as race, faith, sex, age, and disablements. In other words, there is a gulf between the features in the declared definition and those in the applied definition.( Overmyer Day:1995 )

Finally one of the troubles with Diversity is that administrations approach the inquiry in vary different ways. Does diverseness by race, gender, ethnicity, or anything else better organisational public presentation? Finding dependable replies to this inquiry is hard because people define diverseness in different, even conflicting ways. Consequently, an progressively diverse work force is diversely viewed as chance, menace, job, craze, or even non-issue. These disparate positions lead people to pull off workforce diverseness in distinguishable ways, ensuing in different costs and benefits. Despite the claim by some that there is one best manner to pull off a diverse work force, there is small understanding on what it is. ( Dass and Parker: 1999 )

4.Royal Mail’s Diversity Policy & A ; Training

4.1 Royal Mail’s Diversity Policy

The Royal Mail’s Diversity mark is to guarantee that length of clip taken to decide intimidation and torment does non transcend 28 yearss and that the full work force be diverseness trained by April 2006 ( Royal Mail:2004 ) . In relation to the preparation aim the Royal Mail are on mark holding so far trained 65,397 of its work force. In relation to deciding diverseness ailments they are non on mark holding resolved 836 ailments out of clip. This raises two issues, both of which will be dealt with subsequently, and these are why is there such a high incidence of diverseness ailments and why, despite making their mark on preparation do these go on to be settled out of their mark clip.

The Royal Mail claims to run a zero tolerance policy to intimidation and torment and to promote people to kick of any behavior that falls below the criterion that is expected of their employees. As a effect, it is claimed that they are taking positive action in a figure of countries. They have put in topographic point a new intimidation and torment procedure that is clear straightforward and easy to utilize. They have placed a strong accent on quick, informal and timely declarations. Their regional instance directors are wholly independent and their exclusive focal point is doing certain that all instances are followed up and resolved.

They are looking at their working forms to increase flexibleness and do them more attractive to those in the community who might hold caring duties outside of the on the job environment. They are reexamining their procedures to see to promote people that are presently deterred from using to work within the Royal Mail.

A diverseness preparation programme is presently being delivered to all of their employees which it is aimed will be complete by the terminal of the 2004-2005 fiscal twelvemonth ( these consequences are non yet available ) . This covers why they feel that they need to turn to issues of torment and unjust intervention in the workplace, why they need to better the demographic spread of their work force and why they must set up a civilization of regard and exclusivity in all workers.

Royal Mail identified in 2003 that cultural minorities make up about 9 % of our work force. Within, their direct managed sections of the Post Office Ltd subdivisions they have made a broad scope of accommodations to their web to do them more accessible to their handicapped clients.

As an administration they claim to be wholly committed to the rules of equity and equality of intervention and chance for all and are confident that this will be achieved in a comparatively short period of clip. The Equal Opportunities Commission is satisfied that the action program that has been agreed with them is traveling in the right way and towards their recent award of a Silver Award from chance. Now, in acknowledgment of their work on gender, demonstrates that assurance in the administration is non misplaced. They besides received in 2004 the most improved public sector administration in the Race for Opportunity benchmarking study.

Royal Mail’s diverseness programme peculiarly focal points on disablement, with an action squad that works closely with a figure of cardinal disablement administrations and disablement related undertakings. The Royal Mail are ‘gold card’ member of The Employers’ Forum Disability ( EFD ) , working with about 400 of the country’s top companies on the challenges faced in using handicapped people and supplying an inclusive service for handicapped clients.

In 2003 the Royal Mail was the European Year of Disabled Peoples ( EYDP ) . There purpose of that twelvemonth was to drive advancement towards accomplishing

equal rights for handicapped people. They supported the EYDP by:

Funding a stamp cancellation postmarking for five hebdomads in 2003, utilizing the EYDP

logo to raise consciousness.

Sponsoring a brochure aimed at informing instructors about disablement, the DDA, the elements of the statute law that affect instruction and illustrations of good pattern.

Showcasing the DAC web site at the EYDP launch event, attended by the

Minister, Maria Eagle. They have signed up for the Leonard Cheshire VisAbility programme to raise consciousness amongst our Brand and Product Managers of the benefits of inclusive selling.

A comprehensive programme of entree studies have been carried out across all

our 1,600 premises that have client entree

Despite these commissariats Royal Mail recognise that for many grounds there workplaces are non yet free from favoritism or perceived favoritism, but they highlight that they are turn toing long held mentalities and patterns. As an administration they claim to be wholly committed to the rule of equity, equality of intervention and chance for all and are confident that this will be achieved by them in a comparatively short period of clip. The Equal Opportunities Commission is satisfied

that there action program that they have agreed with them is traveling the administration towards this end and our recent accomplishment of a Silver Award from Opportunity Now demonstrates that assurance in the administration is non misplaced.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

4.2 The Disability Training Modules

The preparation faculties are attached as appendix four of this thesis. Module One of the disablement diverseness preparation trades with current perceptual experiences of disablement. This faculty contains one exercising ( good disability/bad disablement ) which is designed to acquire persons to research how they feel approximately disablements as opposed to handicapped people. It is a reasonably blithe exercising, aimed at promoting honest and unfastened treatment around perceptual experiences of disablement.

Module Two trades with: What is disablement? In this faculty disablement, as a generic term, is discussed every bit good as historical and statistical information on handicapped people. This faculty seeks to dispute common perceptual experiences of what disablement is. This faculty highlights that a disablement is the reversible disadvantage or limitation of activity caused by modern-day societal administration which takes small or no history of people with damages and consequences in their exclusion from engagement in the mainstream of societal activities.

Module Three of the preparation faculty trades with linguistic communication and behavior. Included in this faculty are guidelines on appropriate/inappropriate linguistic communication, behavior and general ‘disability’ advice when meeting and working with handicapped people.

Module Four trades with Practical stairss and this faculty covers preferable ways of showing information, illustrations of Disability Action Centre ( DAC ) fact sheets. The preparation faculty sets our quite clearly the manner in which handicapped people should be treated when employed by the Royal Mail.

  • You must be cognizant that handicapped people are people foremost
  • You must be cognizant of your ain attitudes to handicapped people and the importance of understanding their demands
  • You must be cognizant that handicapped people have single demands which are related to the state of affairs and non the damage
  • You must be cognizant of negative ideas and linguistic communication associated with handicapped people
  • You must be cognizant of the importance of entree and the barriers that may forestall it, i.e. unaccessible edifices, inappropriate communicating and people’s negative/inappropriate attitudes
  • You must be cognizant of the importance of meeting and hearing to handicapped people
  1. You must be cognizant that disablement consciousness is one facet of an equal chances and diverseness attack

5.Methodology

5.1 Introduction

This chapter discusses the research methods used for the undertaking and the justification for the pick of methods. It discusses methods that were non used, with justification of why they were non included. Included is a review of methods selected, and with hindsight this identifies any alterations that would hold enhanced the research.

5.2 Research Plan

This paper critically evaluates Diversity preparation and policy and the impact that it has had on employment within the Royal Mail. This issue raises inquiries, such is Royal Mail’s policy an effectual one? What are the policy purposes? Are they ethically, morally and lawfully sound? Or are they paying lip service to the stakeholders to maintain them satisfied?

Choice of the subject was stimulated and formed out of heightened political consciousness on the capable country. The nature of the research was discussed with co-workers and fellow pupils, this non merely added practical thoughts and suggestions ; it besides opened new avenues of idea. This was the discussed with lectors sounding out thoughts, estimating sentiments and clear uping the inquiry. Concentrating in on the inquiry was obtained by using relevancy trees, contracting the research country. This gave way to the research, although with reexamining the literature this way changed several times ( Buzan, J. 1995 ) .

Next, a research proposal was compiled, with the benefit of organizing thoughts and puting a time-scale for research. Theoretically, the proposal would foreground any troubles with the research inquiry and entree to informations. Making a time-scale would concentrate on marks and run into deadlines in the completion of the paper.

5.3 Secondary Research

The literature reappraisal, discoursing theories and thoughts that exist on the subject formed the foundation of the paper. The findings from the research are so tested on theories for cogency ( Saunders, M. et al 1997 ) . The literature reappraisal was disputing, there is a huge sum of articles on the topic. Diaries and newspaper articles formed the back bone for the reappraisal.

Tertiary informations beginnings, such as library catalogues and indexes were used to scan for secondary informations. This produced diaries and newspaper articles, and Internet references. With the sum of literature, it took clip to screen out relevant stuff to the research. Narrowing down the hunt Bell’s ( 1993 ) six point’s parametric quantities was applied. Using cardinal words that were identified in the first hunt produced relevant and up-to-date stuff ( Bell, J.1993 ) . A restriction on the literature hunt was the sum of clip to read all articles and books on the topic. Whilst reexamining the literature mentions to other relevant publications was followed and reviewed. Bells checklist on placing the relevancy of literature found was a practical method to cut down the sum of reading ( Bell, J. 1993 ) .

5.4 Primary Research

Case surveies of the Royal Mail that through changing factors have been considered ethical ( or non ethical ) have been reviewed and compared to the literature. The instance surveies discuss the administrations mission and ethical stance and compare this to actions of the administrations. The external concern image of administrations, does non ever fit the behavior of the persons within.

The administrations web sites were reviewed to uncover their current stance on diverseness and equal chances. This gave insight into the continual alteration needed to present a sustainable diverseness and equal chances policy..

To bring forth primary informations on administrations ethical stance proved to be a huge undertaking, taking a batch of clip to bring forth consequences. Internal and external operations of several administrations would hold to be compared to make any degree of cogency. Alternatively it was decide to reexamine antecedently published instance surveies, interviews and studies. This was so compared to the literature reappraisal. These published instance surveies came straight from the web site of the Royal Mail and imperativeness releases.

Interviewing people within administrations was an option for primary research. The mark of the interview would be the individual that held plenty power to act upon determinations that the administration makes. This was rejected as the paper is discoursing the administrations stance on ethical issues, and by questioning you would merely obtain the single beliefs. The administrations ethical stance is seeable in their mission statement and their behavior and intervention towards societal issues.

The debut of Strategic HR should be reviewed for the timing and the costs involved. The slow followings and dawdlers Mirvis, ( 1997 ) discussed as they “might be inclined to implement the best pattern because a figure of companies have done so earlier. However, the impact of implementing the new tendency is wholly different for the latecomers” . The execution of the HR policies and patterns no longer helps to bring forth competitory advantage, exactly because they are now common across a big figure of administrations. So, the timing of take-up and the costs involved in the acceptance procedure of new HR patterns is important ( Mirvis ( 1997 cited inPaauwe, J & A ; Boselie, P. 2003 ) .

Given the complexness of corporate acquisition, the administration will non be able to merely copy the others procedure. It is the larning to put to death them, which becomes the existent imperative and competitory advantage. Regenerating schemes must integrate a strategic HR larning plan. Teamwork, communications, job resolution, statistical procedure analysis, uninterrupted betterments are merely some of the accomplishments that need to be learned and customised to suit the new scheme (Treen, D. 2000 ) .

6.Decisions and Findingss

6.1 Decisions

The Royal Mail’s Diversity preparation mark is to guarantee that their full work force is trained in disablement diverseness by 2005. The preparation aim the Royal Mail is on mark holding so far trained 65,397 of its work force. The Royal Mail claims to run a zero tolerance policy to intimidation and torment and to promote people to kick of any behavior that falls below the criterion that is expected of their employees. As a effect, it is claimed that they are taking positive action in a figure of countries. Royal Mail’s diverseness programme peculiarly focal points on disablement, with an action squad that works closely with a figure of cardinal disablement administrations and disablement related undertakings. The Royal Mail are ‘gold card’ member of The Employers’ Forum Disability ( EFD ) , working with about 400 of the country’s top companies on the challenges faced in using handicapped people and supplying an inclusive service for handicapped clients. However one may claim with the oncoming of the new disablement ordinance across the board that the Royal Mail are making no more than they need to make. This claim would be unfounded they have taken a pro-active attack to trying to eliminate disablement favoritism from their workplace. Guaranting that their policy is sound and endorsing up developing faculties. The disablement preparation is backed up with countenances for employees who abuse the place of handicapped individuals in the work force and take a difficult line attack to torment and intimidation.

Despite this positive attack, within Royal Mail and across other British Employers handicapped people are still sing bias, maltreatment and societal exclusion. After more than a century of state-provided instruction, some handicapped kids and immature people are still non having the same sort of schooling as their non-disabled equals ; nor do they go forth instruction with tantamount makings. The bulk of farther and higher instruction colleges are unable to suit them in a mainstream scene. Disabled people face dual the degree of unemployment of non-disabled people. (The unemployment rate for handicapped people is 10.7 % compared with 5.7 % for non-disabled people. ONS Omnibus Survey 1998 ) They have lower than mean income degrees. They are seven times more likely than non-disabled people to be out of work and claiming benefits. Many have important troubles in utilizing basic services. This is where the trouble in Royal Mail’s diverseness preparation lies. Peopless attitudes by and large need to be more broad, and it is really hard to switch people’s perceptual experience of disabled when they have grown up with a peculiar set of values and beliefs. A twosome of hours developing will non better this state of affairs at all. As Nemetz and Christensen point out diverseness plans are merely one beginning of influence for persons. Many persons besides are influenced by beginnings of their ain choosing, which may or may non reflect the position endorsed by the organisation. In fact, many of the influences can be rather polarizing and extenuate the consequence of formal diversity-training plans. Unless these influences are explored and recognized, we believe that diverseness plans will discontinue to be, irrespective of their honorable purpose or efficaciousness.( Nemetz & A ; Christensen:1996 )

Furthermore, across the board and within the Royal Mail, diverseness programmes fail to turn to of import facets of diverseness and adresss merely those traits that characterize groups protected by jurisprudence from favoritism – such as race, faith, sex, age, and disablements. In other words, there is a gulf between the features in the declared definition and those in the applied definition.( Overmyer Day:1995 ) .

It is concluded hence that whilst the Royal Mail’s diverseness policy and attack is admirable that peoples attitudes beliefs and value system need to alter by and large. Society as a whole needs to go more accepting of handicapped individuals demands. Once this happens, and it won’t go on over dark, Royal Mail’s diverseness policy will look to be a batch more effectual.

Bibliography

Cases

Abdulaziz Cabales and Balkandali 1985 7 EHRR 47

British Sugar PLC V Kirker [ 1998 ] IRLR

in Clark V Novacold [ 1999 ] ICR 951

Goodwin v The Patent Office [ 1999 ] ICR 302

Greenwood V British Airways [ 1999 ] ICR 969

H J Heinz Co Ltd V Kenrick [ 2000 ] ICR 49

Legislation

Disability Discrimination Act 1995

Human Rights Act 1998

Journal Articles

Baldwin TT, Ford JK. ( 1988 ) . “Transfer of preparation: A reappraisal and waies for future research” . Personnel Psychology, 41, 63-105.

Barnes, ( 1991 ) Disabled Peoples in Britain and Discrimination: A Case for Anti-Discrimination Legislation

Bendick M, “Workplace Diversity Training: From Anti-Discrimination Compliance to Organisational Development” , Human Resource Planning

Bynoe, Oliver and Barnes, ( 1990 ) Equal Rights for Disabled People, IPPR,

Carnevale A & A ; Stone S, ( 1994 ) “Diversity Beyond the Golden Rule” , Training and Development v48 n10 p22 ( 18 )

Cox, T. & A ; S. Blake. ( 1991 ) “ Pull offing Cultural Diverseness: Deductions for Organizational Competitiveness. ” Academy of Management Executive 5: 45-56.

Dass P & A ; Parker B, ( 1999 ) “Strategies for Pull offing Human Resource Diversity: From Resistance to Learning” , The Academy of Management Executive vol 13 Iss 2 pg 68

Delatte A & A ; Baytos L, ( 1993 ) “8 Guidelines for Successful Diversity Training”

D’Netto B & A ; Sohal A, ( 1999 ) “Human Resource Practices and Workforce Diversity: An Empirical Assessment” , International Journal of Manpower vol 20 Iss 8 pg 530

Easley C, ( 2001 ) “Developing Valuing and Managing Diversity in the New Millennium”

Ettorre B, ( 1996 ) “Religion in the Workplace: Deductions for Managers” , Management Review, Dec v85 n12 p15 ( 4 )

Fulkerson JR, Schuler RS. ( 1992 ) “Managing global diverseness at Pepsi-Cola International. In Jackson SE ( Ed. ) , Diversity in the workplace: Human resource initiatives” ( pp. 248-276 ) . New York: Guilford Press.

Gilbert J, Ivancevich J, ( 2000 ) “Valuing Diverseness: A narrative of Two Organisations” , The Academy of Management Executive, Vol 14 Iss 1 pg 93

Guillory W, ( 2002 ) “The Unifying Force of Diversity” , Executive Excellence vol 19 Iss 6 pg 7

Hall L, ( 2005 ) “Following a Different Beat” , Personnel Today Jan 25 pg 19

Johnson RB, O’Mara J. ( 1992 ) “Shedding new visible radiation on diverseness preparation Training and Development” , 46 ( 5 ) , 45-52

Jones J, Halcomb Lewis D, ( 2003 ) “Mending Fences on the Immigrant Frontier: A Call for Better Integration of Demographic Information in Human Resource Management Practice and Theory” , Journal of Leadership and Organisational Studies, Fall vol 10 iss 2 pg 89

Nemetz P & A ; Christensen S, ( 1996 ) “The Challenge of Cultural Diversity: Harnessing A Diverseness of Positions to Understand Multiculturalism” , Academy of Management Review April v21 n2 p434 ( 29 )

Millken and L. L. Martins ( 1996 ) “ Searching for Common Threads: Understanding the Multiple Effectss of Diversity in Organizational Groups. ” Academy of Management Review 21: 402-433.

Overmyer Day L, ( 1995 ) “The Pitfalls of Diversity Training” , Training and Development, Dec v49 n12 p24 ( 6 )

Owens R, ( 1997 ) “Diversity: A Bottom Line Issue” , Workforce March v76 n3 ps3 ( 3 )

Paskoff S, ( 1996 ) “Ending the Workplace Diversity Wars” , Training v33 n8 p42 ( 6 )

Richard O & A ; Johnson N, ( 2001 ) “Understanding the impact of Human Resource Diversity Practices on Firm Performance” , Journal of Managerial Issues vol 13 Iss 2 pg 177

Rynes S & A ; Rosen B, ( 1995 ) “A Field Survey of Factors Affecting the Adoption and Perceived Success of Diversity Training” , Personnel Psychology Summer v48 n2 p247 ( 24 )

Toma M, ( 2004 ) “Diversity: Headache or Head Start? ” , Human Resource Management International Digest vol 12, Iss 2 pg 2

Watson WE, Kumar K, Michaelsen LK. ( 1993 ) . “Cultural diverseness ‘s impact on interaction procedure and public presentation: Comparing homogenous and diverse undertaking groups” . Academy of Management Journal, 36, 590-602.

Books

Beardwell I and Holden L, ( 1994 ) Human Resource Management

Pitman Publishing, London

Beardwell, I. et Al. ( 2004 ) ( 4ThursdayEdition ) Human Resource Management a

Contemporary Approach Prentice Hall, Harlow.

Blyton, P & A ; Turnbull, P. ( 2004 ) ( 3rdedition ) The Dynamics of Employee Relations. Macmillan, Basingstoke

Buchanan D, and Hucczynski A, ( 1991 ) Organisational Behaviour

Prentice Hall, Padstow

Farnham, D ( 2002 ) ( 2neodymiumEdition ) Employee dealingss in Context

CIPD, London

Grint, K. ( 1995 ) Management a Sociological Introduction

Blackwell publishing houses Ltd, Cambridge

Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Wokingham, England

Marchington M and Wilkinson A, ( 1997 ) Core Personnel and Development

IPD publication, London

Mullins, L ( 2005 ) ( 7ThursdayEdition ) Management and Organisational Behaviour

Prentice Hall, Pearson Education, Edinburgh

Sissons, K, ( 1996 ) ( 2neodymiumedition ) Personnel Management

Blackwell Publishers Ltd, Oxford,

Taylor, S. ( 1998 ) Employee Resourcing

The Cromwell Press, Trowbridge

Towers, B. ( 1996 ) ( 2neodymiumedition ) The Handbook of Human Resource Management

Blackwell Publishers Ltd, Oxford

Wilson, F. ( 1999 ) Organisational Behaviour, A Critical Introduction Oxford University Press, Oxford

Royal Mail Publications

Royal Mail Annual Report 2000-1

Royal Mail Annual Report 2001-2

Royal Mail Annual Report 2002-3

Royal Mail Annual Report 2003-4

Royal Mail Health and Safety Report 2002

Royal Mail Corporate Social Responsibility 2004

Web sites

hypertext transfer protocol: //www.eoc.org.uk/

www.RoyalMail.co.uk

hypertext transfer protocol: //www.drc-gb.org/

Appendix 1 – Royal Mail Disability Action Centre Fact Sheet – Disability Discrimination Act 1995 – Rights and Duties

Disability Action Centre ( DAC )fact sheet

Disability Discrimination Act 1995 ( DDA )

Rights and duties

Did you cognize?

  1. There are 8.7 million handicapped people in the UK.
  1. Eighteen per cent of the on the job age population are disabled.
  1. These figures are increasing.
  1. Seven out of 10 handicapped people in employment get their disablement during their on the job lives.
  1. Fewer than five per cent of handicapped people are wheelchair users.

Under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 ( DDA ) employees, occupation appliers and clients who are disabled, or who have had a disablement, have the right non to be discriminated against because of their disablement.

Royal Mail duties

  1. To guarantee just and proper intervention of handicapped appliers, employees and clients.
  1. Not to know apart against handicapped people.
  1. To do sensible accommodations to facets of employment, when the demand arises for handicapped people.
  1. To handle as an offense the torment or exploitation of anybody who supports their ain or another ‘s rights under the DDA.

Individual duties

To inform your line director, forces or seek advice from the Royal Mail Disability Helpline if you think you have a disablement which may profit from sensible accommodations.

  1. To co-operate to guarantee the execution of any sensible accommodations when the demand arises.
  2. To inform your line director, forces or seek advice from the Royal Mail Disability Helpline if you are cognizant of favoritism, torment or exploitation taking topographic point.
  1. Not to hassle or victimize anybody who supports their ain or another ‘s rights under the DDA.
  1. Harassment, exploitation or favoritism of anybody on the evidences of his/her disablement will non be tolerated and any breach of the above responsibilities may ensue in action under the behavior process.

Deciding jobs

  1. Most jobs are likely to be solved amicably through audience and a common sense attack.
  1. If you feel you have been discriminated against, it is our purpose to rectify the state of affairs as reasonably and every bit rapidly as possible.
  1. Where it is non possible to decide the job informally, formal grudge processs are available.
  1. In the improbable event that internal processs fail to decide the state of affairs, persons have the right to seek information, advice and damages externally.

Where to seek aid and advice:

Line Manager ; Personnel ; Union ; Disability Helpline ; Employee Health Service ( EHS

Whilst we endeavour to guarantee the truth of information given in this fact sheet, it is intended for counsel merely. Inclusion of supplier/organisation inside informations does non connote Royal Mail Group plc blessing. Any prices/terms/conditions must be confirmed direct with service supplier.

If you require this fact sheet in an alternate format, delight reach the DAC via:

Royal Mail Disability Helpline Telephone: 0114 241 4731 Facsimile: 0114 241 4534

Calls are welcome through RNID Typetalk and BT Text Direct

Electronic mail: dac @ royalmail.com Website: www.royalmail.com/dac

page 2 of 2 ( publish 02.2004 )

Royal Mail is a trading name of Royal Mail Group plc. Registered figure 4138203.

Registered in England and Wales. Registered office: 148 Old Street, LONDON, EC1V 9HQ

Appendix 2 – Royal Mail Disability Action Centre Fact Sheet – Using Deaf or Hard of Hearing

Disability Action Centre ( DAC )fact sheet

Using deaf or hard of hearing people

The Royal National Institute for Deaf People ( RNID ) provides specialist advice and information on issues for people who are deaf or difficult of hearing.

They have an Information Line and a scope of cusps and fact sheets, many of which can be downloaded from their web site.

Some of the subjects covered in their publications which may be of involvement to Royal Mail directors, include:

  1. Good pattern when using deaf or hard of hearing people – sing the initiation procedure, the working environment, calling and development preparation, etc.
  1. Communication services and the RNIDs regional Communications Services Units ( CSUs ) who can direct inquirers to local and national communicating and interpretation services, such as BSL translators, Sign Supported English ( SSE ) translators, Lipspeakers, Deafblind translators, etc.
  1. Learning British Sign Language ( BSL ) – what is involved in such preparation.
  1. Deaf consciousness
  1. Information on merchandises and services designed for people with hea

Get instant access to
all materials

Become a Member
unlock