Gender-based Equal Opportunities Policy and Practice in Small Firms - Essay Example

The issue of discrimination in the hiring process is one that continues to haunt human resources personnel. Minorities and women are frequently suspicious of human resources personnel when they fail to get a job for which they believe they are suitably qualified. Such concerns on the part of women and minorities are not simply figments of their imaginations, however. Historically, there have been biases in society that have made it difficult for people from the above-mentioned groups to get a fair shake when it comes to employment. In recent years, as the issue has gained more and more prominence in the media, many organizations have sought to change their systems, adopting formalized approaches that appear to spell out very clearly what the organization requires in order to hire a potential employee. Such formalized approaches also include efforts at diversifying the work population and ensuring that the workplace reflects the community within which it is operating. Although many companies have joined the bandwagon of a formalized approach to recruitment, there is no indication that this has consigned discrimination in the hiring process to the dustbin of history, prompting the government to pass legislation that will force the hand of businesses to include women, minorities, disabled, and the aged in their ranks…or else!. Even though some companies have voluntarily been getting minorities on board, there are those who believe that such efforts are only to ensure that there is a token minority, one that will force the media and other critics from questioning the company about its employment practices. In effect, there is a strong belief that many companies in the UK could do more, much more. A University of Bristol report on the issue of discrimination in hiring, which was early this year, “called for the UK to force certain firms to employ more people from ethnic minorities. It backed the use of contract compliance, which is used I the US to set positive action timetables for firms doing business with the state” (Pitcher 2007). In the US, such efforts have succeeded in reducing the disparities in hiring of minorities. This is certainly not welcome news for UK firms because having such a process would add to the burden for the targeted companies who will need to fill out various forms to satisfy the government that they are complying. The report was not only welcomed by the government which sees a need to do more to make UK an equitable society but also it was welcomed by the Commission for Racial equality, whose chairman, Trevor Phillips, said: Some areas of employment will never stop being all white without new kinds of positive action” (Pitcher 2007). Forcing employers to hire minorities and women, however, has been criticized, no less by one of the authors of the Bristol report, who was concerned that there would be a backlash against minorities if there was any perception in the society that the government was promoting positive discrimination. As the report found, in other countries that had instituted such reforms, it was not enough to favour candidates in the recruitment process mainly on the grounds of race (Woolnough 2007). One organization that has been highly praised in the UK for its formalized recruiting efforts is the Metropolitan Police Service. In 1996, only 6% of the recruits for the police service were from black or ethnic minority groups (HR excellence in recruitment and retention 2006). The McPherson report of 1999, which went into detail about issues of police discrimination and lack of representation of minorities, was a wake up call for the police service. “Diversity has been near the top of the HR agenda ever since, and the Metropolitan Police ran a 20 m [pound] Community and Race Relations training programme. Yet, even now, just 2.9 per cent of officers come from ethnic minority backgrounds, and only 19 percent are women” (Paton 2004). The police service has continued to make efforts to attract minorities and thus project a more positive image. By 2006, the figure had jumped to 15% though it is not yet at the 25% target. The 25% target is meant to mirror the percentage of minorities in the greater London metropolitan area, thus making the service reflect accurately the community that it serves. Some of the formal approaches that have been used by the police service include “the creation of a ‘candidate clinic’ that allows applicants to check the progress of their application; restructuring the recruitment department; and extra training for recruitment staff to enable them to advise applicants about the police career open to them” (HR excellence in recruitment and retention 2006). Another element in the Met’s recruitment effort is the opening, in January 2006, of a career office that has improved accessibility to the public. The Met has also taken its recruitment efforts, for example, to Bollywood movies, in order to attract people from Indian or Asian ancestry. “These recruitment drives have also had a positive impact on retention, as existing staff appreciates the seriousness with which the Met is addressing its under-representation from certain groups. Attrition for police officers from black and minority ethnic groups has fallen from 10% to 3% since May 2003, while the overall attrition rate is now at 4.2%, down from 5.7%” (HR excellence in recruitment and retention 2006). In the field of law, which is underrepresented with minorities, one law company has taken the formalized step of appointing an inclusivity manager. This is based on the reality that “The legal profession has traditionally been seen as one of the most closed sectors in business when it comes to employing women and people from black and ethnic minority groups. Just 3% of partners in the UK’s top 100 law firms come from ethnic minorities, according The Lawyer magazine’s 2006 Diversity League Table” (Fuller 2006). This particular company believes that not only is there a business case for diversity but also it is the right thing to do. While this formal approach may send a positive image to minorities, others, including the chief executive of the Law Society, Janet Paraskeva, notes that having an inclusivity director is not necessarily essential to achieve the goal of having qualified minorities within a company’s ranks. The use of formal approaches has been growing steadily as more and more companies come to accept the necessity of showing to the public that they are sensitive to minorities and that they are fair in their recruitment processes. Although flexible targeting of minorities has been around for a while, the chief diversity adviser at the Cabinet Office, makes the case that it is not enough and that a more radical approach needs to be taken. As Waqar Azmi noted, “Targets need to be more ambitious and more challenging…Organizations have been created around the needs of men. Culture change is key and targets are critical to that” (Thomas 2006). In considering whether formal mechanisms or approaches have an impact, it is well worth it to note that for some organizations, the first step in formalizing their commitment to attracting minorities is in employing a human resources officer. With their training and knowledge of the latest research in sociology, law, and other critical areas, it is expected that such personnel would move the relevant organizations more quickly towards having a work force that is balanced and possibly free of any blatant acts of discrimination. Just such a proposition was explored by Carol Woodhams and Ben Lupton of Manchester Metropolitan University Business School into the practices of small business across the UK. This research was significant because even though a great deal of attention is focused on big businesses the truth of the matter is that “The small to medium-sized enterprise (SME) sector accounts for over 99 percent of businesses in the UK< employing over 55.6 per cent of the labour force and accounting for 52 per cent of combined business turnover (Small Business Services, 2003;cited in Woodhams and Lupton 2006 74). The Sex Discrimination Act of 1975 sent a clear message that the government would not tolerate discrimination against women. Since then, some researchers have been making a strong business case for diversity, since minorities and women can bring perspectives into a business that can allow the business to fulfill its goal of making greater profits. In effect, if companies had feared that such minorities would be a liability, the research tries to paint a positive picture, thus making it more difficult for businesses to reject minorities on the basis of their fear that these minorities would negatively impact the bottom line. The human resources literature presents ample support for the implementation of equal opportunities for all. In its most basic form, reflecting minimal legal requirements, this involves the implementation of formal rules and procedure that are to be applied in a uniform way to all employees irrespective of sex, or indeed any of the group characteristics associated with disadvantage in the workplace, e.g., race, disability. Implementation of these principles encompasses the key functions of HR management, namely sourcing and selecting between employees, training and developing them, managing them and rewarding them (Kirton and Greene, 2000; cited in Woodhams and Lupton 2006). It is believed that by having a transparent system that includes a full job description and a standard interview, inequalities would be reduced. This appears to make sense, at least, on the surface, because in the past there were charges of people being hired based on contacts and the so-called “Old Boys’ Network” has often come up for criticism where women are concerned. Woodhams and Lupton were interested in finding out to what extent the procedures and formal approaches are carried out in the workplace and to what effect. In general, the SME field is plagued with skills shortages. It seems reasonable to suppose that such companies would be more eager to seek the skills they need wherever they can find them, whether among women or ethnic minorities and that such businesses would be rigorous in ensuring that they have good selection practices if only to avoid having to waste time going to employment tribunals. Research indicates that small businesses, rather than rallying around formal procedures, have a small uptake of such formal procedures. Reasons for such failure include lack of pressure on them to do so, since so much more attention is focused on their larger counterparts. Also, because of the small size of SMEs there is a seldom a feeling that formal processes or procedures need to be set up in order to ensure fairness and equality. “Formal employment policies, including EO (equal opportunity) policies may be perceived by SME owner-managers as inhibiting flexibility and undermining informal relations” (Woodhams and Lupton 2006). Furthermore, small businesses are subject to strong competitive pressures which makes it difficult for them to justify making the financial investments necessary to formalize their recruitment processes. Finally, small business owners are concerned about putting out fires in their business from day to day and from week to week and may not really have the time or make the time to apprise themselves of the latest in human resources thinking. In fact, some owner-managers do not really see the need to hire someone to focus on the hiring of employees since they see their own position and status as giving them the requisite qualifications to do the hiring. Unfortunately, if such individuals harbour any bias against women or minorities this may be reflected in their recruitment practices. Of course, such owner-managers may think of themselves as being fair even though an examination of their hiring practices may reveal quite the opposite. Among Woodhams and Lupton’s findings was the revelation that size was a big factor in whether an organization had a human resources officer to be involved in hiring and training decisions. Even in those organizations that had qualified human resources personnel there was no indication that this made the hiring process less discriminatory or that it provided a fair and unbiased opportunity for women and minorities. As Woodhams and Lupton write, ”Within a generally, but not wholly, discouraging picture of EO in SMEs it appears that CIPD-qualified professionals are able to influence the production of formalized written policy documents, but unable to translate policy into practice any more effectively than non-qualified practioners” (Woodhams and Lupton 2006). This lack of forward movement in bringing minorities, women, the disabled, and the aged on board has prompted the government to take stronger measures including the enactment of the Age Discrimination Act which came into force in October 2005. In 2004, the Employment Tribunal Service assessed 197,000 cases, with the average payout amounting to 26,600 pounds (Ageist firms face costly lawsuits 2005). Businesses are going to be hit where it hurts if they refuse to hire the aged or other disadvantaged groups in society. Even such laws, however, do not promise to do for the disadvantaged what the government so sincerely wishes. Evidence from other countries that have employed similar legislation make it suspect that the government will succeed, unless perhaps the penalties are so high that businesses really become afraid of going bankrupt for their lapses in hiring those the government is trying to assist. As the article “Age discrimination legislation: choices for the UK,” notes: Legislation has had a positive effect on employment rates of older workers in the United States. This is mostly due to them leaving jobs at a later age, rather than to more of them being hired” (2001). On the other hand, “The evidence from Australia, Canada and the United States, though limited and uneven, shows that legislation has indeed made an impact on discrimination in these countries” (Discrimination legislation: Choices for the UK 2001). Formalized approaches to eliminating discrimination are useful but they do not go enough. The government’s efforts are also helpful but can not eliminate discrimination because the seeds of discrimination are sown in people’s hearts and it is impossible for the government to pluck out hardened hearts. Formalized approaches and government legislation can make more businesses aware of the importance of hiring minorities, women, the disabled, and other disadvantaged groups. These efforts are in the right direction and should be encouraged, not discouraged even though they fall short of becoming effective triggers for the elimination of discrimination in the hiring process in the UK. Bibliography Ageist firms face costly lawsuits. September 2005. www.ttglive.com (Retrieved: February 20, 2007) Fuller, Georgina. Apr 18, 2006. Law firm sets bold precedent with new inclusivity manager. Personnel Today, 2. Jester, Art. Panel says UK has made moderate diversity gains: But Big challenges cited in increasing minorities on campus. Feb 20, 2007. Knight Ridder Business News, HR excellence in recruitment and retention. Jul 2006. Human Resources, A35. Naysmith, Stephen. Sep 19, 2006. Rooting out racism. The Herald, 6. Paton, Nic. Mar 9, 2004. What next for public sector HR? Personnel Today, 22. Pitcher, Greg. Jan 9, 2007. Report triggers fears of US-style minority quotas. Personnel Today, 1. Woodhams, Carol & Lupton, Ben. 2006. Gender-based equal opportunities policy and practice in small firms: the impact of HR professionals. Human Resource Management Journal, 16.1, 74-97. Woolnough, Roisin. Jan 16, 2007. Diversity report raises fears of backash. Personnel Today, 11. Read More