People Development Policy (staff training provision)

From Wikquality Impact Assessment

Jump to: navigation, search


All feedback is welcomed from internal and external sources. Please email your comments to l.m.wilson@leedsmet.ac.uk.

The next scheduled review of this impact assessment is on Saturday 5 July 2014.

Faculty or Service Area: Human Resources
Name of policy owner: Kathy Ashton
Original policy document: PeopleDevelopmentPolicyOct2010.pdf
Creation date: 2010/07/05
Purpose of the policy being assessed:
1. To ensure that all of our people have equal access to suitable development opportunities for their role, in accordance with our Equality Statement.

2. To enable our people to enhance their performance in their current roles.

3. To enable our people to develop their careers effectively.

4. To ensure a consistent approach to our people development across faculties and service areas, and how decisions are made.

5. To align our people development with organisational goals.

Customer groups affected by the policy: Staff
Relevant protected characteristics affected by the policy: Disability, Religious belief, Mode of attendance (part-time or full-time)
Examples of how these protected characteristics are affected by policy with evidence, justification and course of action:
1. Disabled staff may have difficulty accessing our training venues – we ensure that as many courses as possible are put on in Leighton Hall’s ground floor training room, which is accessible.

2. People development activities on the ILM residentials and teambuilds may involve physical activity. We send out a pre-questionnaire to delegates regarding capacity to do the activities. As we design and tailor our residentials according to who we have in a cohort, we have the potential to adapt and re-design if someone with a disability joins us.

3. It is possible that delegates may require use of a prayer mat during courses or residentials. We would ensure that this was provided, and time allowed for prayer. 4. Some of our delegates have dyslexia, we have supported them by offering the core texts for the ILM programmes by iPod.

5. We have had queries from part-time staff and staff with caring responsibilities regarding access to our ILM residentials. We agreed that one delegate (a single parent) would get to Malham under her own steam in order to drop off her child at her parents. We have agreed that part-time staff could leave a course early if essential.

The information provided with this assessment suggests that on an organisational basis training is being accessed in proportion with university numbers of staff by ethnicity, age and disability. There appears to be a slightly higher proportion of women accessing training than men.

Supporting evidence: People Development Policy.pdf
Feedback from Equality Forums and other interested parties:
A number of adjustments are already made to accommodate individual circumstances including the timetabling of course sessions on different days of the week and at different times of the year. This could be promoted more strongly in terms of flexibility and ease of access to training – particularly for those with caring responsibilities or part-time staff.

Accessibility of venues and facilities including toilets and access to meal/refreshment venues is potentially an issue. Some university buildings are more accessible than others and whilst a dedicated training room is accessible – other venues are used which may not be.

The newly introduced self-service function on Trent as well as enhanced record keeping facilities generally mean that a more detailed analysis and review of training uptake will be possible in future. Whilst the accessed training figures are proportionate to current overall numbers there is no detail available about differences within and between training programmes in terms of over or under representation by the equality groups.

Nationally there is recognition of the need for targeted training on the basis of gender and or ethnicity where under-representation is an issue. Analysis of a fuller set of information would enable the University to determine what the position is at a local level.

Recommendations:
1. Accessibility of all training venues and facilities, including those used externally, should be a standard requirement.

2. A more detailed breakdown of training take up should be completed before the next scheduled impact assessment. This should include the different equality strands in relation to training programme and type and ideally a reference to national or benchmark data if available.

3. The next impact assessment should be completed in 18 months time to enable the People Development Team sufficient time to record and review the data referred to above.

Consultation open: Feedback on this impact assessment is welcome, but it is not officially under consultation at this time.
Review date: 2014/07/05
Personal tools