Race Equality Policies at Work: Employee Perceptions of the ‘Implementation Gap’ in a UK Local Authority

Abstract

This article examines employee perceptions of the implementation of a local authority race equality plan in the United Kingdom. It explores the way in which the changed landscape of local authorities in the 1990s affected the implementation of race equality policies. We seek to shed light on black and ethnic minority people’s experiences of their treatment within organizations in the context of the appearance of ‘institutional racism’ on the UK public agenda. We do so whilst recognizing the complex interplay of race and gender in perceptions and experiences of organizational inequalities. The analysis focuses on employee perceptions of the culture of the authority and of the performance, ownership and efficacy of the race equality plan. The article highlights the importance of exploring and understanding workforce perceptions of equal opportunities policies.

Changing attitudes towards diversity: The Netherlands and Morocco compared

“…While the Moroccan managers stated that they adhered to the equal employment opportunities perspective, it seemed that in practice the business case arguments were most prominent. Another possible explanation for the disparity between what HR managers said and what they did in Morocco is what is known as the implementation gap (Creegan et al, 2003). This finding is in line with what Hoque and Noon (2004) call the empty shell hypothesis.…”

Equality and diversity in the public services: moving forward on lesbian, gay and bisexual equality?

“…The public sector has traditionally sought to promote itself as in the forefront of equality and diversity employment policy and practice, not only as an ‘employer of choice’, but also on the grounds that a diverse workforce would be better able to provide services to a diverse community. However, a growing body of literature on equalities in the gender and race areas has been critical of the impact of the modernisation agenda on equality and diversity employment policy and practice in public service organisations (Dickens, 1999: 11; Cunningham, 2000: 701; Bailey and Jones, 2001: 1; Conley, 2003: 456; Creegan et al. , 2003: 635).…”

“…, 2007: 593). However, the public services have been subjected to huge changes as a result of the ‘modernisation’ pursued by the New Labour government, which, it has been argued, may have had a negative impact on its equality/diversity work (Cunningham, 2000: 701; Conley, 2003: 456; Creegan et al. , 2003: 635).…”

Gender differences within 360‐degree managerial performance appraisals

“…This leads to a presumption that unlawful discrimination is both possible and probable across a number of human resource practices, including performance appraisal, and will act to the detriment of certain employee groups. This contention is supported by available evidence of discrimination at work in areas such as age (Duncan and Loretto, 2004;Snape and Redman, 2003;Urwin, 2006), disability (Dibben, James and Cunningham, 2001;Woodhams and Danieli, 2000), gender (Higginbottom and Roberts, 2002; IDS, 2004;Duncan and Loretto, 2004) and race (Creegan, Colgan, Charlesworth and Robinson, 2003; Equal Opportunities Review, 2003).With respect to gender discrimination, Aguinis and Adams (1998) argue that despite the steady increase of female managers, evident over the past three decades (Bartol, 1999), their positions in organisations involve lower-paid roles with less power and authority than their male counterparts. One barrier facing female employees wishing to overcome vertical occupational segregation is the 3 existence of gender-based stereotypes made up of undesirable traits (Schein, 1978).…”

“…This leads to a presumption that unlawful discrimination is both possible and probable across a number of human resource practices, including performance appraisal, and will act to the detriment of certain employee groups. This contention is supported by available evidence of discrimination at work in areas such as age (Duncan and Loretto, 2004;Snape and Redman, 2003;Urwin, 2006), disability (Dibben, James and Cunningham, 2001;Woodhams and Danieli, 2000), gender (Higginbottom and Roberts, 2002; IDS, 2004;Duncan and Loretto, 2004) and race (Creegan, Colgan, Charlesworth and Robinson, 2003; Equal Opportunities Review, 2003).…”