« Previous | Contents |
Listen
DIVERSITY IN THE PUBLIC APPOINTMENTS PROCESS IN SCOTLAND
Footnotes
1 "Equality Strategy: Working Together for Equality" Scottish Executive (2000).
2 "Making Progress: Equality Annual Report" (2003).
3 Further details of relevant policy developments are provided in Annex 1.
4 "Making Public Appointments: A Best Practice Guide for Departments" Cabinet Office (2001).
5 The nature of the process and the roles of those involved are presented in more detail in Annex 1.
6 Where "senior Scottish Executive staff", or "senior staff" are mentioned in this report, this refers to these staff.
7 Sometimes referred to in this report as "The Code".
8 "Making Public Appointments: A Best Practice Guide for Departments" (2001)
9 "Other" respondents to this study included Independent Assessors, representatives of NDPBs and sponsor teams who were not involved in these particular rounds (but were involved in public appointments decision making) and specialist equalities organisations (which were not). Where appropriate in the report, the views of specialist equalities organisations have been identified separately.
10 In the case of Scottish Executive sponsor teams, case study interviews were conducted with staff at a range of different levels. Whilst it is acknowledged that their roles within the process and their impact on decision making varied, most undertook work which might impact on the experiences of under-represented groups, at least to some extent. The perceptions of diversity of all team members were, therefore considered important and were explored. It was found that the level of understanding of equalities issues was not grade-dependent.
11 The Cabinet Office guidance encourages those making appointments to "think about diversity as part of the merit criterion, not replacing it".
12 The Cabinet Office guidance suggests offering diversity, disability awareness and equal opportunities training to those involved in sift and interview, to "reduce the risk of discriminatory attitudes affecting the outcome".
13 These comments generally focused upon whether they believed there were any barriers to participation.
14 Although, given the delay in some reporting cycles, this may have been the most up to date annual report available.
15 The Disability Rights Commission, for example, has expertise on these issues.
16 Where the term "selection" is used, this refers to the selection of candidates for recommendation to Ministers, rather than final selection.
17 This issue has been recognised by the Scottish Executive and a group is currently considering whether amendments to the 2001 Census classification are required. The outcome of this group may lead to changes in the classification used, but it is understood that this is unlikely to be actioned for a number of years. In the meantime, policy across all government departments remains to use the 2001 Census classification for all work where the monitoring of ethnicity is required.
18 It was noted that the Scottish Executive is currently exploring the best means of collecting this information.
19 There was some concern that there may be some concentration of disabled people in disability-related organisations and other patterns of concentration of other groups.
20 "Making a Difference: Women in Public Appointments" Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (2001)
21 The identification of "capacity" does not imply that members of under-represented groups would be unsuitable for participation, but simply recognises that this is an additional area in which they currently face barriers.
22 It was considered inappropriate to list, in each case, which groups would be most affected by each issue. This is largely self-evident and most of the changes would benefit all potential applicants.
23 Cabinet Office (2003) "Report of the Short Life Working Group on Improving Diversity in Public Appointments"
24 It should be stressed that all policy developments should also be considered in terms of their impact upon under-represented groups and the opportunity to promote diversity and equality. It should also be noted that the focus here is specifically on diversity, and this is not a checklist of general good practice in public appointments.
25 "A Guide to Public Bodies in Scotland" Scottish Executive (2002)
26 "Public Bodies and Public Appointments: Frequently Asked Questions and Their Answers" Cabinet Office (2002)
27 "A Guide to Public Bodies in Scotland" Scottish Executive (2002)
28 "A Guide for Independent Assessors in the Public Appointments Process" OCPA (2001)
29 "A Guide to Public Bodies in Scotland" Scottish Executive (2002)
30 "A Guide to Public Bodies in Scotland" Scottish Executive (2002)
31 It is hoped that the CPAS will be in office by the end of 2003.
32 For further information, see, for example: "Public Bodies: Proposals for Change" Scottish Executive (2001) and "A Guide to Public Bodies in Scotland" Scottish Executive (2002)
33 15 candidates fell into more than one category (with, for example, one respondent in four categories).
34 One of the rounds which was included in the study involved a specific focus on issues for people from minority ethnic groups and four of these respondents were involved in that round. Amongst the other candidates from minority ethnic groups, these were almost exclusively concentrated in health appointments.
35 The table does not sum to 100% due to rounding.
« Previous | Contents |