« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
8 VALUATION JOINT BOARDS
Introduction
8.1 The Valuation Joint Boards (Scotland) Order 1995 established ten Valuation Joint Boards responsible for compiling and maintaining domestic and non-domestic council tax valuation lists and electoral registers in Scotland.
Wider policy context, research and statistical evidence
8.2 The role of valuation joint boards is often linked with that of their associated local authorities. Policy and research related specifically to the work of the valuation joint boards and equalities is either non-existent or not readily available. Therefore research which discusses improving practice for consulting and involving disabled people, making services more accessible and developing an ethos more welcoming of disabled people all apply for the work of the valuation joint boards.
Reporting on progress towards equality of opportunity
Areas where progress is evident
8.3 A review of schemes, action plans and annual reports identified progress in four areas:
- Policy and function review
- Recruitment procedures
- Staff awareness and access to training
- Physical amendments to property
Policy and function review
8.4 All boards recognised the requirement to review policy and functions in response to the disability equality duty. Surveys and interviews have been conducted with the purpose of identifying disability equality issues arising in the delivery of services. For example, Ayrshire Valuation Joint Board identified the need to review practices and procedures in the exercising of their valuation role, council tax and electoral registration functions as well as how it communicates with disabled users.
8.5 Valuation joint boards have recognised the need to improve involvement of disabled people in the development of policy and functions. Renfrewshire Valuation Joint Board now requires all new policies to be screened for adverse impact on equality groups and a full equality impact assessment ( EQIA) to be completed where appropriate.
Recruitment procedures
8.6 Where schemes propose amendments to existing procedures ( e.g. introduction of monitoring the number of disabled applicants to posts and the use of forms that allow individual applicants to "self identify" or "self declare" disabilities) these have been implemented.
8.7 Some boards have begun to hold regular meetings with their associated local authority diversity liaison officer or equalities officer to discuss disability equality in relation to recruitment procedures. Central Scotland Valuation Joint Board published their intention to guarantee interviews to disabled applicants who meet essential criteria for employment.
8.8 Some boards are also monitoring in relation to employment. For example, Ayrshire, Central Scotland and Orkney and Shetland Boards have published statistics for recruitment and selection. Argyll and Bute and Dunbartonshire Valuation Joint Boards have expanded the categories of information monitored by including salaries of employees with and without a disability as well as post-recruitment data such as progression and exit interviews.
Staff awareness and access to training
8.9 Valuation joint boards have identified staff training and awareness on disability equality issues as a necessity. Lanarkshire Valuation Joint Board published a list of courses offered to employees including Deaf Awareness, Disability Awareness, British Sign Language Level One, British Sign Language Level Two, British Sign Refresher Training and Visual Awareness. Some boards have chosen to merge training on disability equality issues into broader training on equality issues generally. Some boards have incorporated training into the continued professional development of staff in conjunction with the lead authority. Orkney and Shetland stated their intention to liaise with constituent authorities with regards the provision of training. While all Valuation Joint Boards have recognised the importance of training in developing awareness, it is not always clear which staff are attending such training.
Physical amendments to property
8.10 All Valuation Joint Boards have identified a number of physical barriers that may be inhibiting disabled access to premises, use of equipment in the workplace and access to services. The Central Scotland Valuation Joint Board highlights the importance of involving disabled people in consideration for physical amendment to buildings and equipment. Such amendments included the provision of disabled car parks, appropriate signage, and adaptations to premises, access to disabled toilets, adaptation of IT equipment and workstations and the purchase of portable hearing loop systems.
8.11 Generally, where such barriers were highlighted, most annual reports were able to report progress in removing these barriers. Dunbartonshire has a programme of works covering 2006 to 2008 which include improvement in signage, installation of an induction loop, ramps and disabled toilet provision, production of forms in Braille and ongoing discussion with lead authorities regarding accessibility of the website.
8.12 Highland and Western Isles Board proposes an audit for access to premises and their annual report identified the need to provide a wheelchair emergency stair escape device for one of their premises. They suggest that their self-audit has revealed that many of the department's forms could be improved and work will be carried out in the "period ahead".
8.13 Central Scotland disability equality scheme has produced forms in Braille. "Register to vote" and "Vote by post" are now available and other forms are available in Braille on request.
8.14 In summary, valuation joint boards have considered the disability equality duty largely in three areas. Firstly, in raising staff and organisational awareness of disability issues via training as well as embedding disability issues within human resource policy and practice; secondly, in developing consultation and involvement processes with disabled people and thirdly in improving accessibility to premises as well as services offered by the valuation board such as ensuring communication materials are produced in a range of accessible formats.
Areas where Progress is Less Evident
8.15 There are five areas in which progress would appear to be less evident:
- Publication of information
- Monitoring
- Retention of staff
- Harassment
Publication of information
8.16 The majority of joint valuation board schemes emphasise the importance of making stakeholders and staff aware of disability equality and publish information on both their own website and that of the Scottish Assessors Association. In addition, some distribute information through training and staff networks. A number of schemes also promote the use of a Disability Forum for these purposes.
8.17 Some boards also advertise their willingness to publish information in alternative formats on request ( e.g. alternative languages, easy to read, large print, Braille and audio tape.) However, it is not clear what percentage of literature produced by boards is available in this format.
8.18 While some boards provide limited statistics with regards numbers of disabled employees, in the interest of confidentiality due to small numbers of staff, few publish details of data collected in relation to grievance/disciplinary procedures, promotions and exit interviews of disabled people.
Monitoring
8.19 While some valuation joint boards have highlighted the importance of designing and implementing monitoring disability equality, only one has explicitly highlighted their commitment to both quantitative and qualitative approaches. For the most part, those boards that have collected quantitative data have done so simply on a disabled/non-disabled basis.
8.20 There is no statistical information relating to grievance or disciplinary procedures although many boards have adapted existing complaints procedures to include disability equality issues.
Retention of staff
8.21 Joint valuation board schemes suggest that data collected in relation to grievance/disciplinary procedures, promotions and exit interviews of disabled people will inform future training and the formation of policies and procedures. However, there is little evidence of data collected in this area within annual reports reviewed that would have informed future training, policy or procedures.
Harassment
8.25 Most schemes include the general duty to eliminate harassment, but very few demonstrate how they intend to do this. Some schemes include a review of harassment policy, however the outcome of these reviews is less evident.
8.26 To summarise, valuation joint boards have begun to consider how the disability equality duty impacts on the various aspects of their work. As small organisations they have prioritised the areas to start work on and these are discussed in the progress section above. Many boards have work in progress, particularly in areas such as impact assessment, monitoring and adapting the work environment to be more disability friendly. The one area that has been identified as needing further consideration is in the area of dignity at work and anti-harassment policies.
Categories of impairment
8.27 Some schemes have included the definition of disability according to the Disability Rights Commission. A minority of schemes ( e.g. Lanarkshire, Highland and Western Isles) have also demonstrated their understanding of the advantages of a 'social model' in identifying "disability barriers" and provided examples of impairments that are excluded from the disability category ( e.g. tendency to start fires or steal). Some schemes do not explicitly distinguish between physical or mental impairments. As a consequence, consideration of the implications for specific groups of people is not evident in those schemes and annual reports.
Consultation with and involvement of disabled people
8.28 The majority of schemes recognise that contact with disabled groups is essential to building sustainable relationships with disabled people and can help identify possible barriers. However, the distinction between involvement and consultation is not always clear. In a number of schemes and annual report, the terms are used interchangeably. As such the character of interaction with disabled groups appears to range from one-off contact to more systematic involvement.
8.29 Some schemes have provided lists of organisations contacted reflecting a variety of disabilities that corresponding to the category distinctions made above. Others have chosen to emphasise the importance of avoiding duplication of consultation and have relied on information provided from lead authorities to produce both schemes and annual reports.
8.30 Some boards expressed the opinion that direct consultation or involvement with disability groups would duplicate efforts already made by lead authorities and would be an unnecessary strain on resources.
Summary and conclusions
8.31 Valuation joint boards understand their role in relation to the disability equality duty both as an employer and a service provider. With the exception of those which have consulted with disabled people through lead authorities, some boards have taken steps to involve disabled people both in the production of their schemes and annual reports, the day-to-day activities of the board and the services that they provide.
8.32 In the main, the majority of valuation joint boards have taken steps towards amending the physical environment to improve access for disabled people and have advertised their willingness to provide information in alternative formats on request.
8.33 Valuation joint boards tend to develop their understanding of disability equality in concert with their associated local authorities. This is particularly so in relation to the collection of information and the training of staff towards the development of policy and practice. In most cases, the sharing of information between valuation joint boards and local authorities with regard to the design and implementation of monitoring processes and towards staff awareness and access to training has ensured that all aspects of disability equality have been adequately addressed.
« Previous | Contents | Next »