David Begg Equality at the Enterprise Level

spring2002

Equality and the Union Agenda - David Begg

Equality at the Enterprise Level - Jackie Harrison

Viewpoint - Diane Richards-Hughes & Andrea Brown

equalitynews p3

By Niall Crowley

Legal casework relating to discrimination bypublic houses and hotels has received significantcoverage in recent times. A large volume ofenquiries has been received by the EqualityAuthority in this area and a significant body ofcasework is emerging. These cases cover nearlyall of the grounds under the Equal Status Act -including the gender, disability, family status,age, race, sexual orientation and Travellergrounds.

This reflects a widespread problem that requiresresolution. Public houses and hotels are keyarenas of social interaction in our society.Discrimination in access to such places createssegregation and reinforces the divisions in oursociety - divisions that must be addressed if weare to have a more equal, inclusive and stablesociety. Addressing discrimination in this areawill not only ensure such segregation does notoccur. Social interaction in more integratedsettings will also assist addressing the divisions,as groups develop new experiences of oneanother and negative stereotypes get challenged.

Publicans and hoteliers do have complex andresponsible jobs. The Equal Status Act bringsfurther responsibilities to the job so thatdiscrimination plays no part in the managementof orderly and profitable enterprises. It isimportant that support is provided to meet thesenew responsibilities from a range of quarters.The Equality Authority is committed to makingits contribution through preparing a code ofpractice on Access to Public Houses, Hotels andRestaurants. This work is currently nearingcompletion and should provide an importantsource of support and guidance.

UPDATE...

The contributions to EqualityNews are welcome andappreciated. However, the opinions of contributors donot necessarily reflect the position of the EqualityAuthority. We welcome your feedback on any article inEqualityNews. Please send comments, queries or quipsto Patrick O’Leary at:

The Equality Authority, 2 Clonmel Street, Dublin 2, Ireland Business - Tel: 353 1 4173336Information - Lo Call: 1890 245545

Tel: +353-1-417 3333 Fax: +353-1-417 3366 Text Phone: +353-1-417 3385 Email: [email protected] Web: www.equality.ie

On a wider front significant developments in theequality agenda can be expected from thepreparation of a National Plan for Women and of aNational Action Plan to Combat Racism. The focusfor the work on the National Plan for Women isthe development of a vision for the aspirations ofwomen in relation to the twelve priority areas foraction identified at the UN Conference in Beijing.The Equality Authority hopes that this can bedeveloped as a shared vision for a gender equalsociety. To establish such a vision would give cleardirection to all the various initiatives seeking tocontribute to a more gender equal society. It wouldprovide a strategic coherence to such initiatives andwould establish benchmarks against which to assesspolicy, practice and progress.

The National Action Plan on Racism is beingprepared to implement the conclusion of last yearsWorld Conference Against Racism in Durban. Thisprovides a wide and challenging agenda. TheEquality Authority is currently commissioningresearch into plans being prepared in otherjurisdictions with a view to assisting in establishinga level of ambition for the Irish National Action

Plan to Combat Racism and in accessing newthinking and innovation in the fight against racism.The Equality Authority will be working with theDepartment of Justice, Equality and Law Reform,the National Consultative Committee on Racismand Interculturalism and the Irish Human RightsCommission to build on the relationshipsdeveloped in Durban in the preparation of thisplan.

Within the Equality Authority the most recentdevelopment is the creation of a research sectionwhich is being headed up by Laurence Bond who ismoving to the Equality Authority from theNational Economic and Social Forum. The sectionwill develop its own research programme, networkwith those involved with equality related researchand manage the new equality studies unitestablished to assist outcomes for people withdisabilities, Travellers, refugees and older peoplefrom the Employment and Human ResourceDevelopment Operational Programme of theNational Development Plan.

Finally the Equality Authority has issued a call forapplications for the new scheme of equality reviewsand action plans. The scheme offers enterprises aunique opportunity to explore their policies,practices, procedures and workplace perceptionsand to assess their contribution to equality in theworkplace. We look forward to a wide take up ofthis scheme. It has a significant potential to assistequality in the workplace and to benefit employersand employees.

equalitynewsp2

CONTENTS p. 2 Update by Niall Crowley

p. 4 Equality and the Union Agenda by David Begg

p. 6 EU Update by Brian Harvey

p. 8 3% Employment Target of People with Disabilities Report by Martina Kelly

p. 11 Joint Equality and Human Rights Forum meets in Dublin by Niall Crowley

p. 12 Advocacy: A Rights Issue by Deborah Birmingham

p. 15 Customer Service in the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs - the Equality Diversity Challenges by Brian Duff & Bernie Donohoe

p. 18 Theorising Equality by Patrick O’Leary

p. 20 Introducing Family Friendly Workplace Day, 2002

p. 22 Equality Proofing by Carole Sullivan

p. 23 Joint Equality Authority / Equality Commission for Northern Ireland Board Meeting by Evelyn Collins

p. 25 Equality at the Enterprise Level by Jackie Harrison

p. 26 Case Reports

p. 30 Viewpoint by Diane Richards-Hughes

& Andrea Brown

p. 32 Events & Diary Round-Up

The Equality Authority would like to advise all callers that they can contact ourPublic Information Centre directly at 01 4173333 or Lo Call number 1890245545, for advice on the Employment Equality Act, 1998 and the EqualStatus Act, 2000. Information is also available on the Maternity Protection Act,1994, the Adoptive Leave Act, 1995 and the Parental Leave Act, 1998. Forbusiness and other services, please contact 01 4173336

The controversy surrounding the recent EqualityOfficers' finding relating to children in pubs hascreated an unfortunate distraction from some ofthe core work of the Equality Authority. Cases ofthis nature allow somecommentators to laser in onwhat they often describe as"political correctness gonemad". Now I have to confessthat there is nothing I findmore maddening than politicalcorrectness in its commonlyunderstood manifestation.

Nevertheless, as Niall Crowleypointed out when he was on"Questions and Answers"political correctness isimportant. The fact remainsthat while extreme adherence to it maybetiresome, it does not invalidate it. You have toconsider the alternatives. We all know that thereare very abusive terms used to describe groups insociety, whether it is Travellers, gay people, Blackpeople or foreigners, which are very offensive.Language is a lethal weapon and it is important toroot out forms and uses of it that can hurt andcause isolation and division. The problem is thatmost of us who talk pejoratively about politicalcorrectness have never been on the receiving endof abuse. But just think how sensitive we all areabout "Paddy" jokes in Britain.

The pub case was unfortunate because it was adistraction from the main role of the Equality

Authority which I believe will be vital in shapingIrish society in the coming decade. Let me try andexplain what I mean by this. I have a suspicionthat most people, for example, think that the

current influx of immigrantsand asylum seekers is atransient phenomenon. This isa mistaken belief. The labourforce needs of our economy,the current downturn notwithstanding, and the sheerlevels of destitution in manydeveloping countries meansthat people will keep coming.Irish society will changefundamentally as a result ofthat. Already there aretensions emerging aboutresources in health care and

housing to meet the needs of this expandingpopulation. As Congressman Bruce Morrisonpointed out during a recent visit, we do need acoherent immigration policy which matches thenumber of applicants to the capacity of oureconomy, social services and infrastructure toabsorb them.

When we do accept people into this country wehave to treat them the same as everybody else andwith the dignity and respect that human beingsdeserve. The effective integration of new citizenscan only be achieved without social upheaval onthe back of an intelligent and prudentlyimplemented equality policy. This is crucial to themaintenance of social cohesion and it will be very

equalitynews p5equalitynewsp4

difficult to achieve. Forty years ago ourneighbouring island first experienced what we arenow beginning to get to grips with. The status ofrace relations in the UK, as evidenced by the riotsin the North of England last year, is a measure ofthe challenge we face if we are to avoid goingdown that road.

It is of course true that equality is not a simplematter of race. Indeed, equality legislation in thiscountry is constructed on a platform of combatingdiscrimination on nine grounds: gender, maritalstatus, family status, sexual orientation, religiousbeliefs, age, disability, race and membership of theTraveller community.

Clearly these are of central interest to the work ofthe trade union movement and its core mission topromote social cohesion and to improve thequality of working life. Equality policy in Ireland,in fairness, has evolved in a very dynamic way andhopefully will continue to evolve in the light ofexperience. Congress places a lot of emphasis onthe centrality of equality to its mission andallocates considerable resources to it.

It is important to stress that there is a strongphilosophical basis to our concern for equality. Itis a concept which is at the core of socialdemocratic politics. I recall that Tony Blair wasonce criticised by the "Economist" (surprisingly!)for never mentioning equality. They asked -rightly in my view - how a socialist party wouldnot see its role as trying to minimise inequality. Ithink Tony Blair does believe in equality, but it is

equality of opportunity. This is a completelydifferent perspective because even if everyone getsthe same education opportunity not everyone isgifted with the same brainpower. In my opinionthis is a very dangerous perspective because thisnotion of a meritocracy allows increasingeconomic and social inequality to become moreacceptable.

The gap between the top and bottom of society inthe Anglo Saxon world (including Ireland) ismuch greater as measured by the Gini coefficientthan it is in continental European countries. Thatis why Congress supports European integration.We want to build a country which is more in linewith the European social construct. The great fear,of course, is that social Europe is under threat.Despite the rhetoric, social policy has not beengiven the same importance as economic policy.The vision of Delors has been eroded insofar asthe main emphasis of social policy has been onharmonisation. The problem with this is that itgravitates towards the lowest commondenominator. Britain, as we know, opted out ofthe Social Chapter for a long time and it hasprevented the Charter of Fundamental Rightsfrom being given legally binding force.

So I take the view that there is a broad context toequality. I have little expectation of seeing a trulyegalitarian society in my lifetime but I do hopeand expect to do a lot better than we are atpresent.

EQUALITY IS ATTHE HEART OF THEUNION AGENDABy David Begg

Now I have to confessthat there is nothing Ifind more maddening

than politicalcorrectness in its

commonlyunderstood

manifestation.

“Equality legislation in this country is constructed on aplatform of combating discrimination on nine grounds:gender, marital status, family status, sexual orientation,religious beliefs, age, disability, race and member of theTraveller community.”


The Open Society Institute, set up by billionaireGeorge Soros, has criticised the inadequateprotection of minorities in a number of thecountries aspiring to join the European Union(EU).

In 1993, the EU laid down criteria for new memberstates to join the Union. These were called theCopenhagen criteria (after the city where they wereadopted) and these made as a precondition for entry"stability of institutions guaranteeing human rights,democracy, rule of law and respect for andprotection of minorities".

The Open Society Institute set up a monitoringprogramme to check independently whether thiswas being done. Its work takes on an added urgency,for new member states may be joining as soon as2004 in time for the next European elections.Originally, six states were to be admitted in 2004:Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, Estonia,Slovenia and Cyprus, followed by the rest (e.g.Romania, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia,Malta) in 2006-8, but there may be a "big bang"with all these states joining in 2004.

The Open Society Institute has reached thefollowing conclusions:• Including human rights criteria within the

economic and legal criteria has speeded upprogress.

• Most of the candidate states have ratifiedinternational standards for the protection ofminorities.

• Most have adopted new laws and policies toprotect minorities.

• None have developed a comprehensive legalframework against discrimination on the modelof the 2000 directives.

• The Roma people suffer from discriminationthroughout the region, sometimes even violence,being discriminated against in education,housing, health care and access to goods andservices.

• Roma have been attacked and killed in Bulgaria,the Czech Republic and Slovakia

• Roma complaints to the police are not treatedseriously.

• Most Roma children are sent to special schools,institutes for people with learning difficulties, orall-Roma schools - but not integrated intomainstream education.

• Public officials rarely condemn discrimination; ifanything, they contribute to it.

• The Russian minorities of Estonia and Latviasuffer continuing discrimination in citizenshiplaws, access to political participation and the useof their language.

• The tradition of an independent judiciary toaffirm the rights of minorities is poorlydeveloped. There is executive interference in theoperation of the law.

The report cites the case of Roma who fled fromZamola in Hungary. The local mayor had told themthat they had no place there and that as ‘animalparasites’ they should leave. When the Romacomplained, they were accused of makinggroundless allegations against the authorities. Thebest the prime minister could do was exhort themto "study more and work harder".

The Open Society Institute makes a number ofrecommendations:• Standards for the protection of minority rights

and for judicial independence should be clearerand stricter.

• They should apply to the existing States of the

E.U. UPDATEBy Brian Harvey

EU - not just the accession States.• They should be an on-going condition of

membership of the Union.• There should be a permanent formal mechanism

to monitor compliance with human rightsstandards for the protection of minorities.

• Monitoring should involve non-governmentaland civil society organisations.

The report stresses that accession States should notbe submitted to a process which is not applied toexisting member states themselves.

Hungary’s treatment of minorities was the subject ofa meeting between Social Affairs CommissionerAnna Diamantopoulou and the HungarianCommissioner for Ethnic and National MinorityRights, Jeno Kaltenbach, on 5th November last. Themain discrimination in Hungary is against Roma,who number between 450,000 and 900,000 peopleout of the population of 10million. Hungary hasalready introduced legislation to transpose the two2000 anti-discrimination directives and JenoKaltenbach informed Anna Diamantopoulou thathe had launched a formal enquiry intodiscrimination against the Roma in the Hungarianhealth services and was contemplating investigationsinto the police and education systems.

In related news regarding EU enlargement, anotheraspiring member-state, Cyprus, has now acceded todemands from the European Parliament to changeits laws regarding discrimination against gays andlesbians. This outcome followed a warning by DutchMEP Lousewies van der Laan that the Parliamentwould block Cyprus’ accession if it continued tooperate its existing laws. Cypriot accession negotiatorGeorge Vassiliou has told van der Laan that thecountry will bring in laws to eliminate all forms ofsexual discrimination. His decision was welcomed byvan der Laan and another MEP who has campaignedon the issue, Michael Cashman. Cyprus will reducethe age of consent from 18 to 16 and address issuesof partnership/marriage rights for gays and lesbians.Michael Cashman warned that some of the othercountries still have some way to go, especiallyBulgaria.

Other IssuesOther issues highlighted in the two most recentEuropean Briefings provided for the EqualityAuthority include:• European Commission tables new proposals to

define racism, stipulate racist crimes, designatesuch offences as being extraditable and set outpenalties applicable to racist companies andorganisations - to be transposed into national lawby 30 June 2004.

• Equality-related Conclusions of Laeken summit14-15 December 2001 and Themes of SpanishPresidency of the EU from January 2002.

• European Parliament tables questions to theEuropean Commission calling on it to give gayand lesbian employees the same partnership rightsalready enjoyed by heterosexual employees inregard to health insurance, survivor’s pension etc.

• Save the Children Fund criticises education ofTravellers and Roma in the EU.

• European Ombudsman renews pressure on theEuropean Institutions to end staffing practicesthat discriminate against women.

• Irish EQUAL projects announced.• AGE (European umbrella network for the

elderly) produces a document on the future ofpensions in the European Union which indicatesthat gender inequality and gender discriminationare central issues in the pensions debate.

• Latest EUROSTAT focuses on gender differencesin third level education.

• European Parliament approves proposal todesignate 2003 as European Year for People withDisabilities.

• European Court of Justice rulings regardingdiscrimination on grounds of nationality anddiscrimination in relation to pension rightsagainst male civil servants, who take leave tobring up their children.

The above is a summary of the two most recentEuropean Briefings provided by Brian Harvey forthe Equality Authority. The full briefings areavailable from Majella Walker (Telephone +353-1-4173354 or email [email protected]).

ENLARGEMENT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION:CANDIDATE STATES UNDER FIREREGARDING EQUALITY FOR MINORITIES

Introduction

In 2000 the Equality Authority and the Departmentof Justice, Equality and Law Reform commissionedresearch into the effective recruitment of peoplewith disabilities in the Public Service. The researchproject was one element of a three part initiative toencourage Public Sector employers to meet the 3%employment target of people with disabilities.

The project was supported by a SteeringCommittee made up of representatives fromthe Equality Authority, the Dept. ofJustice, Equality and Law Reform,Health Services EmployersAgency, Local GovernmentManagement Services Board,SIPTU, IMPACT, Forum ofPeople with Disabilities andSchizophrenia Ireland.

The research was carried out byDr. Pauline Conroy and Ms. SarahFanagan of Ralaheen Ltd. The aim ofthe project was to compare and contrastthe recruitment and employment practicesof 6 public bodies comprising two HealthBoards, two Local Authorities and two SemiState bodies. Of the six organisations, three ineach category had a good record in relation to the3% target and the other three had a poor record inrelation to the target. The research would establishhow the difference in practices (if any) affected theperformance of each organisation in relation to the3% target. The researchers interviewed employerand management bodies, trade unions representingpublic sector workers and organisations representingpeople with disabilities.

Who’s Counting?One of the most startling facts to emerge from theresearch was that each of the organisations counted

the number of employees with disabilities in adifferent way. This is very important because if theorganisations are counting in different ways then thefact that they reach or fail to reach the 3% target isactually meaningless. Each organisation must beworking to a single definition of disability so thatthe 3% target can be properly monitored andevaluated. As stated in the report "comparisons oforganisations in terms of their ‘achievement’ of the3% target should be made with caution. Theproportion of people with disabilities inemployment in a public body is not a goodpredictor of their actual practices."

The different definitions of disability in circulationare causing confusion. For example the definition

from the Dept. of Finance’s Code of Practice onthe

Employment of People with Disabilities isthe one which is given to Public Sector

Bodies when making returns to the Dept.of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.However in their Codes of Practice

both the Dept. of Environment andLocal Government and Dublin

Corporation use the definition ofdisability given in the Employment

Equality Act, 1998 which is much broader.The report states that “There appears to be some

confusion among those interviewed as to whichdefinition should be used for the purposes of thetarget and the provision of positive action measuresunder the Employment Equality Act, 1998.” This isa serious issue which needs to be addressed if the3% target is to work effectively.

Do Quota or Target Systems Work?It would seem that without enforcement, target orquota systems are not effective. "A quota that is notenforced represents a kind of moral obligation foremployers and as such tends to be relativelyineffective." In some countries employers who donot meet such quotas are allowed to make paymentsin proportion to the wages workers with disabilities

equalitynewsp8

would otherwise have been paid. In other countriesnon-compliance with the quota is punishable byfines. The fines are then used to the benefit ofpeople with disabilities, to prepare them foremployment, to enable them to retain their jobs inthe labour market or sheltered employment or toprovide employers with financial incentives toemploy people with disabilities.

The Disabilities Bill, 2001 includes a focus on the3% quota. Disability Monitoring Committees willbe established in respect of each sector of the publicservice and in consultation with the NationalDisability Authority (NDA) will monitor progresson the 3% target. The NDA can suggest actions tobe undertaken by a non compliant public body suchas the holding of special competitions or thesponsoring of training/ education of people withdisabilities in order to qualify them for specific postswithin the organisation. The NDA will also reportto the Oireachtas on the extent to which each sectorof the public service has endeavoured to meet the3% target. These provisons may provide an impetusto the public sector to increase their efforts aroundthe employment of people with disabilities.

Which definition should be used?So which definition of disability should the publicsector should use? The main argument against usingthe definition under the Employment Equality Actis that it is too broad. The fear is that employers willuse relatively minor disabilities such as the fact thatan employee does not have 20/20 vision to qualifythem under the 3% target and so reach the targetwithout much difficulty. Such practices would notpromote the recruitment of people with moreprofound disabilities, however, enforcement remainsan issue.

The problem with the Dept. of Finance definition isthat the disability must have a ‘tangible impact’ on aperson’s ability to do a particular job. We need todecide if we want to know the true number ofpeople with disabilities in our organisation or if weonly want to know about the disabilities whichimpinge on the work of an employee. For example,a manual worker with poor vision may not be

counted if his work is not affected. However, if thesame worker is promoted to supervisor and hasdifficulty in reading a computer screen he couldthen be counted under the 3% target as having adisability.

Self DeclarationSelf declaration is possibly the only way of findingout the true extent and nature of disability amongstworkers in an organisation. In an ideal scenarioemployees would feel confident enough to disclosethe fact that they had a disability to their employerswithout fear of discrimination. Until employees canbe assured that their employment status, trainingand promotion options will not be affected by theirdisability this will not happen. It would beinteresting to survey staff anonymously to find outwhat the real extent of disability is within anorganisation compared to the figure under the 3%return.

RecommendationsThe report makes 19 recommendations aroundgreater consistency in the use of definitions ofdisability, the management of disability issues, the3% target measurement, health screening,educational qualifications, dispute procedures,health & safety issues etc. Lets hope that employers,

equalitynews p9

3% EMPLOYMENTTARGET OF PEOPLEWITH DISABILITIESREPORT

by Martina Kelly

Phot

ogra

phy:

Tom

my

Cla

ncy

Mary Wallace TD, Minster of State at the Departmentof Justice, Equality and Law Reform pictured with Sarah

Flanagan and Dr. Pauline Conroy

equalitynewsp10 equalitynews p11

The Joint Equality and Human Rights Forum metin Dublin in December. The Forum bringstogether the equality and human rightsenforcement bodies in Britain, Northern Irelandand Ireland. These are:

• Equality Authority• Irish Human Rights Commission• Equality Commission for Northern Ireland• Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission• Equal Opportunities Commission, UK• Commission for Racial Equality, UK• Disability Rights Commission, UK.

The forum meets twice yearly. It aims to shareexperience and expertise, to engage in joint workand to work together to seek necessary change at apolicy level. The Equality Authority, in parallel tothe Forum, has already engaged in significantnorth-south cooperation with the EqualityCommission for Northern Ireland. Thecommitment, stated in the Belfast Agreement, toan equivalence of rights north and southunderpins this cooperation. The Joint Equalityand Human Rights Forum reflects an east-westdimension to cooperation, again reflecting thethinking in the Belfast Agreement. This east-westcooperation can equally be seen in the light of asearch for an equivalence of rights east and westacross the two islands.

The Forum has already initiated joint work on thetheme of multiple identities. This work is beingcoordinated by the Equality Authority. All sevenorganisations will carry out a piece of research onthe nature of difference as expressed orexperienced by a particular multiple identity

group. This will be done to a common template.Groups that will be focused on include minorityethnic people with disabilities, minority ethnicwomen, young gays, lesbians and bisexuals, youngminority ethnic men, and women with disabilities.The research projects will test the implications ofthe difference defined for practice in employmentand service provision. It is hoped that the projectwill open up and provide a foundation for amultiple identity approach within equalitystrategies.

The poverty-inequality interface has emerged asanother priority theme for the Forum. Discussionsare at an early stage in the Forum on this theme.However there is a potential to make links withthe work of the British Irish Council in this areaand these are being explored.

The European Union is also a focus for theForum. This focus again is only being explored atpresent. This exploration looks to issues aroundthe transposition of Article 13 directives, thedevelopment of further Article 13 directives andthe identification of funding sources.

The Joint Equality and Human Rights Forum is arelatively new initiative. Work to date hasdemonstrated a real potential for this cooperation.Already it has proven its worth in the exchange ofideas and insights so that the creativity in eachorganisation becomes available to all.

JOINT EQUALITY & HUMANRIGHTS FORUM MEETS INDUBLINBy Niall Crowley

trade unions and NGOs will make changes thatwill have a real impact and result in more jobs forpeople with disabilities in the Public Service.The report is well worth reading for anyone who isinterested in employment for people withdisabilities. I would be very interested in any viewson the 3% target, self declaration, which definitionshould be used etc. If you have any comments onthis article or you would like a copy of the reportplease write to me at the Equality Authority oremail me at [email protected].

THE SURVEYThe Bad News.....

• Only two of the six organisations included thePositive to Disability Symbol in their jobadvertisements

• Half of the organisations did not have a policyof checking that the wording of an application

isis either positive to disability or neutral in relation to candidates with disabilities.

• Over half of the organisations did not include aquestion concerning a candidate’s special needsin relation to a job interview.

• All six had a compulsory medical examinationas part of the recruitment process.

• Three of the six organisations were notflexible about the amount of time given tocandidates with disabilities when taking testsas part of the recruitment process.

• None of the organisations with a poor 3%record provided job orientation/induction tonew recruits with disabilities.

• None of the six provided information aboutworking conditions in different formats forcandidates with hearing or visualimpairments.

• Five of the six organisations considered that alack of knowledge in relation to disabilityissues acted as a barrier to the employmentand promotion of people with disabilities intheir organisations.

• Only one organisation made employees with adisability a priority concern when conductingevacuation drills.

• Four of the six identified poorattitudes/stereotypes as a barrier to theemployment and promotion of people withdisabilities in their organisations.

The Good News• All six considered access for people with

disabilities when carrying out work orrenovating their premises.

• None of the organisations identified a lack offinancial assistance as a barrier to theemployment and promotion of people withdisabilities.

• All six stated that employees with disabilitieswere given the same opportunities as otherstaff to acquire the range of skills necessary forfuture career development.

• All six stated that they would consider thefollowing in an effort to retain an employeewho has been injured or become disabled: JobRestructuring, Rehabilitation, Retraining,Relocation or Flexible Working Arrangements.

• Five out of six stated that they proactivelyrecruit people with disabilities.

• All six had either a formal or informal returnto work or retention programme foremployees who are injured or becamedisabled.


The time is ripe for a contribution to the debateon advocacy, its relationship with equality and forthe representation of people. However, advocacycan be a difficult concept to grasp or understand,especially so if you have notheard of advocacy or have nothad any experience ofadvocacy.

Therefore, the first task mustbe information, to understandwhat advocacy is, whatadvocacy means in real terms,its implications, and its valueas a Human Rights Issue.

The Forum of People withDisabilities developed andproduced an advocacypackage, which was launchedby Mary RobinsonUNHCHR on December15th in the Dochas Centre,Mountjoy Women's Prison. This packageconsisted of a reflection document 'Advocacy: ARights Issue’. Other elements within the advocacypackage were an advocacy poster 'advocacy now', a16-page information leaflet and an easy-to-readleaflet, which doubles up as a poster, (aural tapesand brailing available in February). The Forummakes the case that:

1. Advocacy is a matter of human rights

2. An Independent statutory system ofadvocacy is required, which is systemic andaccountable.

Advocacy and Human Rights This document places advocacy firmly as aHuman Rights issue informed through HumanRights language. Human Rights are the rights of

all peoples regardless of familystatus, gender, race, sexuality,religion, politics, class,disability, marital status orage. Freedom of speech,opinion, expression, assemblyand movement are allreferenced withinInternational UN Covenantsand the Irish Constitutionand are the rights of allpeoples. However, for disabledpeople who live in closedenvironments i.e. prisons,residential centres, hospitals,children's homes, workshops,nursing homes and at timesfamilies, these fundamentalrights are often infringed.

In a system where people are vulnerable to abuseand human, economic and civil rights violations,it is vital that each and every person has equal andindependent mechanism's to advocate andrepresent themselves and their own experiences.Autonomous, Accountable Advocacy can beviewed as a liberation tool in this way.

A Disabling CultureI suggest, that the Irish State with its remedialsocial policies has actively participated andsanctioned the de-politicisation of bivalent groupsand that it collaborates in sustaining grossinequalities and social injustices to disabled people

(i.e. the emphasis given to property rights overaccess in current equality legislation). Ireland alsohas a ‘disabling culture’ entrenched in a health andwelfare approach to disability or a compensatoryideology (compensating people for their bad lucki.e. impairment). Systemic advocacy providesmechanisms to challenge this culture. This is whyAdvocacy is Political. Political and Proud of it.

Advocacy and EqualityRepresentation and substantive advocacymechanisms requires recognition. Recognitionrequires the Redistribution of Resources. Peoplewithout resources will go without a remedy; therewill be equality on paper and inequality in action(Cooney 1996:310-313). The aim ofegalitarianism should be one in which people canstand in relations of equality to others. Thisdemands economic resources as well as culturalrecognition. Constructing a society wheredisabled people are valued equally requires first ofall that practice be rooted in law and in fact,based on civil and human rights. The EqualStatus Act, 2000 and the Employment EqualityAct, 1998 are two legislative milestones on thatroad.

Substantive equality requires institutions,structures, politicians, policy makers and servicesto acknowledge that disabled people do not need'compensation' for their impairments. It’s time fora sea change in attitudes from paternalism tosubstantive equality and a Politics ofRepresentation. Systemic Advocacy, which isformally recognised and formally resourced isfundamental for this change to happen.

Disabled people who have been systematicallydisempowered and who live and work withinclosed authoritarian systems and specialist serviceshave been silent and silenced for too long.Advocacy provides mechanisms, which enablepeople to place their own concerns and views onthe bargaining table.

Advocacy as PoliticalAdvocacy is a buzzword in current times but thereis a danger through ignorance, a lack of

information and knowledge that it can betokenised and colonised by services, policy makers,organisations and professionals. If one lives in aninstitution or closed space, going and participatingin an advocacy group meeting can be viewed as a'social' event by staff and managers. It is not.Advocacy is Political because it is about the directrepresentation of people, with their own views andopinions. It is about a process which engages themarginalised and most vulnerable at a grassrootslevel and then feeds into the larger system in orderto effect positive change.

Advocacy is not always about the 'softer' issues,such as recreation and meal times. It is aboutaddressing the 'harder' issues of rights, poverty,

union recognition in Irish sweatshops(workshops), good working conditions, theminimum wage, equality of access, participationand outcome to goods and services, the right to aneducation, a relationship, employment, adequateliving conditions. Advocacy is about havingmechanisms to challenge inequality, injustice anddiscrimination and to be able to live your lifewithout fear or bullying.

Systemic AdvocacyThe Forum suggests that any legislated advocacysystem must be inclusive of all its members in

ADVOCACY:A RIGHTSISSUE

By Deborah Birmingham

The first task must beinformation, to

understand whatadvocacy is, what

advocacy means inreal terms, its

implications, and itsvalue as a Human

Rights Issue

Members of the Union on Hill Street group in action!


multi-faceted ways. The Australian Advocacysystem encourages systemic advocacy from acommunity development model. Effectively, thismeans promoting and supporting self-advocacyand group advocacy groups at a grassroots level.Local group advocacy and regional and nationalnetworks are all essential components in thedevelopment and evolution of systemic advocacy.Systemic advocacy is about a process from theindividual to the collective, to make collectivechange at organisational, policy and provisionlevels

Advocacy and theDisability Bill 2000It is to be welcomed thatadvocacy is referenced withinthe new Disability Bill 2001.Under this Bill, PersonalAdvocates have rights of accessto meetings, consultations,information, and places,which provide day orresidential care or training andit will be an offence toobstruct an advocate. This iswelcome. However, the termsoutlined are too narrow, thetimescales are insulting, nofunding implications arereferenced, and it is basedprimarily on the medicalmodel and not the socialmodel. Systemic advocacy isnot recognised and this Billplaces a future advocacy service and personaladvocates under the auspices of Comhairle, andnot an Independent Advocacy Authority. In orderto be a ‘qualifying person’ under this Bill, you haveto fulfil certain criteria. Set criteria, by definition,discriminate and eliminate people. The Director ofthe Advocacy Service is to be appointed byComhairle with the approval of the Minister. Isuggest that this has an unhealthy feel of a politicalappointment and is unacceptable as such. This Billalso fails to acknowledge the necessity thatdisabled people should form a majority of anyfuture advocacy service.

The aim of advocacy is not solely about therepresentation of others as referenced within thisBill; it is equally about people becomingempowered to become advocates in their own livesand communities through training, education andexperience. Systemic advocacy systemsacknowledge the broader range of advocacymodels and place the individual in the centreencouraging self-sufficiency and self-determination. Any future advocacy system mustencourage and pro-actively support these twocomponents.

It is clear that any futureDisability Act should nameand detail advocacy within it.However, a Disability Act isonly one element within afuture legislative package.There requires to bemonitoring procedures,standards, A Disability ServicesAct, a Disability Commission,and a DisabilityCommissioner. None of theseelements are referenced withinthe new Bill. However, it is astart and the future monthsrequire disabled advocates, andtheir organisations to activelychallenge elements within itand improve upon others. It isa welcome first stage in theconsultative process. Lets get itright.

Deborah Birmingham (project worker, Forum of People with Disabilities;author of Advocacy: A Rights Issue’)

Copies of ‘Advocacy: A Rights Issue’, posters,leaflets and easy to read advocacy information areavailable from the Forum of People withDisabilities, 21 Hill Street, Dublin 1. Tel: (01 878 6077

The issues of Equality and Diversity within thecontext of customer service are posing newchallenges to public sector organisations . Thisarticle outlines how the Department of Social,Community and Family Affairs (DSCFA) isresponding to the need to provide its services inline with the Quality Customers Services (QCS)Principle of Equality/Diversity. That Principle isone of the Revised Quality Customer ServicePrinciples which were endorsed by Government inJuly 2000. It reads;

"Ensure the rights to equal treatment establishedby equality legislation and accommodate diversity,so as to contribute to equality for the groupscovered by the equality legislation (under thegrounds of gender, marital status, family status,sexual orientation, religious belief, age, disability,race and membership of the TravellerCommunity).

One of the key components of the StrategicManagement Initiative (the programme for themodernisation of the public service) is thedevelopment of excellent customer service. Equality,with its focus on fair treatment, its objective tosecure fair outcomes for all and its emphasis onaccommodating diversity is an essential basis forquality service.

The Department of Social, Community and FamilyAffairs is one of the largest service providers in thestate. It is responsible for the delivery of a widerange of social insurance and social assistanceschemes, including pensions, benefits, allowancesand other supports. Services are provided to manycategories of people (unemployed, older people,those who are ill or have disabilities, carers) and tofamilies and communities in general. Payments aremade to approximately 875,000 people each weekand, on an annual basis, 1.7 million claims areprocessed. The estimated spend of the Departmentin 2002 is 9.4 billion euro.

The Department’s Customer ActionPlan 2001 – 2004 was launched inMay 2001. In our "Commitment toQuality Customer Service" in the Plan we state that"we are committed to serving all our customers inan equitable and non-discriminatory manner".

In order to live up to the commitment it isrecognized that it crucial to fully support staff andincrease the profile and understanding of Equalityand Diversity across the Department. These staffsupports and training and awareness raisinginitiatives are, and will continue to be, grounded inour overall objective in the delivery of services i.e.that there must be a balanced approach betweencustomer service and control of fraud and abuseand that they must be considered to be "two sidesof the same coin".

Training.In recent years DSCFA has developed acomprehensive range of training and awarenessraising programmes to support its staff who dealwith the public.

An integrated Customer Service Training Programmehas been delivered to approximately 2,600 staff whodeal with the public, whether face-to-face, bytelephone or by correspondence. The programmeincluded disability awareness and anti discriminationtraining which was delivered to departmental trainersby external trainers expert in these areas. Theprogramme has been recognised as an example ofgood practice by the Equality Authority.

Due to a recognition that a more detailed course inanti- discrimination was necessary a two modularcourse (delivered over two days, day one takingplace one month before day two), has beendeveloped recently. The course was jointly designedby Corporate Development, the Travellers VisibilityGroup (TVG) and the National ConsultativeCommittee on Racism and Interculturalism(NCCRI).

CUSTOMER SERVICE IN THE DEPARTMENT OFSOCIAL, COMMUNITY & FAMILY AFFAIRS –THE EQUALITY/DIVERSITY CHALLENGES

By Brian Duff and Bernie Donohue, Corporate Development,

Department of Social, Community & Family Affairs

The aim of advocacyis not solely about the

representation ofothers as referencedwithin this Bill; it is

equally about peoplebecoming empoweredto become advocatesin their own lives andcommunities through

training, educationand experience.


Day 1 is dedicated to awareness raising andproviding staff with an overview of the relevantlegislation and terms used. Day 2 is morediscussion-based, utilising case studies which allowstaff to develop their own thinking in this area. Itincludes a personal account from a refugee toIreland and a discussion exploring the comparisonbetween the experiences of Irish people whoemigrated and those of non-nationals now livinghere.

The training has, so far, been delivered to staff inthe Cork area. It has been provided by KensikaMonshengwo (NCCRI), Chrissie Sullivan (TVG),Latif Serhildan (NASC, the support center forrefugees and asylum seekers in Cork), Piaras MacEnrí (Head of Migration Studies, UCC) andCorporate Development.

This course is now being reviewed for delivery toother staff members in 2002. The Departmentrecognises the need to continually examine anddevelop this training to ensure it reflects the needsof both customers and staff and that it is up to datewith developments and thinking in this complexand evolving area.

Other Awareness Raising InitiativesAn anti-discrimination seminar also took place inSeptember 2001 delivered by Spirasi (a supportorganisation for asylum seekers) and theEmployment Support Service in DSCFA. Theseminar was devised to raise awareness of anti-discrimination issues and provide staff with anoverview of legislation and developments in this area.

The concept of Peer Support is one which allowsstaff "time out" from work to discuss issues that arerelevant to their work. This approach wasintroduced on a pilot basis by the Department’sRegional Director’s Office in late 2000. Staff fromtwo Dublin Offices (Navan Rd., and NthCumberland St.,) discussed the equality anddiversity issues that arise in their work.

Supports for StaffA working group of departmental staff has been

established to examine the range of supports thatstaff require to deal in the most effective mannerwith non-nationals. The objectives of the groupare to;

• Share experiences and best practice

• Agree guidelines for staff in this area.

These guidelines will be finalised shortly. Theyconsist of the following elements;

• An overview of the relevant legislation and bothcivil service-wide and DSCFA initiatives.

• Definitions of commonly used terms used inrelation to these issues.

• An overview of how an asylum seeker applies forasylum in Ireland and how this claim is thenprocessed.

• Information on policy developments in this areaeg dispersal, direct provision etc

• An overview of entitlements of non-nationals tothe services provided by DSCFA and other stateagencies.

• A good practice guide which informs staff ofrelevant customer service and control issues toenable them to process and review claimseffectively.

Interpretation and Translation Services.The provision of effective interpretation andtranslation services is an important element of theequality/diversity agenda. In DSCFA there are, atpresent, two such pilots in operation.

In the Cork Local Office a number of members ofstaff are being trained in both French and Spanishto provide an on the spot interpretation andtranslation service, when the need arises. The basisof the training are a glossary of DSCFA terms andthe relevant claim forms. The course was designedby the Cork-based North Monastery Language

Centre, the local staff and Corporate Development.

Secondly, a telephone interpretation service is beingtested in two Dublin offices (Apollo House andNth Cumberland St.) and Athlone. A three wayconversation takes place between customer,interpreter and member of staff. The confidentialityof the conversation is a key element of the service.

Both pilots are being monitored to evaluate theireffectiveness, and if found successful, it is plannedthat they will be implemented at other appropriatelocations.

An examination of the appropriate languages intowhich the Department’s main claim forms shouldbe translated is also currently underway.

Inter-agency Co-operationDSCFA is aware of the necessity to liaise on an

ongoing basis with other departments and agenciesinvolved in this area. We consult regularly with theDepartment of Justice, Equality and Law Reformon issues of mutual interest. DSCFA is representedon the various QCS Groups established under theSMI QCS Initiative. Through our involvementwith the Sub-Group on Equality/Diversity we havecontributed to both the Support Pack For Staff andthe research carried out by Dr. Jane Pillinger on theEquality/Diversity aspects of customer service.

Customer ConsultationThe Department has an extensive customerconsultation programme. In line with its remit inthe equality and diversity aspects of the customerservice Corporate Development meets regularlywith relevant groups i.e. NCCRI, TVG, NASC etc.Further consultation of this type will continue to bea feature of the Department’s consultationprogramme.

Some attendees and trainers in anti-discrimination training, January 2002.Back row L-R: Piaras MacEnrí (UCC), Mary O'Donovan, Kay O'Connor, Kathleen

O'Driscoll, Mairead Ryan, Nuala Higgins.Front two L-R: Dermot Field, Etta Goulding, Latif Sahildan (NASC), Ben Hennessy.

nomic inequalityCultural inequalityPolitical inequalityAffective inequalities Economic inequalityCultural inequalityPolitical inequalityAequalitynews p19

The Idea of Equality

Essentially, equality is a relationshipof some kind or other between twoor more people or groups of people,regarding some aspect or feature ofthose people’s lives (Baker, 2000).Fundamentally the focus will relateto factors such as the level ofincome and wealth distributionamong groups of people or the extent of power,respect and status commanded by them. Drawing onLynch et al (2001), there are four sets of socialrelations in which inequalities can be generated;

1. Economic inequality: This refers to the unequaldistribution of material resources and theinequality in their ownership and control.

2. Cultural inequality: This takes the form ofcultural domination, symbolic misrepresentation,non-recognition and invisibility of groups insociety. Their lifestyles, norms, values andpractices are denigrated or made invisible inpublic discourse, to such an extent that their non-status prevents them from engaging in socialrelations.

3. Political inequality: This occurs where a numberof groups in society are excluded from the realmsof decision–making or are politicallymisrepresented. Their exclusion from the politicalprocess has reinforced the processes ofmarginalisation of their communities

4. Affective inequalities: The affective sphere ofhuman relations involves emotional workprimarily, where the end product is establishingrelations of solidarity – maintaining bonds ofaffection, providing moral support, friendship andlove, which gives people a sense of belonging andmaking them feel good (Delphy and Leonard,1992, 21). However this form of human labourhas largely remained nameless and not identifiedas work at all. Moreover, as it is very likely thatwomen exert most energy in love labour (Lynchand McLaughlin,1995, 265), they and the

concept itself remain peripheral, leading toexploitation and inequality.

In practice all forms of inequality are inter-related. Inparticular, there is a strong correlation between,economic, political and culturally generatedinequalities (Lynch et al, 2001, 40).Theory onequality invites us to consider ways to distributewealth, income, rights, power and self-respect. Itprovides a knowledge base for a framework to beestablished, so that inequalities between individualsand groups of individuals can be mitigated as muchas possible.

According to Rawls, justice is about the distributionof rights, liberties, opportunities, powers, incomeand wealth (Rawls,1971). Rawls concept of equalityis framed around two key principles. The firstprinciple secures everyone’s basic liberties such as thefreedom of the person, the right to vote, freedom ofspeech and to possess property. The second principlestipulates that the primary social goods (income,social status, power and privilege) should bedistributed in whatever way maximises the goods ofthe worst off. This effectively allows for somedifferences in income, wealth, social status andauthority, because they may be necessary to improvethe situation of the least advantaged members ofsociety. Moreover, there must be the requisite socialconditions for fair equality of opportunity, wheresocial positions (jobs or positions of authority) areopen equally to all and the ‘expectations of thosewith the same abilities and aspirations should not beaffected by their social class’ (ibid, 73). Sen points to‘the variety of physical and social characteristics thataffect our lives and make us what we are’ (1992, 28).Human diversity becomes a factor, in that peoplediffer in age, sex, physical and mental health, bodilyprowess, intellectual abilities, social surroundings andin many other respects. Well-being is marked by aperson’s freedom and capability to attain, income,wealth and other real opportunities.

However, who makes the decisions to determine thepatterns of distribution for goods, benefits andopportunities? The way society is and how itsinstitutions are structured become a key focus. It iswithin the institutional contexts of the economy,state, family, workplace and civil society (all whichunderpin the patterns of distribution) that rules,

values, norms and social practices can be negotiatedbetween social groups with differing identities, needsand social experiences. This takes place within thecontext of social hierarchies and social systems thatpromote patterns of domination and oppression.Young states that social relationships – economic,political and cultural - systematically reproduceoppressions (1990, 41). She describes theseoppressions as exploitation, marginalisation,powerlessness, cultural imperialism and violence.These oppressions have a detrimental impact onsome groups which inhibits their identity and abilityto develop and exercise their capacities and expresstheir needs, thoughts and feelings in the allocation ofmaterial goods, resources, income and socialpositions. Fundamentally, the ordering andgoverning of a just society must not designinstitutions and laws that eliminate group difference,but instead promote equality ‘among socially andculturally differentiated groups, who mutuallyrespect one another and affirm one another in theirdifferences’ (Young, 1990, 163).

Equally there must be an acknowledgement of ourcapacity to hold a multiplicity of identities. Forexample, people with a disability have a distinctidentity but also they include women, Travellers, gaysand lesbians, older people, Black and minority ethnicpeople and hold various religious beliefs. In essenceevery person holds multiple identities. The challengeis to construct an equality framework that provides ameans of addressing and affirming the range ofidentities any one person may seek to hold – ‘…wenow need to construct a new equality/differencedebate, one orientated to multiple intersectingdifferences.’ (Fraser, 1997,187).

ConclusionWe can now draw certain conclusions about themeaning of equality and the task before policymakersto integrate equality objectives. Equality is concernedwith the equal distribution of primary social goods(income, social status, power and privilege) amongindividuals and groups in society. Inequalities in thedistribution of such goods are sustainable as long asit benefits the worst off. This is justified as long asequality of opportunity is integral to the system,where social positions (jobs or positions of authority)are open equally to all (Rawls, 1971). In thedistribution of primary social goods, some peoplerequire more resources than others to achieve thesame level of utility. Achieving equality of outcome

must focus on the scope and capabilities ofindividuals and groups to do so (Sen, 1992). Thedistribution of goods, should take due account of thekinds of relationship people have with each otherand especially in terms of the relationships betweensocial groups. In particular, the practice of equalityrequires attention to social group differences. Thosemembers of society experiencing marginalisation,exploitation or powerlessness (some of the conditionsof oppression leading to substantial inequalities) needto be part of political and policy decision-makingcontexts. Otherwise there will be little substantialchange to the systems that support unequal socialrelations and create the social conditions ofoppression (Young,1990). Moreover, an equalityframework must acknowledge the reality of multipleidentities and that it is impossible to confront onetype of oppression without confronting them all.

ReferencesBaker, John, 2000, ‘Equality Frameworks,’ Paperpresented to the 10th Anniversary Conference of theEquality Studies Centre, UCD – UCD, 15thDecember 2000.

Delphy, Christine and Leonard, Diana, 1992,Familiar Exploitation: A New Analysis of Marriagein Contemporary Western Societies. Cambridge:Polity Press.

Fraser, N., 1997, Justice Interruptus.Princeton:Princeton University Press.

Lynch, Kathleen and McLaughlin, Elizabeth, 1995‘Caring Labour and Love Labour’. In Irish Society:Sociological Perspectives, ed. P. Clancy et al. Dublin:IPA.

Lynch, K., Baker, J. and Cantillon, S., (2001)Equality: Frameworks for Change Paper prepared forthe NESF Plenary Meeting on 30/1/2001

Rawls, John, 1971, A Theory of Justice. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Sen, Amartya, 1992, Inequality Re-examined,Oxford: Oxford University Press

Young, Iris Marion, 1990, Justice and the Politics ofDifference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

THEORISING EQUALITYBy Patrick O’Leary

equalitynewsp18


The second Family Friendly workplace day will beheld on Friday 1st March 2002. The aim of the dayis to promote awareness of family friendly / worklife balance issues. This year the focus is on familyfriendly /work life balance in individual workplaces/organisations. We hope that the day will inspireorganisations to introduce new work arrangementsor to improve existing ones.

What is being done tomark Family FriendlyWorkplace Day thisyear?

Website toursWe are providing toursthrough our website(www.familyfriendly.ie)which will give people aninsight into the materialavailable on the site.

Suggested ActivitiesA list of activities thatorganisations may carry outto mark Family FriendlyWorkplace day will be available on the website(www.familyfriendly.ie) and in a leaflet, availablefrom the Equality Authority (Lo Call: 1890 245545). Some examples of these suggestions are:

• Launch a new family friendly / work life balancearrangement for employees on the day.

• Carry out a survey of employees or set up a

suggestion box to explore the interest in familyfriendly / work life balance arrangements.

• Provide an information stand in the workplaceon education/training for work and for life.

• Organise a family open day at work.

Please let us know about your event by registering iton the website.

PublicityLook out for the billboard, newspaper and radioadvertising. There will also be a poster to publicisethe day, available from the Equality Authority (LoCall: 1890 245 545).

Why should we celebrate FamilyFriendly Workplace Day in myWorkplace?

The introduction of family friendly / work lifebalance arrangements can produce benefits for bothindividual staff members and their families, as wellas for the business as a whole. Some of the principlebenefits are:

• Increased equality in the workplace

• Improved quality of life for workers and theirfamilies

• More balanced relationship between work andother committments

• Increased opportunities to pursue other interests

Organisations that have introducedFamily Friendly / Work Life Balancearrangements note the followingadvantages as a result:

• Retention of valuable, trained and experiencedstaff

• Improved recruitment

• Improved productivity from more satisfied staffmembers

• Improved morale, motivation and committment

• Cost savings (eg training new staff etc)

FAMILY FRIENDLYWORKPLACE DAY FRIDAY 1ST MARCH 2002

equalitynewsp22 equalitynews p23

What is Equality Proofing?Equality Proofing is about placing equality at thecentre of policy making and planning. The ultimatepotential of equality proofing is to promote thedevelopment of a more equal society. Equalityproofing is a tool which can be used to ensure thatpolicy and planning processes have a positive impactfor all in society.

It includes:• Accessing the impact of

plans on groupsexperiencing inequality

• Resourcing participationof those affected byinequality

• Focussing attention onequality outcomes

The Equal Status Act 2000prohibits discriminationwhere people buy goods, useservices, obtainaccommodation andparticipate in educationalestablishments. It coversnine different grounds.This is of particularimportance for service providers as they must beaware of their obligations under the legislation.Equality proofing will help in designing anddelivering services that are accessible and meaningfulto all sectors of society.

Why equality proofing for the County andCity Development Boards(CDBs)?The national agreement, the Programme forProsperity and Fairness, contains an importantcommitment to Equality Proofing and recommendspiloting an equality proofing initiative with the Cityand County Development Boards (CDBs). TheCDBs by bringing together relevant players locally-

public sector agencies, social partners and localcommunities - represent a new and exiting way ofdelivering local government. The CDBs arecurrently drafting 10 year strategy plans for theirareas. These plans cover economic, social andcultural development. With their focus onpartnership and integration, they are placed at thecutting edge of local development strategies andoffer an opportunity to advance the agenda ofequality.

To support equality proofing of the strategy plans asthey emerge, the Equality Authority in co-operationwith the Directors of the CDBs and PLANET (thenetwork of area-based partnerships) have developed

an equality proofingtemplate. Even though thistemplate has been designedspecifically for the CDBprocess, it is envisaged thatthe template could befurther evolved to supportother local planningprocesses.

The purpose of theequality proofing templateis to provide the CDBswith a practical tool tosupport the equalityproofing process. It shouldbe noted that it does notseek to provide a definitiveproofing template but

instead to capture the specific planning process,pressures and time frame that the CDBs are workingwithin. Therefore this initiative must be seen as afirst step and that further actions can be rolled outduring the implementation of the plans.

How to equality proof?The main focus of the template is on what is called"The Proofing Moment". This is basically a simpleexercise which consists of a number of corequestions that could be addressed at a meeting orplanning event as draft strategy plans becomeavailable. The questions are broken into three areas.

EQUALITY PROOFINGBy Carole Sullivan,Development Officer,Equality Authority

Noel Dempsey TD, Minister for the Environment& Local Government (centre), with Carole Sullivanand Niall Crowley of the Equality Authority at thepresentation of the Equality Proofing template

Questions on Taking Account of Difference areprimarily concerned with identifying differenceacross the nine grounds covered in equalitylegislation and checking mainstream measures toensure that difference has been accommodated in amanner that ensures their accessibility and relevanceto all.

Questions on Targeting focus on the fact that evenif mainstream measures are designed and deliveredin a manner which accommodates diversity, theremay sometimes be a need for targeted initiativesfocusing on any of the groups within the ninegrounds. These would, for example, address theeffects of a past history of exclusion or resourceneeds that are specific to a particular group.

Questions on further developing the EqualityAgenda are about continuing to build the equalityagenda during the implementation of the plan andare focussed on evolving a capacity over the life ofthe plan to realise equality outcomes.

It is hoped that CDBs will be proactive in applyingthe template to their draft strategy plans. Equalityproofing will ensure that each of the plans areinclusive of all people living in the community.

It will ensure that the needs ofthose experiencing inequalitywill be accommodatedtherefore making thestrategy plans relevant toall. However, theimplementation phasewill be key to ensuringthat the plansbecome real workingdocuments. Equalityproofing will ensure thatthose experiencing inequality will play a key roleduring the implementation and monitoringprocesses.

The template has been circulated to all CDBs andwas officially presented in December 2001 to theMinister for the Environment and LocalGovernment, Mr Noel Dempsey T.D.

If you should require any further information onequality proofing, you can contact me here at theEquality Authority on (01) 417 3361 or [email protected]. Copies of the equalityproofing template are available from the EqualityAuthority.

By Evelyn Collins,CEO, Equality Commissionfor Northern Ireland

The Commission was delighted to welcomemembers of the Equality Authority to Belfast on 6and 7 November 2001 for the annual Joint BoardMeeting, held for the first time in Northern Ireland.We were particularly delighted to welcome ourvisitors to Equality House, our new home inShaftesbury Square since August 2001. While KateHayes and Niall Crowley had kindly joined us atour opening events in October, it was great to hostthe Joint Board Meeting in premises specificallydesigned for our needs as the Equality Commission.

Our get-together began with a reception and dinnerin Parliament Buildings, Stormont, attended by MrDenis Haughey, MLA, one of the two Ministerswith responsibility for equality in the Office of the

First Minister and Deputy First Minister. The LongGallery is a splendid venue for dinner, and I knowmany of the Board members enjoyed walking up thesteps to Parliament Buildings, from which so manystatements have been made by politicians over thepast number of years! We all appreciated the tour andhistory of the Chambers given by Denis Haughey atthe end of our dinner as well his kind words ofencouragement and support to us in our joint work todevelop the equality agenda in both parts of Ireland.

The main purpose of the joint meeting ofCommissioners and Board members is to provide anopportunity for mutual learning and exchange ofideas on key strategic themes of relevance to our twoorganisations.

The three themes we focused on in November were• single equality legislation• equality and human rights, and• equality proofing/equality impact assessments.

JOINT EQUALITY AUTHORITY / EQUALITY COMMISSION FOR NORTHERN IRELAND BOARD MEETING


When Mary Harney, T.D., Tanaiste and Ministerfor Enterprise Trade and Employment formallylaunched the PPF Framework Committee topromote equality at the enterprise level inNovember 2001, the initiative was actually just overa year in being. Nonetheless, the timing wasappropriate because I think it is true to say that theCommittee has taken some time to find its feet andto come to a sense of purpose as to what it is tryingto achieve.

Given that the focus of the Committee is onequality at the enterprise level, in many ways onewould think that it should have been easy to takethe nine grounds covered under the EmploymentEquality Act of 1998 as the obvious frameworkupon which to build initiatives. To some extent,this has been the approach of the Committee butwhile there is a good deal of familiarity andexperience in dealing with a single ground ofdiscrimination, such as gender, it is in theinterweaving of the grounds and beginning to planmulti-ground clusters of activity, that the realchallenge arises.

Since the enactment of the Employment EqualityAct, 1998 and the Equal Status Act, 2000, a newfocus has developed on corporate legal compliancein relation to equality issues. The extension of thenon-discrimination principle to a broader range ofgrounds beyond gender and marital statusrepresented a significant change in the legalframework governing equality in the workplace. Inresponse to this development many employers havefocused on the requirement to comply with thenew legislation, in particular in relation to the newnon-discriminatory grounds introduced.

For this reason, I think that the new Guidelines forEmployment Equality Policies in Enterprises whichwere launched by the Tanaiste on November ,2001, will be a very useful tool for everyoneinvolved in the work place. This is a comprehensiveguide to developing an employment equality policy

in an enterprise, in addition to a useful "Ten Stepsto Equality". The Guidelines are currently beingdisseminated widely and will prove very useful. TheGuidelines are also the first tangible output of thework of the Framework Committee.

There has also been a strong desire on the part ofthe Framework Committee to approach the agendaof equality at the enterprise level from a positiveperspective of the value and potential gains whichwill accrue from the successful management andvaluing of diversity, and a sense that the Committeeshould not become preoccupied with the moredefensive perspective of the legislation.

This is one of the advantages of the FrameworkCommittee in that it affords a chance to undertakesome innovative projects in the diversity area.While there are a number of companies andconsultants specialising in aspects of diversitymanagement, it is still a relatively new field ofinterest in Ireland and a number of companies whohave diversity initiatives underway have had to lookfurther afield to find appropriate inputs. Hopefullyone benefit arising from the projects which will besupported by the Framework Committee in itslifetime, will be to help develop the appropriateinfrastructure to support diversity management inthe longer term.

EQUALITY AT THEENTERPRISE LEVELBy Jackie Harrison, IBEC

Pictured at the launch in the Equality Authority inNovember 2002 L-R: Jackie Harrison, IBEC; KateHayes, Chair, Equality Authority; Mary Harney TD,Tánaiste, Minister of Enterprise, Trade &Employment; Niall Crowley, CEO, EqualityAuthority ; Joan Carmichael, ICTU.

Phot

o To

mm

y C

lanc

y

Single equality legislation is, of course, already a factin Ireland, albeit in two separate statutes. The firstProgramme for Government of the Northern IrelandExecutive committed it to producing single equalitylegislation for Northern Ireland. Consultation by theOffice of the First Minister and Deputy FirstMinister on this took place in the middle of 2001and the timetable indicates that we should see theresults of this consultation in Spring 2002.

The EqualityCommission haspublished a positionpaper outlining itsthinking on many ofthe areas and alsoseeking views on someissues on which wehave yet to determineour position. TheEquality Authority hasalso completed itsreview of the legislationand published itsthinking, so themeeting was mosttimely.

Staff members EilisBarry of the EqualityAuthority and Petra Sheils of the EqualityCommission set the scene for our discussions. Theygave a brief outline of the relevant legislation and asummary analysis of the types of issues comingthrough individual complaints to both the EqualityCommission and the Equality Authority. Key issuesfor future legislative developments was then verymuch the focus of our discussions, which were mostvaluable in stimulating thinking around newdimensions such as protection againstdiscrimination on grounds of ‘other status’ and pastconvictions.

We were pleased that Professor Brice Dickson of theNorthern Ireland Human Rights Commission wasable to join us for our discussion on equality andhuman rights. Brice talked to us about theconsultative draft Bill of Rights which has beenproduced by the Northern Ireland Human RightsCommission, a wide-ranging set of proposalscovering socio-economic rights as well as civil andpolitical rights. There is a chapter on equality rights,and a number of aspects of the work covered by the

equality bodies is addressed in the proposed Bill ofRights. There was a fascinating discussion about theinterplay between equality work and human rightswork, and the relevance and timeliness of thediscussion was important to us as we develop ourresponse to the NIHRC proposals.

The final topic for the day was equalityproofing/equality impact assessment. Bronagh

Hinds, Deputy Chief Commissioner, led for theEquality Commission on this, together with DannyLambe, Director of Statutory Duty, and his deputyAubrey McCrory. They discussed the developmentof the Commission’s Guidelines to Equality ImpactAssessment, the processing of equality impactassessment statements and ongoing training. TheEquality Authority’s work on equality proofing withCounty & City Development Boards was presentedby Greg Heylin, Head of Development Section forthe Equality Authority, and again there was a usefuldiscussion on what both organisations are seeking toachieve through equality impact assessments andequality proofing.

The meeting was certainly an excellent opportunityto exchange information and ideas, and there is nodoubt that this important annual exchange will addvalue to the work each of us is doing in our ownjurisdictions. From our perspective, we valuedgreatly the opportunity to strengthen and deepenour relationship with the Equality Authority andlook forward to the return event later this year!

L-R: Niall Crowley, CEO, Equality Authority; Evelyn Collins, Chief Executive, EqualityCommission of Northern Ireland; Kate Hayes, Chair, Equality Authority; Denis HaugheyMLA, Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister; Joan Harbison, ChiefCommissioner, Equality Commission of Northern Ireland; Bronagh Hinds, Deputy ChiefCommissioner, Equality Commission of Northern Ireland.


[CASE REPORTS]

CASES HIGHLIGHTRACIALDISCRIMINATIONIN THE WORKPLACEThe Equality Authority welcomes the ODEIdecision in the Dr. Bennett Kim Heng Eng vs St.James Hospital which established paydiscrimination on the race ground. The successfulcase taken by Dr. Eng against St. James Hospital isa timely and important affirmation of the rights ofthird country nationals in Ireland.

The key findings of the Equality Officer include:

- National law governs the right and entitlementsof third country national resident in an EUmember state

- The EC Treaty cannot be relied on to justify thedisplacement of non-EU nationals in order togive priority to EU graduates in the allocation offunded intern positions. The Treaty does notrequire employers to discriminate against non-EU nationals.

The case raises the issue of the inequitableexperiences of foreign doctors in our healthsystem. Dr. Eng performed like work to his Irishcolleagues for no pay. The success of this case willhopefully stimulate a wide review and change inthe practices and policies that shape the experienceof foreign doctors. Dr Eng’s award includedarrears of salary, unrostered overtime and a weeklyliving out allowance.

Claims of discrimination in respect of equal payand equal treatment on the race ground alsofeatured in two unsuccessful cases taken by theEquality Authority on behalf of employees of theItalian Embassy in Dublin. The reason for the lackof success in these cases was that the ODEI foundthat they had "no jurisdiction to investigate thecomplainant’s substantive claim". The respondentargued that the Italian Embassy "had never waivedits right to avail of sovereign immunity in respectof any dealings it had with the complainant withregard to the employment relationship betweenthem". This was accepted by the ODEI and hencethe reason for the loss of the cases.

Workers in embassies should have the same rightsof protection given to all other employees whoserights are protected from discrimination undernational equality legislation. It is important thatsovereign immunity does not supersede the rightto equal treatment and equal pay in theworkplace.

In the light of these cases the Equality Authority iswriting to the Minister for Justice, Equality andLaw Reform to identify this problem and to seekan effective way of addressing this in any futurereview of the legislation.

PUB PRACTICESFOUND TO BEDISCRIMINATORYQuotas, Regulars only and Ban on accompaniedchildren outlawed

The Equality Authority welcomes three importantdecisions from the ODEI which deal withpublicans who operate quota systems, regularsonly policies, and blanket bans on parents whoseek service when accompanied by children under18 years old. The Equality Authority whichrepresented the claimants in two of the cases, andwas consulted on the third, welcom thesedecisions, one of which is the first such successfulcase under the family status ground.

These important cases reflect issues that requireurgent change. Pubs alongside hotels, restaurantsand nightclubs are important venues for socialinteraction. Denial of access to particular groupsin society effectively creates segregation thatdeepens the divisions in our society.

Publicans need to develop their knowledge of, andresponse to, obligations under the Equal StatusAct 2000. The Equality Authority will assist thisprocess with the publication of a code of practiceon access to pubs, hotels, nightclubs andrestaurants this year.

Michael Mc Donagh vs. The Castle Inn, Birr, Co.Offaly, Represented by the Equality Authority

Bernard, Richard and Thomas Joyce vs. LizDelaney’s Pub, Coolock, Dublin

These cases reveal strategies being used bypublicans seeking to circumvent the provisions ofthe Equal Status Act:-

- applying a regulars only excuse to refuse serviceto Travellers

- operating a quota system to limit the number ofTravellers being served

The quota system for Travellers was found to betotally contrary to the provisions of the EqualStatus Act, 2000. The Equality Officer stated "itis entirely inappropriate and unjustified for apublican to tar all members of the Travellercommunity however peaceable and responsible ,with the same brush, by refusing service toTravellers whom they did not know, andrestricting service even to Travellers whom they doknow, irrespective of any real risk of disorder".

{Note: in the Michael Mc Donagh case thepublican admitted to operating a quota systemwhereby no more than 5 Travellers were served inhis pub at any given time - no similar quotasystem is operated for settled people. MrMcDonagh had written to Mr Coffey throughForm ODEI 5 seeking an explanation of therefusal of service in good faith expecting aconciliatory reply. He had not expectedproceedings to go as far as the investigation. Hedid not receive a reply. Mr Coffey, whenquestioned as to why he did not reply said "whyshould I? ... I have enough to do". The complainant,a settled Traveller, was awarded £1,000 (1270Euro) in compensation and the respondent wasordered to immediately review his practices toensure compliance with the Equal Status Act inrespect of everyone seeking service in his pub.}

{Note: The Equality Authority was consulted bythe Joyces in their own case but was not involvedin their representation This case centred arounddiscrimination on the Traveller communityground. The respondents had admitted that a"judgement call" is usually made at the door as towhether an individual is admitted. If they are nothappy about a person’s "form" or "attitude" theysay that they usually use the "regulars only" excusefor refusing entry. The Equality Officer stated"also, from the evidence before me, I am satisfiedthat the respondents have no "regulars only"policy in place and that this excuse is used as a

equalitynews p29

ploy to deter people who, for some other reason,they do not approve of".}

John Maughan v the GlimmermanRepresented by the Equality Authority

The Equality Authority welcomed the first familystatus case under the Equal Status Act, 2000.

There was an error in the original press statementissued by the Equality Authority. The subsequentconfusion about the implications of this case isregretted by the Equality Authority.

The claimant who is visually impaired claimedthat he entered the Glimmerman pub with hiswife (who is also visually impaired) his thirteenyear old son and his guide dog. The claimantstated that he was refused service contrary to theEqual Status Act, 2000 because of his i) familystatus ii) his disability and iii) his membership ofthe Traveller community.

The respondent claimed that the reason thecomplainant was refused service was because it hasa no children policy and the claimant’s son keptcoming into the pub while the claimant was beingserved there. It claimed that in having a nochildren policy it is acting in good faith for thesole purpose of ensuring compliance with theLicensing Acts and is not in breach of the EqualStatus Act, 2000. The respondent also claimedthat when parents are consuming alcohol theytend not to supervise their children properly andthat its no children policy is also designed toprevent disorderly conduct on its premises. TheEquality Officer stated "I consider that having a blanket ban on under 18year olds being in pubs with their parents is adiscriminatory policy against parents of under 18year olds on the family status ground under theEqual Status Act, 2000".

However he added "... My findings on this point should not beinterpreted as meaning that publicans must serveparents when accompanied by their children under

TRAVELLERDISCRIMINATEDAGAINST BYSUPERMARKETCHAINThe Equality Authority welcomed the decisiontoday of the ODEI in favour of AnnMcDonagh in her case against Tesco Ireland Ltd.

The case is the first such case to be heard under theEqual Status Act. It is testament to the underspreaddiscrimination experienced by the TravellerCommunity and their ability to challenge this underthe new legislation. It must new serve as a wake-upcall to service providers to gear up for theirobligations under the Equal Status Act, to ensuretheir staff are trained in this area and to put in placeEqual Status Policies for their organisations.

The Director of Equality Investigations haspublished the first decision relating to asupermarket in an equal status case. The EqualStatus Act, 2000 outlaws discrimination includingmembership of the Traveller Community in theprovisions of goods, services, facilities and access toeducation, accommodation and clubs. AnnMcDonagh claimed that while shopping in Tesco,Waterford she was asked to leave the premises. Sheclaimed that this was on the grounds of hermembership of the Traveller community. Tescodenied this allegation and stated that thecomplainant was asked to leave because she hadbeen barred previously from the store. TheEquality Officer found that the complainant hadestablished a case of discrimination on the Travellercommunity ground and that there was insufficientevidence to support the supermarket’s case.

The Equality Officer ordered that Tesco IrelandLtd. provide the complainant with free shoppingin their Waterford stores to the value of £1,000(EURO 1270). He also ordered that Tesco IrelandLtd pay the complainant a further £1,500 (EURO1905) for the embarrassment and humiliationsuffered by her and for the loss of amenitysuffered by her since the date of the incident.

equalitynewsp28

18 years old in all circumstances. This is because theLicensing Acts require publicans to run orderly housesand to ensure that under 18 year olds do notconsume alcohol on their premises. The Equal StatusAct, 2000, has not changed their obligations in thisregard".

The Equality Officer then gave examples of whena publican would refuse service"For instance if a publican saw an under 18 yearold consuming alcohol on the premises whenaccompanied by a parent then the publican could beentitled to refuse service. Similarly a publicanwould be entitled to refuse service in other situationssuch as if a parent was drunk or if a parent or under18 year old were disorderly".

Guide DogsWhile the case did not succeed on the disabilityground or the Traveller community ground, it hasusefully established that facilitating the presence ofa guide dog is a necessary reasonableaccommodation for people with disabilities. TheEquality Officer stated "I consider that allowing aguide dog into a pub with a visually impairedperson is special treatment without which itwould be impossible or unduly difficult for thevisually impaired person to avail of the service".

TRAVELLER WINSFIRST EMPLOYMENTDISCRIMINATIONCASEDISABLED MANWINS EQUALITYCASETwo cases, one represented by the EqualityAuthority have been upheld in decisions made bythe ODEI. A Traveller who was discriminatedagainst in accessing employment in a hotel hassuccessfully won her case and an award of £5,000in compensation. A disabled man has beenawarded £8,000 for discrimination under theEmployment Equality Act against a firm.

These are both groundbreaking cases taken by theEquality Authority to re-enforce the anti-discrimination provisions that protect Travellersand disabled people in access and carrying outtheir employment.

The Traveller case reveals for the first time, in theoperation of the legislation, the barriers faced byTravellers seeking employment and the economicindependence that flows from employment.Discrimination against Travellers in accessingemployment is illegal and the Authority hopesthat this case sends out a clear message in thisregard to employers and to Travellers who havebeen discouraged by previous experience ofdiscrimination from seeking employment.

The disability case, taken by SIPTU highlights thevaluable provision in the Employment EqualityAct that requires employers to make reasonableaccommodation for employees with disabilities.This requirement is crucial if we are to change thedisabling environment experienced by so manypeople with disabilities in their search foremployment.

pre-operative [ seehttp://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/TS.html]. In Ireland the figures should be lower because ofthe pressure on transsexual people to leave thecountry because of lack of health care, socialexclusion, lack of legal recognition by thegovernment and lack of rights of any description.

These are the difficulties we face, so what is thesolution? Firstly the State needs to ratifyRecommendation 1117 and vigorously implement

all its points. Secondly society needs to wake up tothe realities of the human condition and realise thatall that is different is not automatically bad orwrong. Really that is it, there are fewer complexitiesto transsexualism than we have been lead to believeand as with all equality issues the solutions are quitesimple, accept people as you find them, without preconceptions. After all Transsexual people only want alevel playing field and a chance to be in the gameand play fairly.

By Diane Richards-Hughes & Andrea BrownPress for Change (Ireland).Although Transsexual people or persons withGender Identity Disorder (GID) as we are nowcalled, have been here since the beginning ofcivilisation, it is only recently we have looked atourselves and our rights issues.

To help you understand what this condition isabout I will give a brief summary of current medicalknowledge regarding this much misunderstoodmedical condition. For many years it was thoughtthat Transsexualism was a mental illness or psychosisand only recently completed research has revealedthe realities of Transsexualism. Work carried out inHolland by Drs Gooren and Swaab [ seehttp://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/85/5/2034 ] revealed that Transsexualism is related to brainstructure and is therefore physiologically based, thedistress suffered by Transsexual people comes fromthe mismatch of brain and body, to use the oldcliché "trapped in the body of the opposite sex" isfairly becoming a valid statement.

Now to the issue of rights and equality. Transsexualpeople have over the last three decades been gainingthere rights all over the world, in most of Europe,Russia, Ukraine, Turkey and South Africa, except theUK and Republic of Ireland. In Europe the Councilof Europe have established guidelines on thecondition of Transsexual people. This was drawn upin 1989. The European states were keen to agree thispackage of equality measures, however the UK andthe Republic of Ireland were two of these states whorefused to implement the recommendations laiddown in Recommendation 1117.

By any standard Recommendation 1117 is a verywell thought out document and covers all the mainareas of life where Transsexual people find themselvesdisadvantaged by prejudice. Significantly the right to

medical treatment for the condition is covered byRecommendation 1117, Health care for Transsexualpeople is almost non-existent in the Republic ofIreland, despite the known success of treatment andexcellent cost effectiveness. Other areas covered atlength are the right to have Birth certificatescorrected (not yet available in Ireland), rights toprivacy and the right to be free from discriminationin accordance with Article 14 of the EuropeanConvention Human Rights.

Unfortunately Transsexual people resident in Irelanddo not get a very good deal from society. We have nodirect right to healthcare despite the known high riskof suicide, the risks surrounding the way society andgovernment treats transsexual people are very real.Unemployment is between 60-80% in persons whohave the courage to undergo treatment. Socialexclusion is very commonplace and violence againsttranssexual people is distressingly high. SadlyTranssexuals bear this kind of treatment by societywith great stoicism, believing that no one cares,simply because successive Governments have nottaken our needs seriously and ratifiedRecommendation 1117 putting Ireland alongside theUnited Kingdom in refusing rights for transsexualpeople in stark contrast to other European countries,on this important rights issue.

Of course it is believed that one is more likely tomeet pixies than to come across a transsexual personin everyday life. This is not so, on out dated figuresthere would be 500 transsexual people in theRepublic of Ireland.

The percentage of the population actually affected byGender Identity Disorder or Transsexualism nowseems to be a lot higher than the 1:30,000 quoted inthe 1960's, it has since dropped in the 1980's to1:11,900. Since then calculations in the UnitedStates alone are putting it at 1:2500 people in theUnited States who have been gender reassigned,based on the number of actual gender reassignmentoperations, this of course leaves out people who havecommitted suicide or died of natural causes, when

equalitynewsp30

VIEWPOINT: TRANSSEXUAL PEOPLE - THE LAST MINORITY

COMBAT POVERTY AGENCYGRANTS SCHEME 2002-2004

WORKING AGAINST POVERTY

A grants scheme to support community andvoluntary groups to influence policy.

This grant scheme is for community and voluntarygroups working to tackle poverty or the effects ofpoverty. It aims to support groups to effectivelyinfluence policy at local, regional, or national levelsin a number of ways: training in how to influencepolicy; carrying out and publishing research;evaluating the impact of actions, running seminarsand conferences which engage policy makers;contributing to consultation processes, analysingpolicies and making submissions.

2002 deadlines for applications are: 27th March and18th September

For Grants Scheme information brochures &application forms please contact:• Annmarie Wallace Tel: 01 6026623

Email: [email protected]• Anne Bride Tel: 01 6026629

Email: [email protected]

at the Combat Poverty Agency, BridgewaterCentre, Conyngham Road, Islandbridge, Dublin 8.

Enterprise LevelEquality Reviews and Action Plans

What are Equality Reviews and Action Plans?An Equality Review is a comprehensive examination of thepolicies, practices, procedures and perceptions impacting onequality within the workplace. An action plan defines thegoals and steps necessary to promote equality and betteraccommodate diversity in the workplace.

Equality Reviews and Action Plans are the means by whichemployers and employees can develop effective practice inemployment equality.

Is your organisation:• Committed to equality, particularly in relation to women,• Willing to work in partnership to progress this agenda,• Open to the provision of funded expertise to progress you

along the way?

If so, this scheme may well be for you. It provides:• Funding for an Equality Auditor from an existing panel,• A template from which your organisation and the Auditor

will work,• A review report and an agreed action plan,• An external review of implementation of your action plan

after an agreed time.

Organisations in the public, private and voluntary sectors areinvited to seek an application form and information sheet from:

The Equality Authority, 2 Clonmel Street, Dublin 2.Telephone: (01) 4173360/4173363E-mail: [email protected]

Funded by the Government under the National DevelopmentPlan 2000-2006, under the Equality for Women Measure ofthe Regional Operational Programmes. Implemented by theEquality Authority on behalf of the Department of Justice,Equality and Law Reform.

equalitynews p31

equalitynewsp32

University CollegeDublin

EQUALITY STUDIES

Applications are invited for the

• Masters Degree in Equality Studies &• Higher Diploma in Equality Studies

The only programme of its kind in Ireland, EqualityStudies provides students with a unique andchallenging opportunity to examine a wide range ofequality, human rights and social justice issues.Courses are taught by staff from the disciplines ofsociology, economics, law, education, politics, socialpolicy, development and women's studies. Thecourses may be taken on a 1year full-time or 2 yearpart-time (evening) basis.

The four major themes are:• Social Class Structures and Equality• Gender Inequalities • Global North/South Inequalities and Development• Minorities and Discrimination (including racism,

ageism, disability, language and sexualities)

The Equality Studies Centre also welcomesapplications from those interested in undertaking aPh.D. Degree by research.

Details from: The Secretary, Equality StudiesCentre, Library Building, University CollegeDublin, Belfield, Dublin 4. Telephone: (01) 7167104. Fax: (01) 716 1107. Email:[email protected]. WWW:http://www.ucd.ie/~esc/

Application deadline: Friday, May 3rd 2002. Lateapplications may be considered, subject to theavailability of places.

EVENTS/DIARY

A second annual Family Friendly Workplace /work life balance day will be held on Friday 1March 2002. If you need more information onfamily friendly/work life balance arrangementsor why they might be relevant to yourorganisation, visit our website:www.familyfriendly.ie. If you do not have accessto the family friendly website, you can registeran event by email to [email protected].

The MPHIL in Ethnic and Racial Studies at theDepartment of Sociology, Trinity College areannouncing a public seminar entitled "Re-mapping Dublin: Spatial narratives of racialisedethnic minorities, anti-racism organisations anddisaporic communities in a changing city.Lecture Room 3, Panoz Institute, TrinityCollege. The seminar will take place on 16thFebruary 2002, between 9.00am and 18.00pm.And further information can be obtained fromDr Ronit Lentin at the Department ofSociology, TCD at 6032766 or e-mail [email protected]. admission is free.

The Equality Studies Centre at UCD haveannounced a series of Public Lectures forFebruary and March 2002. Professor Jan Pahlof the School of Social and Public Policy,University of Kent, Canterbury will speak on"Widening the Scope of Social Policy; FinancialServices and the impact of Technology" and onthe 7th March Paula Casal of the University ofKeele will speak on "Equality ofConsumption". The lectures will take place inRoom B101 (John Henry Newman/Arts Block1st Floor) at 7.30pm.

David Begg Equality at the Enterprise Level

Documents