Introduction to the research - Newcastle

Research findings and implications

Managing the interface: sexual orientation and faith

Ian Gittens

Research aims and objectives

Address the research gap and:

• gain a better understanding of the experiences and challenges in the workplace and learner environment

• explore issues relating to conflicts/interrelations between sexual orientation and faith/belief

• use the findings to develop practical guidance for the FE and HE sectors in England.

Methodology

• Mix of quantitative and qualitative• Literature and research review• Two online surveys - staff and learners (797)• 1:1 interviews (43) 7 stakeholder organisations• Focus groups (10 with 111 participants)

Staff profile

LGB and heterosexual staff in the survey :

• 49% of bisexual staff in the survey worked in a university; 13% in FE

• 52% of gay men in the survey worked in a university; 11% in FE

• 32% heterosexual people surveyed worked in university; 48% in FE

• 56% of lesbian women in the survey worked in a university; 16% in FE

• 15% of university staff preferred not to indicate their sexual orientation along with 58% of those working in FE

Interface operates at 6 levels

• Within individuals• Between individuals• Between groups and individuals• Between groups• Between groups and organisations• Between organisations

Staff survey findings• 20% saw no particular challenges in managing relationships

between LGB staff and staff of different faiths /beliefs • 31% did not think there were tensions or conflicts between LGB staff

and staff of faith/belief• 30% perceive good relations between staff and learners of different

sexual orientation and those of different faiths or beliefs; 4% disagreed

• 42% of Christians and 22% of those with no faith/ belief agreed that good relations existed in their workplace; nearly 25% of LGB staff agreed with this view

• no clear evidence of structured approaches to applying

policies and procedures to resolve tensions/conflicts.

Staff views‘We need to anticipate the likelihood of this type of problem getting worse. I need a …policy to help me deal with it and then I need training to help me implement the policy effectively. I want to be able to put gay learners at ease and make sure that no one is allowed to exclude anyone in the group. I will need to challenge the homophobia, and that is quite scary.’

‘This is where the core values of the university take precedence over diversity. We are being asked to choose between competing differences. Whose freedom takes precedence here – the gay learner or the religious learner who objects to being in contact with them? The university equality policy should make this clear and confront this type of issue. We are not talking about an approach to diversity that is about the survival of the fittest. It should be about respect for difference, within a context of academic and other policy laid down by the university.’

Staff views‘There is ignorance, misunderstanding and confusion as to the differences between beliefs or faiths and how sexual orientation can be openly discussed in the college. This creates and intensifies the challenges that emerge in the organisation.’

University, West Midlands

‘We have some staff and volunteers with strong Christian or Muslim beliefs which mean they find issues of sexual orientation difficult.’

Sixth Form College, North East

‘There is an assumption that lesbian, gay and bisexual staff are not religious. I am Christian and bisexual. I get harassment from both straight and gay people all the time for having a belief in the first place, or for making a mockery of their beliefs by not being straight.’

University, Greater London

‘There is not any tension between the two groups that we are aware of. I think this is because we take a secular position. We do have a very small number of staff who refuse to undergo equality and diversity training on sexual orientation on religious grounds and we are in active discussion with them about it. But this is a handful of people in the whole college. There does not seem to be any real tension between the strands’

Vice Principal, FE college

Learner survey findings • 41% perceive mutually respectful relationships between

LGB learners and those of different faiths/beliefs• 9% had experienced tensions or conflicts between staff

and learners of different sexual orientations and those of different faiths or beliefs

• 9% experienced conflicts between staff and learners based on these characteristics; 65% said they had not

• 60% said the relationship between equality LGB and faith/belief equality had no impact on learning quality; 7% positive effect, 4% negative effect.

Managing learner complaints‘I was concerned that my fears would simply be rubbished by someone who fundamentally failed to understand them and was not willing to make any effort to understand them. I had complained earlier and was ignored. I also witnessed staff attitudes to students that complained.’

FE College, London

‘Unfortunately, I had no firm tangible evidence to take my concerns through to a complaints process. However, I have voiced my concerns, which were listened to, but failed to have actions taken.’

University, South West region

‘[I attend a] Christian dominated university - although a secular institution there is a very strong Christian tradition. Who do you turn to when you feel that Christian 'values' are persecuting you as a gay pagan? Dilemma’.

University, South West region

Managing the interface

‘LGBT and religion are kept in the closet with the door padlocked. I suggested Student Learning advisors should discus a LGBT leaflet in a 121 with each student so LGBT students would feel staff were friendly and homophobes would realise their attitude was unacceptable. Staff stated it was not necessary.’

FE College, London

‘[The] LGBT society has a faith section in their handbook and website; they also have faith related activities. They are working with the Student Union and the multi-faith chaplaincy to gain support and make their activities more high profile etc.’

University, South West

Examples of effective practice

• Multi-faith centre in NW English university• Chaplaincy in an East of England FE college• Chaplaincy in NE English FE college• Security guard training in SW English

university• Numerous students’ unions - debates, joint

campaigning

Role of the law• Law likely to support a provider requiring an

individual to comply with an equality policy with which they disagree so long as doing so is a proportionate and justifiable means of achieving the legitimate aims of promoting equal opportunities and tackling discrimination

• Tribunals reluctant to give latitude to homophobic actions apparently based on religious beliefs of perpetrators

Balancing priorities‘We obviously earn a huge amount of money from overseas learners. This is big money we are talking about. Senior staff were really worried that if we were seen as having lots of gays the Muslim  learners would just go elsewhere. It’s as simple as that. The government spending cuts have made this type of thinking more influential.’

‘… I think real-politics takes over. Money is the driver that moves things. It’s as simple as that.’

‘… I don’t think that we will be prosecuted for not promoting lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender history month. We may lose out in the money department if we do promote it, or so the thinking goes.’

 University Managers’ focus group

Approaches to managing the interface

• Clear, comprehensive, embedded, well led inclusive culture and policy

• Clear and effective discipline and grievance procedures• Standard application of existing procedures and policies• Equality impact assessment as an organisational

development rather than compliance tool • Overarching culture of equality and inclusion• Staff training• Staff support

Interventions to manage the interface

• Funding of learner societies conditional on compliance with equality and diversity policies

• Learner and staff charters/codes to require compliance with equality and diversity policy

• Embedding in staff and learner induction• Anticipatory arrangements that may involve

enlisting stakeholder expertise.

Main findings • Small amount of good practice found in sector organisations • anticipated tensions/conflicts less than the actual incidents found in practice• Significant numbers of LGB staff and learners of faith/belief in the sector;

often conflicted and split between these two identities in the work/learning environment

• Strands treated as separate and often incompatible • Responses to academic disruption have been indecisive and uneven, often

inhibited by a fear of increasing conflict between the two equality groups• When problems arise they are often not managed or resolved by the

learning provider• The interplay between these two areas impacts on sector employment,

teaching and learning, and the experience of working and

studying in the sector.

Strategic leadership and management

• FEC Governing bodies and university senates are well placed for an effective strategic leadership role in management of the interface

• some evidence that learning providers tend to rank and prioritise the different equality strands

• a widespread failure to apply existing procedures and policies to managing the interface between sexual orientation equality and equality on the grounds of faith or belief.

Conclusion

• The challenge for all learning providers is to deal with these complex relationships in ways that ensure the values and presence of both groups are respected, whilst at the same time neither group feels unfairly treated or discriminated against (ECU)

• Empowering individuals to manage conflicts within the law and within a framework of respect for difference – beyond compliance

• Requirement for the success of a modern,

diverse, democracy.

www.slideshare.net/managingtheinterface