Policing the equality beast

Whilst awareness and understanding of the changes to the equality landscape are vital to achieve a more engaged and responsive policing service, it is the police officer that is left to provide that visible assurance to the local community. Constables may have browsed their force websites but few will have been able to find the new Equality Act changes displayed so here are the main ones

The 1st of October 2010 was arguably a seminal day in the equality landscape, not because many of the substantive provisions of the Equality Act 2010 became effective but because it brought a level of coherence
and fairness to many individuals in society who, historically, have been subject to disadvantage and unfair treatment.

Whilst many occupations engage to some extent the wider public, and others very
specific parts of society, policing has traditionally been one
of the few public-sector organisations that operates across
all of society, at all levels, regardless of status.

Whilst the office of constable has been traditionally somewhat
distanced from that of the police-staff employee, and for good reason, the struggle between pay and conditions and the absence of many substantive employment rights may soon need to resolved.

Notwithstanding the generalised relationship between industrialist and free employee, in the widest sense of course,
the Equality Act will no doubt impact on all staff groups across the Police Service along with the public they are there to protect.

Although policy, principle and rhetoric are likely to form
the foundation of all strategically espoused equality and
diversity programmes, the realworld operating environment of
the police constable is substantively where the tangible results of customer satisfaction are played out.

The patrolling constable will no doubt today, as with yesterday
and the day before that, meet the community that has been conditioned to expect so much from the modern police service.

Customer satisfaction, although assessed across a
variety of platforms, is largely driven by the “street-level interaction” and such interactions have long-been the sole
and exclusive domain of the patrolling constable.

With little more than a couple of compliance-based diversity
awareness attendances, it is cultural exposure and a large
application of common sense that bonds those interactions
between the community and the Police Service.

The Sherpa van, flared trousers and meticulously maintained
moustache, although romanticised by many, have been appropriately fossilized to the 1970’s model of policing, but notwithstanding such stereotypical symbols of male dominance, matters of fairness in the workplace and that of wider society have longbeen a prominent theme for legislators.

The 70’s birthed the vast majority of equality and diversity-
based legislation, which has traditionally centred itself on the relationship between employer and employee but, alongside such, has ridden a similarly thematic programme of public engagement and service.

The Equality Act 2010 came into effect in April this year,
with many of its provisions being either delayed or subject
to later consideration / implementation. The vast majority of those delayed provisions became effective on 1 October 2010, with the remaining provisions – although no less important – being tentatively scheduled for April 2011.

The Act itself was designed as a consolidating instrument,
bringing together 30 years of important, but nevertheless
disjointed, equality-based provisions. Although repealing a large amount of former equality-based statutes, the vast majority of the former protections remain within the new Act and are complimented and strengthened by an array of changes.

Whilst many of the additions relate to the relationship of employer and employee and, by correlation, that of “constable”, several new provisions relate specifically to the duties of public bodies.

The new Act provides a onestop shop of formalised equality
provisions, together in a comprehensive format, enabling
the public and employee an accessible way to understand the variety of protections afforded to them in a variety of
environments.

Main changes to Act
The Act introduces the widening of “protected characteristic”
which now includes age, disability, gender reassignment,
marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.

Protection for persons with disabilities, both physical and
mental, have been widened and, except in limited circumstances, employers will now be unable to use medical questionnaires to screen people out for offers of employment.

Discrimination
Provisions previously required persons with specified characteristics to complain on a sole ground to their employer, meaning a variety of actions, now a claim can be engaged based on one or more protected characteristics. For example, a police officer could now claim gender and disability-based discrimination in one claim.

The definition of direct discrimination is now simplified to “less favourable treatment” because of a protected characteristic, such as gender.

Discrimination based on “association” across all protected
characteristics will now be actionable. This could apply in a situation where an employee receives less favourable treatment because of a relative who is disabled and the need for them to provide care for the relative.

Indirect discrimination protection is now afforded to
all protected characteristics where, previously, not all were
protected.

Socio-economic inequality
Probably one of the more important duties for police services
in relation to public engagement, although not yet in force, requires the majority of public-sector bodies to take into account the impact of their policies and actions on socioeconomic inequality.

In essence, police forces will need to consider whether a policy requirement disproportionately affects people from poorer socio-economic communities.

Positive action
Where an employer has a reasonable belief that a person with a protected characteristic is disadvantaged, has different needs, or is disproportionately underrepresented in the workforce, the employer may undertake proportionate activities to enable and encourage that person to overcome such disadvantage or to encourage participation.

This is likely to form a substantive part in many police recruitment programmes and, specifically, in relation to hardto-
reach members of the local community.

Despite earlier recommendations, the Act currently does not provide for employers to positively discriminate against
employees or applicants for employment who are equally
qualified or otherwise (with the exception of specified occupations and genuine occupational requirements).

Equality duty
Whilst not yet in force, a duty on a wide range of public bodies, including private-sector bodies contracted for such duties, to promote and support activities across all of the protected characteristics and to produce schemes that support such and monitor disproportionality of outcomes.

Does it all matter?
For the police forces that are truly engaged with the concepts
of fairness and equality, 1 October 2010 should have been a
profound date for their equality and diversity advisers.

Many, no doubt, will have been providing awareness and
implementation training to all uniformed police officers and
staff about the changes to the equality landscape, whilst others were busy reviewing all of those other statutory-based
duties required under previous equality provisions.

And whilst the most conscientious of constables may have
been regularly browsing their local force websites, few will
have been able to find the new changes prominently displayed,
if at all.

Structural adaptations are likely to be a substantive part of
the overall change programme for many police forces, but
equality and fairness are more qualitative concepts that are
found not at policy or managerial level but that of the street-level environment.

Fairness, although arguably a matter of subjective interpretation, is something that policy cannot easily dictate and is something best grown within a culture of understanding and meaningful dialogue.

Equality, fairness and diversity are all core facets of modernday
public engagement and not things that can be easily driven, or indeed achieved, through programmes of adherence.

Financial boundary
With efficiency savings amidst, one asks whether equality and
diversity should be more embedded across the operational
landscape rather than at policy level.

It is incredibly difficult to ascertain the financial boundary of the formal equalities programme and even more difficult to specify the evidenced correlation between operational effectiveness and such allocation.

In an era of financial tightening, whilst change, both structurally and culturally, will occur (and for some police forces quicker than others) does the way that police forces enunciate equalities need to be driven down to a more tangible operational level with the onus on front-line supervisors and
managers to take ownership of such, rather than where it currently sits?

As with all changes across the policing landscape, it will be for
the more engaged and diverse force leaders to break free from
the past and lead others to a new community lead model.

Policing is fundamentally about oral communication and
community exposure and, notwithstanding policing pledges
and glossy target-orientated brochures and policing plans,
that communication will continue to require policewomen and
policemen.

Both in deployment and recruitment, the Police Service must continue to attract from the widest and most diverse
communities. As police forces drive down expenditure, they will be under enormous pressure to ensure that services remain
evenly deployed across all communities.

Whilst awareness and understanding of these important
changes is vital in achieving a more engaged and responsive
policing service, it is nevertheless the police officer that is left to provide that visible assurance to the local community
neighbourhood.

By Mark Harron LLB/Hons, barrister, postgrad researcher, police organisational diversity and change. Mark is also a member of a not-forprofit organisational diversity consultancy.

Top Back to Features Home