ABSTRACT:

C hangeable employee’s demographics and new organizational

structure are increasing the diversity of work teams in general and
administrative teams in particular. Given these modifications, work teams
that are varied in terms of sex, race, ethnicity, national origin, area of
expertise, organizational relationship and much other private
distinctiveness are increasingly widespread. The main intention of this
paper is to present a framework for understanding the dynamics of
diversity with respect to equality and employment policy of UNITED
KINGDOM.

INTRODUCTION:

UK culture is becoming more composite and varied. On the whole

population is increasing, UK population is culturally dissimilar. New
directions of immigration have affected homogenous society in different
ways. Uniform treatment to people is indispensible for successful and
dynamic organization. The beginning of equality and diversity has resulted
in the elimination of large amount of dissimilarity in the organization. The
UK employers now intend to formulate the equalities fundamentals to
their service practice. This will make sure a varied labour force that
reproduces the society in which they serve.

The general structure for equal conduct and behaviour at work place
include discrimination against workforce at work on the basis of age,
disability, race and religion. With respect to gender, race and disability,
public establishments have broad and precise responsibilities to
proactively encourage equal opportunity throughout their activities. They
should reveal how they attain this diversity and equality plan that they are
officially make to produce. The long-term achievement of any industry
entitle for a varied bulk of talent that can take new ideas, viewpoint and
vision to their employment. The challenge that diversity causes, thus, is
facilitate your executives to capitalize on the mix up of genders, cultural
conditions, ages and standard of living to react to business prospect more
quickly and resourcefully (Lindenberger and Loike 2009).

Concept of diversity:

The expression diversity has small history in behavioral sciences and is

not (so far) a systematic build. Instead, it is a daily phrase that jump to life
rather freshly, encourage by extensive media exposure of the "managing
diversity" actions that organizations are take up in response to altering
labor force demographics.
Anderson and Metcalfe (2003), summing up their conclusion, have
indicated that the evidence that diversity can deliver a business benefit is
complex, arguing that a lot of workforces are diverse in a range of both
undetectable and reputable grouping (see Table). The very diversity of the
work and the way that different forms of diversity are articulated mean
more work is needed to examine causal linkages between diversity and
industry upshot.

Social category diversity Demographic differences

Informational diversity Organizational differences
Value diversity Psychological differences
Table: A diverse workforce include different types of diversity

FRAMEWORK OF DIVERSITY:

According to Edwards (2010) workplace diversity refers to range of

dissimilarity among people and organization. For example one
organization having varied races, genders, age and ethnicities of
workforce, education, illustrate the phenomenon of diversity. A number of
regulations need to involve in workplace to be diverse. This means that
company employ more than one race, sexual category and certain age
grouping. When workplace is diverse it demonstrate that organization is
true equal opportunity employer that employ people with diverse
backgrounds and raced instead of discriminating against a specific
individual.

Creating a diversity and equality strategy for an organization may

consider as a fussy trouble. On the other hand there are different
excellent motives for an employer to develop a diversity and equality
policy for an organization. Few motives include like in general, it is against
the law to discriminate in recruitment matters on the basis of race, colour,
nationality, sex and religion. Likewise by building the practice of diversity
in an organization may benefit in terms of its customer relations and wide
range of skills and experience.

In theory diversity search for heterogeneity while in practice human

resource system permits similarity or homogeneity (Ferris et al, 1993). A
dissimilar labour force turns into a crisis as HR staff recruits persons with
an ability to do the job. Regardless of this perception generates positive
discrimination. In diversity managing strategy, training is indispensable
for culture modification. Culture transformation is focussed equally to the
employer and workforce. Owners and workforce have to recognize and
add knowledge about diversity management policies. It is acknowledged
that members of the organization receiving diversity guidance develop
their approach in the direction of each other (Maxwell, 2004).

Diversity concerns with like large organisations and small organization

consists of law-making requirements for equal employment chance and
anti-discrimination. Equivalent employment legislatives can be costly for
company when violate. These laws restore inequality and discrimination to
defend weak members of the culture. The laws include the Race Relations
Act 1976 (RRA), designed for supporting equality. The Sex Discrimination
Act 1975 (SDA) designed to diminish gender intolerance. The sex
discrimination law become unsuccessful to deal with community problems
especially facing women. The RRA disregarded to undertake
institutionalised favouritism (Bamforth 1996, MacPherson Report 1999).
Therefore issues of diversity and discrimination have anxiety for tolerance
of individual differentiation, communicating with and motivating varied
labour force.

Moreover, The Workplace Employment Relations Survey (Cully et al 1998)

highlighted another significant problem in terms of equality as only 64 per
cent of the survey companies had policies on equal opportunities. CIPD
research (2005), Discrimination and the Law: does the system suit the
purpose?, argue that, although law may be an enabler, it can also hinder
progress, mostly when the law is badly designed.

‘The number of women directors involved in running Britain’s biggest

businesses has been in steady decline for the last three years … Among
the largest firms listed in the London Stock Exchange; only 57 per cent
have a female representative on the board, according to a study
published by Cranfield University’s school of management. This compares
with 58 per cent of FTSE 100 companies last year and 64 per cent in 1999.
Of this small band of women directors, more than 85 per cent occupy
part-time, non-executive roles. Only 10 women hold executive positions –
and they are outnumbered, by their male colleagues, by more than 17 to
one’ (Connon 2001).

Organisations utilize a variety of means when recruiting. Training may be

given to active workforce to extend them to fit the ability and desires for
the new employment. Or new people from external environment may be
required for organisation to fill up positions. The reality that small and
micro organization has few employees makes it hard to extend an internal
labour market. Comparatively, statistics demonstrate that small
organization were less probable to provide preference to in-house
applicants than medium organization. Notably a highest figure of small
firms relied on external labour market for new aptitude and expertise
(Beekie, 1997).
On the other hand, there is also confirmation that a lot of the strategies
lack preparation and material (Hoque and Noon 2004) because they are
not maintained by organization. Most intermediate firms require particular
measures to help ethnic minorities or disabled people in getting jobs.
Conversely, workplaces lacking official procedures distinguish equality
and diversity. For example, 91 percent of small firms address gender as
an issue of discrimination.

Where the workplaces have an official printed EO (Equal opportunity)

policy, managers were requested how it was corresponded to workforce.
The large common way of communication is through the agreement of
service, staff manual and training. These conclusions maintain the
significance of training as a way for bringing in new employees into the
organisation (Armstrong 2003).

To discuss the framework of diversity the office of National Statistics

illustrates the diversity structure of UK. To make and examine our
tactical approach and make sure we meet our legal obligations, National
Statistics have a complete organized structure which is directed by
Stephen Penneck, Director General and ONS diversity champion. Stephen
chairs the Equality and Diversity Steering Group (EDSG) which meet
periodical and reports through the Executive Committee to the ONS
board. Members of the group include:

• our three site diversity champions

• three senior managers
• three workers at any level
• a trade union spokesperson
• the diversity advisor (Internet, 2010)

The EU has an important impact on UK employment law and employee

rights, sometimes on time major alterations in the UK.

EU directions comprise laws on:

• collective redundancies
 • transfer of undertakings (TUPE)
• data protection
• discrimination (gender, racial and ethnic origin, disability, age,
religion/belief and sexual orientation)
• employee human rights in the event of employer bankruptcy at
work
• equivalent pay
• wellbeing and safety
• information and discussion (both national level and European Works
Councils as well as conference in the event of collective
redundancies, mergers and takeovers)
• protection of 'atypical' workers (for example part-time, fixed-term
and teleworkers)
• security of pregnant personnel
• safety of young employees
• rights of workers move within the EU and to the EU from third
countries
• temporary agency workers
• Working time (a proposed revision is under consideration) (CIPD,
2009).

Diversity and employment policy:

AGE DISCRIMINATION
Age discrimination happens when someone is unlawfully disadvantaged
for reasons, which cannot be independently justified, relating to their age.
It can:

• influence anybody despite of how old they are

• unfavorably affect employment opportunity, particularly those of
older people and younger people
• Result in failure to believe personal aptitude, prospective and
practice in Legislation making age discrimination unlawful was introduced in 2006 in the
 Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006. These Regulations are now incorporated in the

Equality Act 2010.employment and training declaration (CIPD, 2010).

Legislation making age discrimination illegitimate was introduced in 2006

in the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006. These set of laws are
now included in the Equality Act 2010. One review carried out with the Chartered
Management Institute (CMI) examines the attitudes of HR professionals and managers to older
workers, how equipped organisations are to cope with an ageing workforce, and the impact on HR
policies and practices.

Recruitment and selection

Age, age-related measure or age ranges should not be used in adverts

apart from to encourage applications from age groups which do not
usually apply. While such forms of encouragement through positive action
are lawful, positive discrimination is not and employers need to make sure
they treat everyone fairly despite of their age, especially when trying to
equalize inequality in the average age of their workforces.

Training and development

Employees of all ages should be entitled for training and development

plan. The mechanical elimination of age groups, such as those near
leaving, is not only potentially illegally discriminatory but also guide to a
breakdown to make the best use of talent and can stop people from
making improved assistance and adding greater significance to business
presentation.

Commitment towards removal of age discrimination in service as it is

inefficient for aptitude and destructive to both persons and organizations.
The use of age, age group and age-related criteria reduces neutrality in
employment decision-making and boost the possibility of improper result
which can damage organizational performance and spoil corporate
Reputation if legal state is brought.
Employment assessment based on age is never reasonable because:

• age is not a authentic employment principle

• age is a poor analyst of presentation
• it is misleading to equate physical and mental ability with age
• When age is used, it tends to be a alternative for essential feature
such as health or ability to drive.

EXAMPLE OF DIVERSITY PRACTICE:

Age no limit at Tesco

‘It is attitude, not age that makes for great service for our customer’ says
Tesco, and this opinion is shared by its staff. Margarette Spencer,
employee (age 76) says, ‘I enjoy working and I meet new people each
day. My job keeps my mind active and stops me from growing old. Tesco
didn’t care how old I was. I wanted to work and they gave me the
opportunity.’ Recent research has taught us that, not only do shoppers
like dealing with staff of all ages, but employees from all age groups
consistently state that they enjoy working in an age-diverse team’ (Age
positive 2005).

CONCLUSION:

Clearly, managing diversity well is providing greater opportunities to

organisations, and businesses are experiencing better performance,
greater market awareness and are more innovative and responsive. The
financial performance is a consequence of good business practice and
market conditions. There is growing evidence linking cost reductions,
efficiency improvements and a more effective business philosophy to the
management of diversity.

Diversity is central to business strategy because universal language

means everyone can talk, exchange and contribute, and this has
implications for leadership, change and control.The proficient and
effectual use of people’s skills need that employment decisions should be
based on competencies, qualifications, skills, potential and objective job-
related criteria obtained through careful analysis of job requirements and
job performance.
The author consider that there is an significant business case for employer
to get rid of age discrimination and has carry out research and published
direction to raise consciousness and educate human resources
practitioners and employers about the issues implicated.

The long-term success of any business calls for a diverse body of talent
that can bring fresh ideas, perspectives and views and a corporate
mindset that values those views. It's also no secret that the lack of
diversity can affect your ability to communicate effectively with diverse
clients. Link your diversity strategies to specific goals like morale,
retention, performance and the bottom line. Build your business with
everything you’ve got, with the complex multi-dimensional talents and
personalities of your workforce, and make diversity work for you.
Edwards, T. (2010)
Read more: What Is the Definition of Workplace Diversity? | eHow.co.uk
http://www.ehow.co.uk/about_5154350_definition-workplace-
diversity.html#ixzz15kWkYRDz

Greenberg, J. (2006)

http://www.diversityworking.com/employerZone/diversityManagement/?id=9

http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?
site=181&r.s=m&r.l1=1073858787&r.lc=en&r.l2=5000751016&r.i=500075352
4&type=RESOURCES&itemId=5000753320&r.t=RESOURCES

Ferris, G.R., Frink, D.D and Galang, C (1993), Diversity in the workplace: the
human resources management challenges, Human Resource Planning, Vol.16
(1): pp 41-52

Maxwell, G.A (2004), Minority report: taking the initiative in managing

diversity at BBC Scotland, Employee Relations, Vol. 26 (2): pp182-202

Bamforth, N (1996), Limits of anti-discrimination law. In Dine, J and Watt, B

(eds) Discrimination Law concepts, Limitations and Justifications, Longman,
UK

Beekie, R (1997), Diversity training’s big lie, Training, Vol. 34 (2): pp 122-123

Armstrong, M, (2003), A handbook of human resource management practice,

9th ed., London, Kogan

Hoque, K. and Noon, M, (1999), Racial discrimination in speculative

applications: New Optimism Six Years On? Human Resource Management,
Vol. 9, No. 3, pp 71-82

Lindenberger, J. and Loike, M. (2009) Diversity in the workplace, Available

from:

http://www.zeromillion.com/econ/workplace-diversity.html

ROBINSON, C. (2007) How to ensure talent management isn't ageist.People Management. Vol 13,
No 24, 29 November. pp40-41.
http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/dvsequl/general/divover.htm

ANDERSON, T. and METCALFE, H. (2003) Diversity: stacking up the

evidence: a review of knowledge. Executive Briefing. London: Chartered
Institute of Personnel and Development

CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF PERSONNEL AND DEVELOPMENT. (2005)

Discrimination and the law: does the system suit the purpose? Executive
Briefing, London: CIPD

AGE POSITIVE. (2005) Case studies [online]. Sheffield: Department of

Work and Pensions. Available at: http://www.agepositive.gov.uk [Accessed
8 April 2005]
KANDOLA, R. and FULLERTON, J. (1998) Diversity in action: managing the mosaic. 2nd ed. London:
Institute of Personnel Development