1

Equality impact assessment

Name of policy:

Amendments to the NHS terms and conditions of service handbook for England – Pay progression

Owners of the policy:

NHS Staff Council

Annexes:

General NHS workforce data that assesses the impact of the proposals on the protected characteristics of age and gender.

Incremental pay progression: Assessments at all incremental points

1. To develop a revised approach, in the NHS in England, to the management of incremental progression. The proposals create a more explicit link between an individual’s performance and their reward (in the form of pay). Incremental progression through a pay band will be dependent upon meeting locally set performance criteria and demonstrating that they have the requisite knowledge and skill/competencies for that level.

Incremental pay progression: Top two points of bands 8C, 8D and 9

2. For senior staff in pay bands 8C, 8D and 9, pay progression in the top two pay points in their band will become annually earned, the retention of which will be dependent upon meeting subsequent locally set levels of performance in any given year.

3. Those individuals already in receipt of one or both of the top increments will not lose them in future years, but will have to earn any outstanding progression as per the agreement.

Flexibility on senior posts

4. It is proposed to extend the flexibility to apply alternative pay arrangements to posts with a job evaluation score over 720 (Band 9), to posts with a job evaluation score over 630 points (Band 8C and above). Equal pay principles should still apply to posts affected.

2

Removal of accelerated pay progression for new entrants to Band 5

5. It is proposed to remove accelerated pay progression as currently set out in 1.8 of the NHS terms and conditions of service handbook. Rather than new entrants to Band 5 receiving two increments in the first year if they meet their ‘preceptorship’ development outcomes, they will now only be entitled to a yearly increment in line with all the other pay bands and in line with the other proposals listed above. This may have the effect of removing any anomaly in treatment of those on band 5 compared to other pay bands.

6. The agreement will amend the current version of the NHS terms and conditions of service handbook with effect from 31 March 2013. It covers all eligible staff in England who are covered by the Agenda for Change pay system.

7. The key stakeholders include:

• NHS employing organisations in England,

• the NHS Staff Council and its Executive, a partnership of the NHS Employers organisation and NHS Trade Unions, (led by NHS Employers), including

• Managers In Partnership and

• any other relevant staff representative bodies;

• UK Health Departments.

• ESR

• Patients

8. The NHS Staff Council and its Executive have responsibility for the collective agreement and implementation of the proposed amendments.

9. The NHS Staff Council and its Executive will be responsible for implementing the amendments within the NHS terms and conditions of service handbook and any subsequent national monitoring of the equality impacts.

3

10. Individual employers will assume responsibility for developing pay progression schemes locally as part of the national terms and conditions of the staff they employ and for monitoring the equality impact locally in line with equality legislation.

11. The NHS Staff Council will maintain oversight of the new amendments through existing governance arrangements.

12. The Handbook sets out a general equality and diversity statement (Section 30) which places a requirement on NHS employers and local staff representatives to review and monitor their local policy arrangements.

13. Monitoring of the effects of the amendments to sick pay at a local level will be encouraged ,for employers in England, and may be facilitated by use of the Electronic Staff Record, Equality Delivery System and the Equal Pay Audit toolkit.

14. Monitoring the effects of the amendments can be split into three stages:

Pre-implementation analysis

15. Establishing a national baseline of data which describes the equality status of Agenda for Change prior to implementation of the proposals. The purpose of the baseline information is for comparison with the subsequent analysis of national data once the new proposals are in place. Pre-implementation analysis, to establish a baseline, will also be necessary at a local level. Pre-implementation analysis is necessarily limited to the elements of the proposals which are nationally determined. It is an analysis of how definable groups of staff in the current system will be affected by the implementation process. Therefore this analysis primarily relates to groups of staff who:

a) could be/will not be affected by the proposals;

b) will/will not receive nationally agreed protection.

Post-implementation analysis

16. Full analysis of the impact of the new policy will only be possible after the method of implementation has been locally determined in line with the national guidance, and there is a sufficient time-series of data to describe the impact of the changes. The timing of the post-implementation analysis will vary locally corresponding with implementation schedules. For example, where new local performance standards have been linked to incremental progression, it will take at least a year until it is possible to count the number of staff who have not met the performance standards and, consequently did not receive pay increments. The Equal Pay Audit toolkit and guidance can help facilitate this monitoring.

4

Post-implementation steady state monitoring

17. Local equality analysis will be necessary on an ongoing basis.

18. In trying to assess the impact of the proposed amendments on pay progression, the NHS Staff Council Executive sought data and information from the Electronic Staff Record.

19. Gaps in the nationally accessible data include:

• Religious belief – The ESR Data warehouse has the facility to record the religious belief of staff. However, of Agenda for Change staff in September 2012, the religious belief of over half were either unknown or undisclosed, therefore it is not statistically valid to assess the impact of any of the proposals on each religious belief group. The possible list of values for religious belief is:

Atheism; Buddhism; Christianity; Hinduism; Islam; Jainism; Judaism; Sikhism; Other; Not Disclosed; Unknown

• Sexual orientation – The ESR Data warehouse has the facility to record the sexual orientation of staff. However, of Agenda for Change staff in September 2012, the sexual orientation of over half were either unknown or undisclosed, therefore it is not statistically valid to assess the impact of any of the proposals on each sexual orientation group. The possible list of values for sexual orientation is:

Heterosexual; Gay; Lesbian; Bisexual; Not Disclosed; Unknown

• Disability Status – The ESR Data warehouse has the facility to record the Disability Status of staff. However, of Agenda for Change staff in September 2012, the Disability Status of over half were either unknown or undisclosed, therefore it is not statistically valid to assess the impact of any of the proposals on each Disability Status group. The possible list of values for Disability Status is:

Disabled; Not Disabled; Not Disclosed; Unknown

5

• Gender reassignment – This is not currently recorded on the ESR data warehouse.

• Marriage and civil partnership – This is not currently recorded on the ESR data warehouse.

• Pregnancy and maternity – There is no dedicated pregnancy/maternity flag on ESRDW. There is some recording of maternity under absence types. However as it is inconsistently recorded, it isn’t possible to accurately identify this group.

20. No further data required at this stage to support the pay progression amendments. However, as noted above, employers locally will need to capture appropriate monitoring data via the Electronic Staff Record, Equality Delivery Systems (EDS) (where these systems are used) and the Equal Pay Audit toolkit. Employers that do not use these particular systems should put in place adequate systems/procedures to capture the relevant data.

21. The ESR data can be retrospectively accessed for comparative purposes.

22. The Information Centre may be required to improve equality monitoring of existing beneficiaries going forward.

Analysis of the function or policy

23. Impact analysis detailed in the table below.

Does or could the policy or function have any influence on any of the equality strands in relation to: • promoting equality • eliminating discrimination • achieving equality

Yes No

Race

Yes (dependent upon local application) this should encourage a justified basis for pay progression through long pay scales, mitigating risks of age discrimination.

Religious belief

Yes (dependent upon local application) this should encourage a justified basis for pay progression through long

6

pay scales

Disability Yes (dependent upon local application) this should encourage a justified basis for pay progression through long pay scales

Gender Yes (dependent upon local application) this should encourage a justified basis for pay progression through long pay scales

Sexual orientation Yes (dependent upon local application) this should encourage a justified basis for pay progression through long pay scales

Age Yes (dependent upon local application) this should encourage a justified basis for pay progression through long pay scales

Gender reassignment Yes (dependent upon local application) this should encourage a justified basis for pay progression through long pay scales. Trusts will need to consider how they will collect data and monitor this group

Maternity and pregnancy Yes (dependent upon local application) this should encourage a justified basis for pay progression through long pay scales. Trusts will need to consider how they will collect data and monitor this group

Marriage and civil partnership Yes (dependent upon local application) this should

7

encourage a justified basis for pay progression through long pay scales. Trusts will need to consider how they will collect data and monitor this group

Assess the likely impact on equality 24. Impact assessment detailed in the table below Could the function/strategy/project/policy in the way it is planned/delivered have a negative impact on any of the equality target groups (i.e. it could potentially disadvantage them) or could it have a positive impact on any of the groups, contribute to promoting equality, equal opportunities or improve relations Group affected Positive

impact Negative impact

Reason

Ethnic groups

Yes

The proposals on pay progression allow for a justified basis for progression although local application will need to be tested to make sure that this is applied fairly and objectively. Better data collection and ongoing monitoring should help identify if any group is under represented in future. If analysis demonstrates an underrepresentation then action will need to be considered in light of the organisation’s public sector equality duty compliance requirements.

Faith groups

Yes

The proposals on pay progression allow for a justified basis for progression although local application will need to be tested to make sure that this is applied fairly and objectively. Better data collection and ongoing monitoring should

8

help identify if any group is under represented in future. If analysis demonstrates an underrepresentation then action will need to be considered in light of the organisation’s public sector equality duty compliance requirements.

Disability groups

Yes

The proposals on pay progression allow for a justified basis for progression although local application will need to be tested to make sure that this is applied fairly and objectively. Locally, employers will need to make sure that reasonable adjustments are taken into account when setting appropriate and objective progression criteria. Better data collection and ongoing monitoring should help identify if any group is under represented in future. If analysis demonstrates an underrepresentation then action will need to be considered in light of the organisation’s public sector equality duty compliance requirements.

Gender groups

Yes

The proposals on pay progression allow for a justified basis for progression although local application will need to be tested to make sure that this is applied fairly and objectively. Better data collection and ongoing monitoring should help identify if any group is under represented in future. If analysis demonstrates an

9

underrepresentation then action will need to be considered in light of the organisation’s public sector equality duty compliance requirements.

Sexual orientation groups

Yes

The proposals on pay progression allow for a justified basis for progression although local application will need to be tested to make sure that this is applied fairly and objectively. Better data collection and ongoing monitoring should help identify if any group is under represented in future. If analysis demonstrates an underrepresentation then action will need to be considered in light of the organisation’s public sector equality duty compliance requirements.

Age groups

Yes

The proposals on pay progression allow for a justified basis for progression although local application will need to be tested to make sure that this is applied fairly and objectively. Better data collection and ongoing monitoring should help identify if any group is under represented in future. If analysis demonstrates an underrepresentation then action will need to be considered in light of the organisation’s public sector equality duty compliance requirements.

Gender reassignment Yes The proposals on pay progression allow for a justified basis for progression

10

although local application will need to be tested to make sure that this is applied fairly and objectively. Trusts will need to consider how they will undertake data collection and ongoing monitoring to help identify if any this group is under represented in the future. If analysis demonstrates an underrepresentation then action will need to be considered in light of the organisation’s public sector equality duty compliance requirements.

Maternity and pregnancy Yes The proposals on pay progression allow for a justified basis for progression although local application will need to be tested to make sure that this is applied fairly and objectively. Trusts will need to consider how they will undertake data collection and ongoing monitoring to help identify if any this group is under represented in the future. If analysis demonstrates an underrepresentation then action will need to be considered in light of the organisation’s public sector equality duty compliance requirements.

Marriage and civil partnership Yes The proposals on pay progression allow for a justified basis for progression although local application will need to be tested to make sure that this is applied fairly and objectively. Trusts will need to consider

11

how they will undertake data collection and ongoing monitoring to help identify if any this group is under represented in the future. If analysis demonstrates an underrepresentation then action will need to be considered in light of the organisation’s public sector equality duty compliance requirements.

If you have indicated there is a negative impact on any group, is that impact:

Yes No

Lawful? i.e. it is not discriminatory under anti-discriminatory legislation

n/a n/a

Intended? n/a n/a

25. Any future negative impact should be identified through local equality monitoring procedures as well as through grievance procedures and action planned accordingly. Strategic issues will be dealt with under the NHS Staff Council governance arrangements.

26. Yes. The amendments to the collective agreement are in national and local employment contracts and as such, changes can be made at national or local level following consultation with and agreement from staff and or their representatives. The NHS Staff Council will conduct any national level negotiations and agree to make any subsequent changes that may be necessary.

27. The pay progression provisions are in the format of a framework underpinned by national principles. This will allow for a variety of local variation of policy and different implementation outcomes which will accommodate local needs. These amendments have been negotiated nationally in partnership and will be discussed locally in partnership prior to implementation.

28. Where any negative impact is identified in future, employers will be able to respond to adapt their policies on pay progression accordingly. Locally both

12

employers and trade union representatives have a role to jointly monitor the equality impact of their organisational policy.

29. The removal of the accelerated progression for new entrants to pay Band 5 is a nationally negotiated outcome and will be uniformly applied.

30. This is a negotiated agreement and therefore there are no alternative arrangements within the national Agenda for Change agreement.

Involve and consult relevant stakeholders

31. Details of involvement and consultation with key stakeholders

What previous or planned consultation (both locally and nationally) on this function/topic/ policy/area/project has taken place/will take place with groups/individuals from equality target groups? If there has already been consultation, what does it indicate about negative impact and how people view this function, strategy, project or policy? Equality target groups Summary of consultation carried out or planned

There has been no explicit consultation of the target groups. Negotiations have involved trade unions whose members are representative of all the affected target groups. Collectively and individually the NHS trade unions have undertaken two consultations with their members regarding the initial proposals and the final proposals for consideration and feedback as part of the trade union decision making process for accepting the proposals.

Race: black & minority ethnic communities

There has been no explicit consultation of this target group. As part of implementation, employers will need to give consideration as to how to engage this group as part of their own local policy development.

Faith groups There has been no explicit consultation of this target group. As part of implementation, employers will need to give consideration as to how to engage this group as part of their own local policy development.

Disability There has been no explicit consultation of this target group. As part of implementation, employers will need to give consideration as to how to engage this group as part of their own local policy development.

Gender There has been no explicit consultation of this target group. As part of implementation, employers will need to give consideration as to how to engage this group as part of their own local policy development.

Sexual orientation There has been no explicit consultation of this target group. As part of implementation, employers will need to give

13

consideration as to how to engage this group as part of their own local policy development.

Age There has been no explicit consultation of this target group. As part of implementation, employers will need to give consideration as to how to engage this group as part of their own local policy development.

32. The NHS trade unions sought expert advice on the likely equality impacts of the proposals and this feedback has been incorporated into the equality analysis.

33. Employers will also need to undertake any relevant consultation locally as part of their local policy implementation.

34. Yes – most of the key stakeholders have been engaged as part of the wider negotiations process and have provided a range of expert views to support the development of the new arrangements and its supporting equality impact assessment. Further assurances sought via the NHS Staff Council and its Executive.

35. In addition, the new draft section of the NHS Staff terms and conditions of service handbook will be reviewed by colleagues that will operate the new arrangements locally, but who have not been involved in the national negotiations. This additional assurance should help ensure that the implementation is monitored locally for any adverse impacts and addressed locally or brought to the attention of the Staff Council where appropriate in order to address nationally.

Make a decision on the policy

36. Policy decision risks detailed in the table below.

What is the potential risk on the effect of equality (indicate one)

Highly likely to have an adverse effect on equality High risk

May possibly have an adverse effect Moderate risk

Probably will not have adverse effect Low risk

14

Highly likely to promote equality of opportunity and good relations High potential

May have the potential to promote equality and good relations Moderate potential

Probably will not promote equality or good relations Low potential

If the potential for risk and benefit occurred, how substantial would these be in terms of the number of people effected and the severity of the problem Lots of people from different groups may be affected to some extent

A few people may be adversely affected to some extent

A few people may be affected but the effect on them will be highly adverse

A lot of people may be severely affected

Incremental pay progression: Assessments at all incremental points

37. The proposed changes should have a positive impact from an equality perspective as progression due to having a justified basis for movement up the incremental scale. A number of the pay bands are long and having a justified basis for progression other than length of service reduces the risk of age discrimination.

38. Employers locally will need to make sure that they have a system of measuring performance that is fair and non-discriminatory and should deliver similar outcomes for both men and women, especially given the workforce size of the NHS.

39. The proposed new Annex A4 of the NHS terms and conditions of service handbook sets out principles which should help employers locally to comply with their equality duties.

40. Employers locally should ensure that they have sufficient monitoring in place to be able to assess the impact of their pay progression in line with their equality duties.

15

Incremental pay progression: Top 2 points of Bands 8C, 8D and 9

41. As long as the application of progression is fair and equally applied there should be no/a limited equality impact.

42. Pay protection for those already in the final two pay points will result in some advantaged and disadvantaged employees. Whilst the number of men are slightly greater in the final two points the protection is equally applied to both men and women and therefore a legitimate response to achieve the aim of making pay progression more evidence based in the longer term.

43. Consideration will also need to be given to the equal pay risk where senior managers’ pay overlaps with Bands 8C, 8D and 9.

Flexibility on senior posts

44. From an equal pay perspective this proposal carries the greatest potential risk of inequality and therefore employers locally will need to consider the following:

• Designing a pay framework which applies to all relevant employees, rather than just some groups of them;

• Equality impact assessing the pay framework before implementation; • The Equality Impact Analysis should include recording current gender pay

gaps for those above 720 points (for comparison purposes) and each pay band between 630 and 720 points, as the base for future monitoring;

• Reasons for each pay decision in the relevant pay bands should be recorded; • There should be regular monitoring of the impact of pay decisions on the

relevant grade gender pay gaps.

Removal of accelerated pay progression for new entrants to pay Band 5

45. The proposed change will remove an anomaly in the treatment in Band 5 compared to other pay bands. Application of pay progression for new starters will be consistently applied and therefore it is not anticipated that there will be an equality impact.

46. No adverse or negative impacts have been identified.

47. The impact assessment will be published as a paper supporting the final agreement of the review partners.

16

Local Monitoring - Points for consideration

48. Post-implementation it will be necessary for individual NHS organisations to identify and regularly monitor the those who are adversely affected by the change, grouped by protected characteristics.

Data Collection

49. Equality analysis of the pay progression changes will require data relating to:

• AfC pay point – to determine which individuals might be affected by this policy and how.

• Protected characteristic information - Gender, age, ethnicity, religious belief, sexual orientation, Gender reassignment, Marriage and civil partnership, disability status, and Pregnancy and maternity.

50. High level data summaries in each area may not identify overlaps in the data items. Cross-checking of the separate data sources at an individual member of staff level in these three areas maybe necessary.

51. It is envisaged that the majority of data collection will be possible from the Electronic Staff Record, but may also require supplementing with data from other systems.

Analysis

52. Using the data above, it will be necessary to identify the individuals affected by the policy, and also those not affected by the policy. A comparison of the protected characteristics of the staff in these two groups will be useful in identifying any disparate impact in relation to the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.

53. As the numbers of staff in each employing organisation with each characteristic are likely to be small (there may only one employee with a given protected characteristic), care should be taken to ensure that any conclusions drawn are statistically reliable and provide an adequate basis for action/investigation. It is unlikely that data analysis alone is sufficient to confirm a disparate impact between groups of staff. Analysis is intended to identify potential areas of concern which require further investigation, rather than being an end in itself.

Timing

54. Grouping the workforce into those who will be/will definitely not be affected by the proposals is sensitive to the timing and length of the data snapshot. The timing of

17

the post-implementation analysis will vary locally corresponding with implementation dates.

55. The analysis should take place after there has been sufficient time for the changes to 'bed-in' and there is a sufficient time-series of data to describe the medium to long term impact of the changes. The analysis should be repeated at regular intervals to ensure the application of the policy continues to comply with equality legislation.

Further useful information

56. To assist NHS organisations to meet their legal duties under the Equality Act 2010, the NHS Staff Council Equality and Diversity Group has been working with the NHS Information Centre and the Equality and Human Rights Commission to produce an Equal Pay Audit toolkit and guidance.

57. These standard iView reports included in the equal pay audit toolkit are available for use by authorised iView users in each NHS organisation, and audits should be undertaken in partnership inline with the terms of use set out by the Information Centre.

58. The tables within iView are a starting point for investigation. Additional exploration is possible within iView but iView will only provide the questions, not the answers. To find out more about what information you need to produce and publish, see the Equal Pay Audit toolkit.

59. The following document provides advice in relation to the analysis, governance and publication of ethnicity data:

60. Office of National Statistics (2003). Ethnic group statistics - A guide for the collection and classification of ethnicity data.

The NHS Staff Council March 2013

18

Annexes Note to annexes Analysis of the existing data cannot definitively identify staff who will definitely, or definitely not be positively or negatively affected by the proposals. This is because precisely how staff are affected is dependent upon future factors which are as yet unknown, for example, future performance. Instead the analysis considers the potential to be affected positively or negatively. In terms of pay progression, for example, those staff at the top of their band may be considered as potentially advantaged on the basis that any performance appraisal post-implementation will not affect their pay. Performance appraisal for those on the lower points of the same band has the potential to affect their incremental progression, so may potentially be disadvantaged, but only if they do not meet performance standards. Incremental progression of those staff who meet performance standards will be unaffected, so despite being categorized as potentially disadvantaged for the purpose of equality analysis, they do not suffer any disadvantage at all. Within the group of staff who are potentially disadvantaged, there may also be degrees of disadvantage. Quantifying degrees of disadvantage is difficult, both because it is largely subjective and again is dependent on unknown future factors. Such analysis would also be statistically problematic - as the workforce is divided into smaller degrees of disadvantage, the sub groups become so small that it is not possible to draw any statistically valid conclusions. The National Incremental Pay Progression tables detail the distribution of staff at a national level across band, protected characteristic (e.g. gender or age), and their relative position within the pay scale. As staff are not distributed evenly across the Agenda for Change bands and protected characteristic values, it may not be clear from a visual comparison of the proportions of staff on different positions in the scale, which, if any, gender, age group or other characteristic value will be at a persistent advantage or disadvantage post implementation. The use of the ‘relative risk’ ratio in the final column(s) of the table (when there are a small number of characteristic values and categories), or in a separate table (where there are a large number of characteristic values and categories) addresses this question. 95% confidence intervals have been calculated for the relative risks. Further details are given below each table. Where a risk ratio is replaced by “N/A” , this means that there are no staff of that characteristic value and Agenda for Change band (e.g., there are no staff aged under 25 in Bands 8 and 9.) Where a risk ratio is replaced by *, then the staff numbers in that characteristic value and Agenda for Change band are too small to make any meaningful comparisons. Note: there is likely to be variation at a local level regarding the proportions of staff in each Agenda for Change band, characteristic value and category, depending on organisation type, skill mix, recruitment and increment dates and other factors.

19

Annex 1 - National Workforce distribution by protected characteristics

1.1. National Workforce Age Profile

Age Band % of Headcount

Under 25 5% 25 to 29 10% 30 to 34 11% 35 to 39 12% 40 to 44 14% 45 to 49 16% 50 to 54 15% 55 to 59 11% Over 60 6% Total 100%

1.2. National Workforce Ethnicity Profile

Ethnicity % of Headcount

White 81% Black or Black British 5% Asian or Asian British 5% Mixed 1% Chinese 0% Any Other Ethnic Group 2%

Not Stated or Unknown 6% Total 100%

1.3. National Workforce Gender Profile

Gender % of Headcount

Female 81% Male 19% Total 100%

20

Annex 2 National Incremental Pay Progression - All Points

2.1. National Incremental Pay Progression by Gender - All points

A relative risk of 1 indicates there is no variation between males and females. A relative risk of less than 1 indicates a higher proportion of men are on the other points of the band than women. A number higher than 1 indicates a higher proportion of women are on the other points than men. The closer the number is to 1, the less variation between genders there is. 95% confidence limits can be calculated for the relative ratios by band and gender.

• If these limits encompass 1 (with no symbol next to it), then it cannot be assumed that the proportion of men in the potentially disadvantaged group is different to that of women in the potentially disadvantaged group.

21

• f the symbol next to the ratio is “m”, then it can be assumed with 95% confidence that the

proportion of men in the potentially disadvantaged group is greater than that of women in the potentially disadvantaged group. If the symbol next to the ratio is “f”, then it can be assumed with 95% confidence that the proportion of men in the potentially disadvantaged group is smaller than that of women in the potentially disadvantaged group.

At a national level (across all AfC pay bands) women are only slightly more likely than men to be at the top of their pay band. 43% of men are at the top of their pay band compared with 44% of women. This particular analysis is based on a snapshot of data relating to a single day. The proportions change on a daily basis as employees join the NHS, staff in post leavers and others are promoted, receive increments or retire. As this measure is particularly sensitive to the timing and duration of data taken into consideration. For example, a relatively short period may be characterised by significant changes in staffing in mainly male or mainly female professions, owing to policy initiatives such as recruitment of health visitors. In future it will be necessary for NHS organisations to examine relevant data often to ensure that neither gender is persistently disadvantaged.

22

2.2. National Incremental Pay Progression by Age All points(Proportions)

23

2.2 National Incremental Pay Progression by Age - All points(Relative Risks)

Where a risk ratio is replaced by “N/A” , this means that there are no staff of that characteristic value and Agenda for Change band (e.g., there are no staff aged under 25 in Bands 8 and 9.) Where a risk ratio is replaced by *, then the staff numbers in that characteristic value and Agenda for Change band are too small to make any meaningful comparisons.

24

The potentially disadvantaged group comprises those staff who are not yet on the top point of their pay band (who will be subject to performance appraisal post-implementation),

The proportion of staff in the potentially disadvantaged group in each age band is compared to the proportion of staff in the potentially disadvantaged group in all other age bands. For example, the proportion of staff in the potentially disadvantaged group in the 45 to 49 year old age bracket would be compared to the proportion of staff aged under 45 or 50 and over in the potentially disadvantaged groups. A relative risk of less than 1 indicates a higher proportion of staff in the specified age band in the potentially disadvantaged group than staff in all other age bands. A number higher than 1 indicates a higher proportion of staff in all other age bands in the potentially disadvantaged group than staff in the specified age band. The closer the number is to 1, the less variation between age bands there is. 95% confidence limits can be calculated for the relative ratios by band and age band. If these limits encompass 1 (with no symbol next to it), then it cannot be assumed that the proportion of staff in the specified age band in the potentially disadvantaged group is different to that of staff in all other age bands in the potentially disadvantaged group.

• If the symbol next to the ratio is “a”, then it can be assumed with 95% confidence that the proportion of staff in the specified age band in the potentially disadvantaged group is greater than that of staff in all other age bands in the potentially disadvantaged group.

• If the symbol next to the ratio is “o”, then it can be assumed with 95% confidence that the proportion of staff in the specified age band in the potentially disadvantaged group is smaller than that of staff in all other age bands in the potentially disadvantaged group.

At a national level (across all AfC pay and age bands) older staff are more likely than younger staff to be at the top of their pay band. Those staff at the top of their band may be considered as potentially advantaged because, apart from staff on the penultimate pay point in pay bands 8C, 8D and 9 performance appraisal post-implementation will not affect their pay. In any incremental pay system, it is to be expected that older staff are more likely to be at the top of their pay band than younger staff. This is because the opportunity for progression increases with greater time in post. For example, an employee on pay point one in pay band six at the age of 40, will reach the maximum pay point in that pay band at the age of 49, if he/she progresses at the rate of one increment per year. In future pay progression for all pay points, in all pay bands, will be conditional upon individuals demonstrating that they have the requisite knowledge and skills/competencies for their role and that they have demonstrated the required standards of performance and delivery, as determined locally in line with new nationally agreed principles on pay progression. This weakens the link between pay and time served and

25

increases the strength of the link between pay and performance. In future, in the example above, progression to the maximum pay point in the pay band will be dependent on the employee consistently meeting local performance and delivery requirements, in line with national guidance, for nine years.

26

2.3. National Incremental Pay Progression by Ethnicity- All points

The table shows that, between the ethnic groups, there is some variation in the proportions of staff at the top of their pay band. Comparing ethnicity with position on the pay band does not provide and explanation. All staff (regardless of protected characteristic) should be able to progress by one increment per year (aside from promotions, preceptorship, temporary promotion and some other factors). A further analysis investigated the correlation between the average pay point and average length of service. This identified a strong correlation between the average length of service and average position on the pay band. Those ethnic groups with a higher average length of service also had a higher average position on the band. A correlation between length of service and position on the pay band is to be expected. Those staff who have been in their post for longer, have had more years to progress up their pay band. Secondly, duties and responsibilities may be adjusted, commensurate with additional increments, when staff have prior experience in other organisations or posts. For the purposes of this analysis the agenda for change pay bands have been grouped. When considered individually, a full comparison across ethnic groups was not possible, due to the small numbers of staff in many categories.

Ethnic GroupNot Stated

or Unknown

All bands 0.90 o 1.03 e 1.05 e 0.90 o 1.18 e 1.22 e 1.19 e 1.18 e 1.19 e 1.15 e 1.31 e 1.37 e 0.99 1.13 e 0.91 o 1.24 e 1.08 e 1.12 e 1.02 0.91 o 0.93 o 1.06 e

Irish

Any

Oth

er M

ixed

bac

kgro

und

Relative risk of Ethnic origin being on other points compared to other Ethnic origins

White Mixed Asian or Asian British Black or Black BritishChinese or Other Ethnic

Group

Any

Oth

er W

hite

Bac

kgro

und

All W

hite

Gro

ups

Whi

te a

nd B

lack

Car

ibbe

an

Whi

te a

nd B

lack

Afr

ican

Whi

te a

nd A

sian

All C

hine

se o

r Oth

er E

thni

c G

roup

s

Not

Sta

ted

or U

nkno

wn

Carib

bean

Afric

an

Any

Oth

er B

lack

Bac

kgro

und

All B

lack

Gro

ups

Chin

ese

Any

Oth

er E

thni

c Gr

oup

All M

ixed

Gro

ups

Indi

an

Paki

stan

i

Bang

lade

shi

Any

Oth

er A

sian

Back

grou

nd

All A

sian

Gro

ups

Briti

sh

Ethnic subgroup

27

Annex 3 National Incremental Pay Progression: Top 2 Points of 8C, 8D & 9

3.1. National Incremental Pay Progression by Gender (Proportions) : Top 2 Points of 8C, 8D & 9

28

3.2. National Incremental Pay Progression by Age (Proportions) : Top 2 Points of 8C, 8D & 9

3.2 National Incremental Pay Progression by Age (Relative Risk) : Top 2 Points of 8C, 8D & 9

29

Where a risk ratio is replaced by “N/A” , this means that there are no staff of that characteristic value and Agenda for Change band (e.g., there are no staff aged under 25 in Bands 8 and 9.) Where a risk ratio is replaced by *, then the staff numbers in that characteristic value and Agenda for Change band are too small to make any meaningful comparisons.

30

3.3 National Incremental Pay Progression by Ethnicity : Top 2 Points of 8C, 8D & 9

Where a risk ratio is replaced by “N/A” , this means that there are no staff of that characteristic value and Agenda for Change band. Where a risk ratio is replaced by *, then the staff numbers in that characteristic value and Agenda for Change band are too small to make any meaningful comparisons. Even after grouping bands 8c,8d and 9 a full comparison across ethnic groups was not possible, due to the small numbers of staff in many categories.

Ethnic GroupNot Stated

or Unknown

Top of Band 1.04 e 0.98 0.99 1.06 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *2nd top of Band * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Whi

te a

nd B

lack

Car

ibbe

an

Ethnic subgroup

Briti

sh

Irish

Any

Oth

er W

hite

Bac

kgro

und

All W

hite

Gro

ups

Relative risk of Ethnic origin being on top or 2nd point of band compared to other Ethnic origins

White Mixed Asian or Asian British Black or Black BritishChinese or Other

Ethnic Group

Whi

te a

nd B

lack

Afr

ican

Whi

te a

nd A

sian

Any

Oth

er M

ixed

bac

kgro

und

All M

ixed

Gro

ups

Indi

an

Paki

stan

i

Bang

lade

shi

Any

Oth

er A

sian

Back

grou

nd

All A

sian

Gro

ups

Carib

bean

All C

hine

se o

r Oth

er E

thni

c G

roup

s

Not

Sta

ted

or U

nkno

wn

Afric

an

Any

Oth

er B

lack

Bac

kgro

und

All B

lack

Gro

ups

Chin

ese

Any

Oth

er E

thni

c Gr

oup

Draft Equality Impact Assessment

31

1.1. National Removal of Accelerated Pay Progression By Gender for New Entrants to Pay In this proposal, the potentially disadvantaged group are the future new entrants to pay band 5, compared with the potentially advantaged group who entered AfC and received accelerated progression prior to the change in policy. As the potentially disadvantaged group are not yet in employment, it is not possible at this stage to know what their gender, ethnicity and age groups will be. This part of the analysis will need to be done post-implementation for new starters to band 5. At this stage it will also be necessary to reproduce tables for the advantaged group, so that the data compares the workforce as at the same date. There is no obvious reason why the composition of the future new starters in terms of gender and other protected characteristics should be any different from the existing group, so a disperate impact seems unlikely. Many staff currently on band 5 will not have received accelerated progression. It is not possible from the ESRDW to reliably identify all staff who have received accelerated progression. At a local level it should be possible to identify these staff. The tables below detail the gender, ethnicity and age groups of the staff currently in post in band 5 (an unknown subset of this group who have received accelerated progression are the potentially advantaged group). 1.2. Gender

1.3. Age

Male Female Male Female17% 83% Unknown Unknown

Future Joiners post implementation

Current staff

Band 5 23.7%

% Unknown % Unknownof which: of which:

% of staff in each band

Band

Band% of staff in each band

Under 25 8% Under 25 Unknown25 - 29 16% 25 - 29 Unknown30 - 34 14% 30 - 34 Unknown35 - 39 14% 35 - 39 Unknown40 - 44 14% 40 - 44 Unknown45 - 49 13% 45 - 49 Unknown50 - 54 11% 50 - 54 Unknown55 - 60 8% 55 - 60 UnknownOver 60 2% Over 60 Unknown

Current staffFuture joiners post

implementation

of which:% Unknown

Band 5 23.7%

% Unknownof which:

Draft Equality Impact Assessment

32

1.4. Ethnicity

Band% of staff in each band

British 68.4% British UnknownIrish 1.5% Irish UnknownAny Other White background 4.2% Any Other White background UnknownWhite and Black Caribbean 0.3% White and Black Caribbean UnknownWhite and Black African 0.3% White and Black African UnknownWhite and Asian 0.3% White and Asian UnknownAny Other Mixed background 0.4% Any Other Mixed background UnknownIndian 4.8% Indian UnknownPakistani 0.8% Pakistani UnknownBangladeshi 0.2% Bangladeshi UnknownAny other Asian background 3.5% Any other Asian background UnknownCaribbean 1.6% Caribbean UnknownAfrican 5.5% African UnknownAny Other Black background 0.8% Any Other Black background UnknownChinese 0.4% Chinese UnknownAny Other Ethnic Group 2.9% Any Other Ethnic Group UnknownNot Stated or Unknown 4.1% Not Stated or Unknown UnknownTotal 100% Total Unknown

of which:

23.7%Band 5

Current staff Future joiners post implementation

% Unknown % Unknownof which: