Diversity Dimension - Essay Example

? Diversity Dimension In order to achieve equality in employment, organizations have to take in to account both affirmative action and anti discrimination legislation as well as other approaches to managing diversity dimension. Affirmative action refers to the various policies that are used to ensure inclusiveness in areas of business, education and employment in terms of race, religion, sex or age. Diversity in the workforce refers to the policies and practices that aim at including people with certain qualities in the workforce, which the current staff does not have. This could either be on the basis of age, disability, experience, gender or special talents. Achieving Equal Opportunity in Employment through Affirmative Action Legislation, Anti Discrimination Legislation and Managing Diversity Approaches Managing diversity in employment has become one of the most fundamental principals in human resource management in recent years. Diversity in employment is based on the principals of equal employment opportunities to everybody irrespective of inherent differences such as gender, race, religion, age, ethnicity as well as physical disabilities (Sappey et al, 2006). Businesses and companies are being encouraged to adopt more inclusive approaches in their employment strategies so as to accommodate everybody and help do away with the negative effects of discrimination and marginalization of certain groups and individuals. In order to fully achieve inclusiveness, most companies have been encouraged to adopt policies that reflect affirmative action and those that are in line with anti discrimination laws and regulations. The companies should also have various practices that embody different approaches to managing diversity dimension. Recent studies in human resource have focused on the question of diversity management and how firms can incorporate policies to ensure a more diverse workforce and how this will benefit the organizations. A common understanding is that managing diversity in the workforce can help an organization become more innovative and adaptable to the ever changing business environment as well as helping the organizations meet their performance objectives (Verspaandonk, Holand & Horne, 2010). In some jurisdictions, the issue of workforce diversity has been backed with a legal foundation. Companies are expected to comply with set out legislations concerning employment procedures so as to avoid discrimination. In some cases, it’s mandatory for organizations to have guidelines and policies to ensure inclusiveness in terms of gender, race and disability (Dickens, 2000). In order to fully achieve equal opportunity in employment, organizations have to rely on affirmative action legislation and policies, anti-discrimination legislation as well as other various approached to workforce diversity management. All these three approaches (Anti-discrimination legislation, affirmative action and diversity management approaches) are the fundamental guidelines in achieving equality in the workforce. In Australia, the idea of workforce diversity has been welcomed by organizations both in the public and private sector (Strachan et al, 2010). The Department of Immigration and Citizenship has been at the forefront at ensuring diversity at all levels of the department. This has enabled the department to be one of the best performing in the public sector (Strachan et al, 2010). Workforce diversity management can be done using various ways. The two main approaches that organizations can use to ensure inclusiveness in employment are the radical approach and the liberal approach. The liberal approach assumes that there is equal opportunity only when all individuals are able to compete for the rewards freely. According to this approach, employment should only focus on merit of individuals rather than factors such as gender, age disability or race. The radical approach o the other hand states that organizations should however strive to ensure that they not only create equal opportunity but also ensure equal outcome. The main focus of the radical approach is on groups rather than individuals. This approach ensures that the workforce is composed of representatives from every social group available for selection for any given opportunity. The radical approach calls for employers to look at other factors in job selections other that just merit. This is a very fundament principal especially in the civil services employment, where each social group or community will want to be represented in the government. When it comes to legislations, Australia has a wide range of anti-discrimination and equal opportunity in employment laws and regulations. These laws are meant to ensure protection of individuals against either direct or indirect discrimination for groups such as the disabled, women, older employees, as well as gays and lesbians. These legislations also aim at promoting career opportunities for the marginalized groups in the community. In order to be fully effective, this set of legislation is also supported by various industrial agreements as well as organizational policies that seek to ensure equal opportunity in employment. However, the practice of diversity management is itself diverse (Strachan et al, 2010), and even instances where there is some recommendation and regulation such as in the Australian Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) legislation, the outcomes are highly variable. Australian Legislation to spearhead Diversity management The Australian government has binding laws and regulations that seek to address diversity as well as discrimination and equity issues. This legislation also known as regarded as equity legislation, touches an about twelve Acts, both federal and State, and incorporates mainly two approaches; affirmative action and anti-discrimination. The anti-discrimination legislation seeks to eliminate all forms of discrimination women, and has a dual effect of both preventing discrimination and ensuring there is equality in the Australian demography (Sex Discrimination Act, 1984). Its main focus is on the rights of individuals and preventing and breach of such rights. This legislation also makes it unlawful for organizations or individuals to make any discriminatory actions in the workplace based on any differences that some staff may have depending on their sex, race, disability, and religion, age among others (Kirton and Greene, 2005). The Affirmative Action Legislation This is a unique piece of legislation meant to promote Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) in Australia. Affirmative action, often described as AA legislation, was introduced in Australia in the 1980s with the introduction of the Affirmative Action (Equal Opportunity for Women) Act 1986, which was later on substituted by Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Act 1999 (French et al, 2010).. Affirmative action can be defined as the various policies and measures taken to include characteristics such as disability, color, sex, and race, religion among others in to consideration in employment opportunities so as to give opportunity to the marginalized groups or individuals (Ronalds and Pepper, 2010). Affirmative Action legislation in Australia has been characterized as an inclusionary approach or model since it is based on the principle of increasing the number of women and the disabled in employment. AA legislation is composed of all those acts of parliament that give a specific systematic approach to be used in identifying and eliminating different barriers that various disadvantaged groups may experience in their places of work. The main objective of these legislations is to overcome discrimination in the workplace by requiring organizations to have positive policies and practices to foster change. Its main focus is not on the individual instances of discrimination but rather preventing occurrence of any form of discrimination (Ronalds and Pepper, 2004). In the private sector, this legislation mainly focuses on discrimination against women. In the public sector however, the legislation is broad enough to include other marginalized groups such as indigenous Australians, the disabled as well as those from non English Speaking backgrounds (French et al, 2010). Affirmative action legislation, which is commonly known as Equal Opportunity, aims at encouraging organizations to analyze systemic or structural discrimination so that they may be able to design relevant proactive solutions at an organizational level (Ronalds and Pepper, 2010). The legislation recommends a systematic approach which is based on different treatment of people within a particular group so as to overcome both social and natural differences that may exist. Key affirmative action legislation in Australia is the Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Act 1999, was meant to ensure that women were not discriminated or left disadvantaged from job selections by virtue of their gender or sex (Strachan 2010). Organizations with more than 100 employees are required to implement an equal opportunity or affirmative action plan. The Act also requires organizations to regularly analyze their current employment statistics as well as their workplace practices to determine if they are in line with the governing legislation (Thomas, 2001). In order to ensure accountability on the part of business organizations and the effectiveness of this legislation, it is mandatory for organizations to report to government agencies on their compliance with this legislation. Businesses that fail to report on this matter will automatically become ineligible for all government contracts and will be publicly mentioned in parliament (French, 2005). Other Approaches To Managing Diversity Dimension Diversity in the workforce can be managed both from a business case point of view and from a human resource or organizational development point of view. The business case approach is known as productive diversity, while the other approach is known as valuing diversity. Productive diversity claims that managing diversity can improve productivity of a business immensely, as well as giving the business a competitive advantage, which will be derived from utilizing the various skills from the diverse workforce (French, 2001). This approach is based on two main utilitarian concepts of productive advantage and mutual benefit. The productive diversity approach is also backed up by the human capital theory, which calls for organizations to find better practices to help utilize the different skills in order to gain more benefits. If human capital is used effectively, organizations will gain from the workforce diversity through a wide range of skills, market knowledge, cultural heritage, increased business networks. This is likely to lead to a stronger corporate image, reduced labor turn over and increased productivity (Strachan et al, 2004). Productive diversity can also be enhanced by organizations if they put in place family friendly policies. Such policies are also likely to reduce staff costs through staff turnover, absenteeism, stress or sick leaves. Research indicates that organizations can play a role in their development by running equity and diversity prospects so as to gain a better understanding of the market, successful international relationships and increasing creativity and innovation. The Valuing Diversity Approach is based on the premise that dealing with workplace disparity is the accommodation of different individuals and the adaptation of organization systems for reasons of best management practice and communal advantage and progress (Strachan, 2010). This approach involves including every person in the process and recognizing that diversity is very good for the business (Burgess et al, 2007). In order to eliminate any form of discrimination in the workplace, there is need to have a significant change in political, cultural and structural systems within the organization (Burgess et al, 2007). The valuing diversity approach ensures that there is significant change to these systems within the organization, and not only on the individuals or marginalized groups. The valuing diversity approach helps organizations to analyze disparity issues in the workplace and solve the problems by changing the organizational structure as opposed to other approaches that only address the symptoms of disparity in the workplace such as discrimination (Burgess et al, 2007). Statistics on managing Disability Diversity Management in Australia According to the International Labor organization (ILO), one out of every six people in the world has a disability. The number of disabled people in the world is therefore estimated to be about one billion people. In Australia the number of disabled people, as given by the Australian Network on disability is over four million people. This represents about a fifth of the entire population. As noted by the Australian Human Rights Commission in 2005, the disabled people form a very significant proportion of the working age population in the country, which is about 16.6%. The big question then arises about just how much they contribute to the growth of the economy through significant employment. Statistics indicate that the disabled peoples’ participation in the workforce is still at lower rates (Monicah and Pepper, 2007). Disabled people are only likely to be employed when they choose to attempt to participate in the workforce, and will only earn a less amount if they get the job. This situation has been in the Australian economy for a very long time and it has not been getting significantly better in the recent years. In 2009, Statistics from the ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) seemed to concur with this fact. The number of people with disability of working age was estimated to be about two million, but astonishingly, more than half of them were not in the workforce (Monicah and Pepper, 2007). People with disability possess a wide range of skills and abilities that organizations need to utilize in order to achieve their potential. The disabled should be given employment opportunities so that they can develop their skills further and enhance their potential particularly in leadership roles, professions and skilled trades. Joining the workforce can give the disabled people a lot of confidence, as well as expanding their social networks and improving their social skills. Employment can also ensure their financial independence, improved physical and mental health, and a better living standard (Monicah and Pepper, 2007). Despite improvements seen in the employment of the disabled in the recent past, there is still a lot to be done to ensure they fully participate in the work force. The Disability Discrimination Act, 1992 (DDA) aims at protecting the disabled people from any form of discrimination (Monicah and Pepper, 2007). The people with disability aged between 15- 64 had a much lower percentage of participation in the workforce as compared to those without disability. They were at 54% as compared to 83% of those without disability. One of the priority outcomes of the National Disability Strategy 2010-2020 is to raise job opportunities as a way of improving economic state and personal safety for disabled people (Monicah and Pepper, 2007) A Business Case Argument to Address Diversity Dimension In building a case for age diversity in the workforce, this study aims at exploring the main benefits of diversity. Businesses incorporating an age diversity strategy are more likely to benefit in various ways (Strachan et al, 2009). The main benefits of age diversity in the workforce are: i) Increased productivity Diversity in terms of age in the workforce creates an environment for better teamwork and creativity, where ideas from both older experienced employees and younger novices are able to share their ideas to help the company move ahead. There is bound to be improved service delivery hence increased productivity. The younger employees are able to easily adapt to changes in technology to help businesses remain competitive while the older employees will be relevant for their experience (Strachan et al, 2009). ii). Business Continuity In order for the business to maintain its traditions and keep appealing to its stakeholders, age diversity in its workforce is necessary. This allows younger employees to learn from older employees, gain from them while at the same time gaining the skills that they will require to take over the firm when the older employees finally hung their boots. iii). Helps to strengthen the business’ communication strategy Age diversity helps the business to improve its communication strategy so as to reach out to new and existing clients, vendors and partners. Every other company is adopting a diversification strategy and in order for your business to keep up the pace, there have to be significant changes in the workforce to help improve relationships with other stakeholders. Businesses can benefit a great deal from diversity dimension. As time goes on, more and more businesses are realizing the need to have a diverse workforce and bringing in people with various backgrounds to help them achieve their objectives. The business case for diversity management outlines the various ways in which businesses are likely to benefit from implementing all inclusive polices. The disabled people too need to be given an opportunity to use their skills just like those without disability. It is also important for proper legislation to be enacted to guide organizations on diversity management, and strict measures be put in place to ensure compliance with the set out legislation. References Burgess, J., Henderson, L and Strachan, G. (2007). Work and family balance through equal employment opportunity programs and agreement making in Australia. Employee Relations, 29 (4), pp. 415-431. Dickens, L. (2000). Promoting gender equity at work: A potential role for trade union action. Human Resource Interdisciplinary Gender Studies, 5 (2). French, E. (2001). Approaches to equity management and their relationship to women in management. British Journal of Management, 12 (4). French, E. (2005). Strategic change has an integral role in effective equity management: No one size fits all model. Strategic Change Journal, 14 (1). Glenda Strachan, John Burgess, Lindy Henderson. (2007). Equal employment opportunity legislation and policies: the Australian experience. Equal Opportunities International, Vol. 26 Iss: 6, Kirton, G. and Greene, A. (2005). The Dynamics of Managing Diversity: A Critical Approach, 2nd edition, Amsterdam: Elsevier. Monicah C. and Pepper, R. (2007) Discrimination Law and Practice, 2nd edition, Sydney: Federation Press. Ronalds, C and Pepper, R. (2004). Discrimination Law and Practice, 2nd edition. Sydney: Federation Press. Sappey, R., Burgess, J., Lyons, M. and Buultjens, J. (2006). Industrial Relations in Australia. Sydney: Pearson Education. Strachan, G., Burgess, J., and Sullivan, A. (2004). Affirmative action or managing diversity— what is the future of equal opportunity policies in organizations. Women in Management Review, 19 (4). Thomas, R. (2001) 'From affirmative action to affirming diversity' in Harvard Business. Review on Managing Diversity. Strachan, G. and Burgess J. (2001). Affirmative action legislation in Australia--the legislative model, paper presented at Rethinking Gender. Work and Organisation Conference, Keele University, UK, 27-29 June. Strachan, G., French, E. and Burgess, J. (eds). (2010). Managing Diversity in Australia. North Ryde: McGraw-Hill. Strachan, G., French, E., Burgess, J. & Henderson, L. (2009).Managing Diversity in Australia, Theory and Practice. Sydney: McGraw-Hill. Verspaandonk, R; Holland, I & Horne, N. (2010). Chronology of changes in the Australian Public Service 1975–2010. Background note. Parliament of Australia, Department of Parliamentary Services. Read More