Equal Opportunities: National Health Services - Essay Example

Equal opportunities The fight for equality is deep rooted in history, and may be traced to the origin of humanity. However, equally has carried varied meanings in different times throughout history. Equal opportunity is a means to achieve equality by all human beings belonging to a particular country or region. In other words, equality means equal opportunity for all beings of a society, region or a country. In literal legal terms, equal opportunity (EO) refers to the chance given to a group of people to achieve their goals, which usually are common. Organizations are legally obliged to provide equal opportunity to all employees, internal and external, which they implement as diversity management. The connection between regulation and management is formed by various policies, procedures and practices. Most of the times, these initiatives seem to be ineffective in bringing about absolute equality and providing an ideal equal opportunity platform. This discourse considers equal opportunity paradigm from organizational perspective and evaluates its implementation and effectiveness at the National Health Services, United Kingdom. In this process, it highlights the positive aspects related to EO, progress made at NHS, and gaps that continue to victimize some people. Cauthen (1987) identifies three elements that form equal opportunity namely, the people belonging to a group that have the chance; the goal itself, which is sought by this group; and the scene that enables this group to achieve the goal. The prophecy of equal opportunity emphasizes provision of equal chance to achieve their desired goals to all human beings irrespective of their age, gender, class, sect, group and ethnic background, social and economic status. Based on the fundamental meaning associated with equal opportunities, as identified in the legal system, there should not be any discrimination among people aiming for a certain goal; however, the individuals and their qualities must conform to the intrinsic nature of the goals they wish to pursue. This means, equal opportunities must be provided to people aiming for a specific goal if they possess all qualities required to achieve that specific goal; sometimes, people-specific attributes such as age, gender, ethnic background etc may be included in the qualities required to achieve that goal. Application of principles of equality and equal opportunities to society has eventually moved to organizations; implementation in organizations reversely impacts the society. Legislation related to promotion of equality through equal opportunities has brought about significant change in the society. The EO act resulted in substantial increase in number of people belonging to diverse groups joining the workforce, which uplifted the society to a certain extent. Adoption of equal opportunities at organizations and institutions has directly impacted the civil society that houses diverse groups of population; moreover, this opened up multiple forms of employment (Jacobs, 2004). Organizations are capable of bringing vast social change and hence organizations have an obligation to promote social justice and equality (Mor-Barak, 2005). In order to adhere to the legislative requirements associated with EO, almost all organizations formulate their rules and policies associated with equal employment opportunities. The National Health Services (NHS) in the UK embraces almost all regulations outlined in the Equality Act 2010, as stated by Rees (2011). These regulations are embraced by organizations in the form of equal employment practices or diversity management practices. Adoption of diversity management by organizations to their advantage can be traced back to the Civil Rights movements in the United States (Mor-Barak, 2005). This concept of including EO through diversity management has evolved during last few decades in the management literature; the EO legislation and affirmative action policies, or positive action practices, form the base for diversity management in organizations and institutions. The benefits of globalization further intensified adoption of diversity management practices. According to Dhami et al., (2006), diversity management refers to the process of creating and maintaining a positive workplace that values individual differences and allows all individuals to use their potential to maximize their contributions to the organization’s strategic goals. The link between diversity management and equal opportunities is established through positive actions. Positive actions have three dimensions, legislative or adherence to national law; executive, concerned with practice; and political, which relates to communication and critical factors (Archibong et al, 2008). Therefore, positive actions or the practices formulated to drive EO are also impacted by the situations and political agenda besides legislative obligations. Due to the multiple dimensions, positive actions can be misinterpreted by general public, thereby resulting in partial implementation or execution. Diversity management practices are also being used to tackle discrimination issues at workplace. At NHS, the employment policies reflect diversity by adopting practices to employ and nurture people from different backgrounds. The Equal Opportunities and diversity policy of the NHS London Strategic Health Authority (SHA) states, ‘NHS London SHA is committed to building a workforce which reflects the diversity of the communities it serves, valuing the benefits brought by access to a wide range of individual backgrounds, experience and skills. It aims to create an organisation which promotes equality and is free from discrimination and harassment, where all staff can fulfill their full potential in an environment of fairness, dignity and respect (2006; p.4). This policy is executed by promoting a culture that embraces and values diversity as well as encourages EO best practices; secondly, it emphasizes usage of this policy through appropriate training for managers and staff; and, by establishing systems for monitoring the application of the policy and rectifying inequalities and deficiencies through appropriate actions. Anti-discrimination and EO policies are implemented in areas such as recruitment and selection, training and development, promotion, human resources policies, cultural and religious aspects, and disability. NHS is also committed to promote and support EO by establishing relationships with external suppliers and vendors that conform to its EO policies as well as follow anti-discrimination polices. NHS has established strong grievance redressal mechanisms to highlight any discrimination faced by its employees through its SHA’s Grievance and Disputes Procedure, which is applicable to the employees well as external candidates that had applied for a job posting. In order to ensure strict adherence to EO and anti-discrimination policies, the HR team at NHS conducts surveys and studies to assess application of anti-discrimination practices and procedures as well as their impact on employees. Various aspects studied during these include four main discriminatory attributes such as age, gender, contract type, ethnic origin and disability. With respect to these attributes, the studies assess issues such as job profiles, job roles, number of promotions, employee turnover, internal training and developmental activities, usage of disciplinary procedures, leaves taken, sickness etc (Equal employment and diversity policy, 2006). To strengthen EO and anti-discrimination, NHS added few more practices such as removal of default retirement age, a cross-Government LGBT programme, an extension of the right to request flexible working and implementation of 90 per cent of the Equality Act. However, gaps still exist in full execution of EO and related acts (Rees, 2011). Almost every organization is, both, legally and ethically obliged to follow equal opportunities and anti-discrimination for which policies, practices and procedures are laid down with intent to derive greater outcomes as well as to abide by legislative norms. In an ideal state, organizations reap multiple benefits of the EO regulations: they get the benefit from diverse talent brought by people belonging to diverse groups; they retain their best employees as well as their status as the employer of choice; they also reap higher performance and productivity from motivated and committed staff. However, this does not happen all the time and not all benefits are achieved as intended. Ashraf and Archibong’s (2009) case studies identified certain inequalities such as lack of inclusion of people belonging to specific ethnic groups in the senior management levels at NHS. Rees (2011) confessed about the issue of lack of equal pay at NHS despite the Equal Pay Act of 1970. Differences in employment rate of the disabled still exist although this rate has improved during last few years. Employability of disabled people would improve only if their skills match with the job roles at NHS. People from ethnic minority still face unemployment issues despite the EO legislation. People aged above 50 continue to experience rejection from employment due to their age when compared with applicants in the 30s range. Bullying and indifferent treatment of people with different sexual orientation continues to be reported. Based on a study conducted by NHS Employers (2005) on 20 NHS organisations, it was identified that the coordination among different positive action initiatives was lacking at NHS; secondly, the understanding related to positive action initiatives meant for minimizing inequality and injustice also differed (Ashraf & Archibong, 2010). Various studies conducted to assess the effectiveness of EO initiatives indicate that the policies and procedures are effective; however, implementation of these initiatives is ineffective in bringing about the desired ideal state of equality. Emphasis on learning, training, support, coaching and mentoring, on-the-job training, networking etc as practices for reinforcing positive action is high across the organisations in the UK. However, as pointed out by Iganski et al. (2001), slow implementation of EO initiatives at NHS also affects and reduces their effectiveness. Ashraf and Archibong (2010) assert that the managerial knowledge related to EO can leverage effectiveness of EO initiatives. Although the number of employees from the black and minority ethnic groups has increased at NHS, opportunities for their advancement still seem to be bleak. A study by the National Nursing Leadership Programme (2002) reported a few corrective action programmes employed to address this issue, such as, Top Talent programme, the Breaking Through Programme, BME Graduate Programme, Transformational Leadership course, The Mary Seacole Awards and Beacon programme, in addition to management and fast tracking schemes, BME staff forums, BME support groups and networks schemes aimed at recognizing and cultivating leadership potential within BME staff (cited in Ashraf & Archibong, 2010). From an ethics point of view, factors such as leadership, communication, and organizational culture are equally significant in implementing fair EO policies. People in the leadership role should implement diversity management practices in the right manner, and be able to produce effective outcomes through transparency, honesty, integrity and loyalty towards their organization as well as their people. The ethical code of conduct also emphasizes equality and equal treatment for all its employees at NHS; effectiveness of these codes is proved only when implemented and driven appropriately by the leaders and thus employees. Clear and effective communication with the employees and with management is the responsibility of managers; this plays a significant role in implementing EO positive actions. All training, learning, coaching and mentoring activities require effective communication from the managers and above. Organizational culture that promotes diversity as well as equality through congruent policies and procedures will reinforce EO; these policies and procedures should promote ethical, moral and legal relationship between employees and organization. In conclusion, equality and equal opportunities are considered as rights that every individual must be given by the society and by institutions. At organizations, equal opportunity is embraced in the form of diversity management practices that provide all employees with equal opportunities to grow, learn and reap organizational benefits. At NSH, diversity management discourages discrimination on the basis of age, gender, class, ethnicity, group, disability or any other form of discrimination against employees. After identification of certain gaps in EO and after experiencing issues, NHS now purposely employs noticeable number of people from these groups; and also ensures growth and learning opportunities through different practices, procedures and policies. However, ideal state of EO is hardly achieved because of many reasons such as ineffective strategies, incongruent initiatives and practices, ineffective leadership, inappropriate organizational culture, ineffective communication mechanisms, lack of coordination and control etc. Gaps in EO surface in the form of uneven representation of people from different groups such as the disabled, black and minority ethnic groups, and women at the top management levels at NHS. Unequal pay for women is another issue. These gaps can be addressed by adopting improved measures and practices towards EO backed by choosing effective leaders that can drive organizational practices and culture aligned to the organizational goals. Leadership knowledge, skills and awareness related to EO are critical to achievement of equality in an organization. References Archibong, U et al., (2008). A concept analysis of positive action in health and education. Diversity in Health and Social Care, 3 (4) pp. 233-243. Ashraf, F and Archibong, U. (2009). Journeying towards leadership: Personal accounts of experiences of corrective action by managers in NHS organisations. International journal of diversity in organizations, communities and nations, 9(3), pp.171-180. Ashraf, F and Archibong, U. (2010). Positive action in the UK. Dossier Positive Maßnahmen. Heinrich Boll Stiftung. Available from http://www.migration-boell.de/web/diversity/48_2695.asp (Accessed May 8, 2012). Cauthen, K. (1987). The passion for equal opportunity. In The passion for equality. New Jersey: Rowman & Littlefield. (Ch.4; pp: 99-129). Equal Opportunities and diversity policy. (2006). NHS London. Available from, http://www.london.nhs.uk/webfiles/Corporate/Jan%202009%20publication%20scheme%20upload/Equal%20Opportuntities%20and%20Diversity%20Policy.pdf (Accessed May 6, 2012). Jacobs, .L.A. (2004). Equal opportunities as a regulative deal. In Pursuing equal opportunities: The theory and practice of egalitarian justice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (ch.2; pp: 10-47). Mor-Barak, M.E. (2005). Managing diversity: Toward a globally inclusive workplace. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Rees, J. (2011). ‘Government strongly committed to equality says Jonathan Rees. NHS Employers. Published January 18, 2011. Available from, http://www.nhsemployers.org/EmploymentPolicyAndPractice/EqualityAndDiversity/atest-e-and-d-news/Pages/JonathanRees.aspx (Accessed May 6, 2012). Read More