John Penrose

Conservative Party | Weston-super-Mare

Workplace Diversity

John Penrose (Weston-super-Mare) (Con): I congratulate the hon. Lady on securing this important debate on a crucial topic. Has she had a chance to read the recent Select Committee on Work and Pensions report addressing participation by minorities in the workplace? The report identified not only the issues that she has mentioned, but a number of other vital points and difficulties experienced by many in minority groups trying to enter work, such as not having English as a first language and in some cases a lack of community support for entering work in the first place. Those are crucial issues as well. Does she have something to say about them, as well as ensuring proper employer attitudes?

Lorely Burt: I am extremely grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. I am afraid that I have not read the report, but I shall do so. Clearly, it is breaking new ground in a difficult area, particularly in relation to the attitude of local communities towards entering work. I am minded to recall the situation of women who have difficulties entering a job.

Perhaps they would be interested in self-employment. A number of extremely valuable micro-finance initiatives compliant with sharia law are available. Starting up, even on a small scale, does wonders not only for women’s confidence, but for interaction with the local community. I am in total agreement with him and thank him for his intervention.

I would like to make some suggestions about how the Government and employers can redress the unfairness. I have three main solutions. First, we need to develop cultural intelligence in the workplace; employers need to confront racism, sexism and anti-Muslim prejudice. That could be done by up-skilling managers to facilitate better awareness, understanding, confidence and competence in relating positively to employees from diverse backgrounds. Given the critical role of line managers in determining whether ethnic minority women thrive in an organisation, such cultural intelligence is essential.

Cultural intelligence cannot be learned in a one-off diversity training course. It needs to be embedded in management practice and organisational values so that people can deal effectively with any incidents of racism, sexism or anti-Muslim prejudice by staff, customers or clients and adopt open and transparent recruitment practices for all job opportunities.
The second method would be to improve careers advice and guidance. Careers staff need a better understanding of the specific barriers facing ethnic minority women, and advisers should be trained in cultural intelligence. Equality should be built into the new quality standards for careers information, advice and guidance in schools. The new careers service for adults proposed for England and Wales should have access points at community venues, and the marketing of the service should specifically target unemployed Bangladeshi and Pakistani women. Employers should be linked into careers advice services, to promote job opportunities more widely and to set up opportunities for work placements.

The third strand is to improve support for working parents and carers. We should use Jobcentre Plus advisers to help women to find employment that fits with their child care responsibilities. I am sure that that is done to an extent at the moment. This year, I introduced a ten-minute Bill, the Flexible Working Bill, which deals with extending the right to request flexible working to parents with children under the age of 18. However, the issue is more the cultural attitude among employers towards employees. Employers who introduce such measures find that retention is improved, the absenteeism record is much better and employee loyalty is much enhanced.

The community company initiative Women Like Us is fantastic. That organisation works exclusively to match the work needs of mothers returning to the workplace after having children with the needs of employers who are willing to offer flexible working in return for the huge talent, flexibility, loyalty and retention that they get in return. Let us have moreof that, please, and give Women Like Us and organisations like it the funding to develop throughout the United Kingdom.

I am indebted to Stonewall for its research relating to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. Lesbian, gay and bisexual people comprise about 6 per cent. of the population, according to Government estimates. That is roughly 1.7 million people in the UK work force. Stonewall found that 36 per cent. of gay employees say that they will change careers if discrimination continues. One third of gay staff conceal their sexual orientation from their employers and co-workers for fear of discrimination. Not surprisingly, at least 55 per cent. of gay employees facing discrimination report a direct negative work impact, so employers who do not deal with these problems will find their productivity decreasing. Most worryingly, approximately 20 per cent. of gay employees facing discrimination at work will consider suicide.

Sexual orientation is not yet within the auspices of the discrimination law review in so far as it applies to the equality duties being recommended for employers. Under present legislation, there are three separate duties in respect of race, gender and disability. The discrimination law review has one solid proposal to integrate those three into one duty, which I have already mentioned. It is considering extending that approach to sexual orientation. We certainly urge the Government to include that arrangement, as has already been proposed in Lord Lester’s Equality Bill of 2003.

Such a move would go a long way towards the measures that Stonewall is calling for. Will the Minister comment on what the Government have done so farto address the following solutions, proposed by Stonewall? It proposes measures to ensure that employers recruit and select fairly. Recruiters often have stereotyped notions of what LGB people are good or not good at. Stonewall proposes measures to ensure that recruiters understand fair selection criteria and apply them consistently.

Stonewall also proposes measures to tackle issues of workplace bullying and harassment and to make staff feel confident about using complaints procedures, even if that means revealing their sexual orientation. It proposes the establishment of employee networks—forums for staff who share one or more aspects of their identity. Employers increasingly appreciate the benefits that such forums can bring to the whole organisation. Also proposed are monitoring and evaluation on whether an organisation’s diversity policy is being implemented. For as long as I have held a women and equalities portfolio, I have sought assurances that the Government will address the issue of transgender people, but despite
that, in the equalities law review and indeed in all legislation relating to fair treatment in respect of sexual orientation, there remains absolutely no protection for transgender people unless they have had or are seeking gender reassignment surgery. The vast majority who do not want surgery—people such as transvestites and cross-dressers—will not be covered. Will the Minister please talk to his colleagues about that grave omission? Those people are not huge in number, but they are suffering and the Government are not listening.

With all the groups that I have discussed today, there is a huge pool of talent, skill, dedication and loyalty there for the asking. It makes huge economic sense for any employer to go fishing in that pool. Will the Government encourage and cajole employers to take the plunge, for the sake of their own profits, the economic prosperity of this country and fairness itself?

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Jim Fitzpatrick): It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair again, Mr. Caton. It is only five and a half hours since I last saw you there, so I hope that you managed to have a break in the meantime.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Solihull (Lorely Burt) on securing this very useful debate. I am grateful that she gave notice of some of the issues that she intended to raise. We can all agree that there is no place for discrimination in a modern, tolerant society, and there is much of which we can be proud. The UK has some of the most comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation in Europe and human rights are enshrined in statute. The Government have extended anti-discrimination law—as well as protecting people from discrimination because of their sex, race or disability, we have ensured that it is now also unlawful to discriminate in the workplace on the grounds of gender reassignment, sexual orientation, religion or belief, or age. Those regulations were intended, among other things, to help to tackle bullying and harassment in the workplace.

Evidence from the implementation of the regulations shows that anti-discrimination laws can be a powerful tool for tackling prejudice and bullying. People are making use of the regulations to enforce their rights through employment tribunals. The Government have also extended regulations to outlaw discrimination in the provision of goods and services on the grounds of sexual orientation and religion or belief.

Yesterday, as the hon. Lady mentioned, we published our consultation document on the discrimination law review to help to ensure that we have a framework of anti-discrimination law that is fit for purpose for the 21st century. We want to simplify and clarify the law. Clearer law in a single equality Act will help to prevent discrimination in the first place, because everyone will know where they stand. If people are discriminated against, they will know what their rights are. The single equality Act will put the law on equality and discrimination in one place, supported by clear and practical guidance. We want to hear people’s views on the many issues that we need to consider for such a comprehensive statute. We want to see whether there are gaps in protection that need to be filled. The consultation will also consider whether, and how, statutory protection against harassment on the ground of sexual orientation should be provided outside the workplace. Even though we have a lot to be proud of, there is still a long way to go. It is not enough just to have laws on the statute book, because they must be accompanied by a change in attitude.

I want to deal with the specific issue of Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Afro-Caribbean women and work.

John Penrose: Before the Minister moves on to the specific issues of women and ethnic minorities, I would like to ask him something. He mentioned age discrimination. I believe that the Government recently said that they were reluctant to extend the protection from age discrimination to people who are older than 65 and that they will not be re-examining the issue until 2011. Given that he has mentioned that the Government are seeking comments on equality and anti-discrimination law, will they be considering comments on age discrimination in respect of over-65s before 2011?
Jim Fitzpatrick: The age discrimination regulations are relatively new and we are monitoring them carefully. The hon. Gentleman, should he wish to do so, will obviously have the opportunity to make a contribution to the equality consultation that is about to start—we are certainly interested in application and experience.

The Equal Opportunities Commission’s report “Moving on up?” showed a contrasting picture. It contains stories about women who have broken down barriers and overcome the preconceptions to become very successful in their chosen fields of education, business and the wider community. Young Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Black Caribbean women are increasingly well qualified and keen to work, but they find it harder than white women to get jobs and to get promoted. Bangladeshi and Pakistani women who have a degree and are seeking work are five times more likely to be unemployed than white British women with a degree. The EOC found that Pakistani women who work full-time face a large pay gap, earning £3.28 less per hour—or 28 per cent. less—than white British men working full-time

The gender and ethnic pay gap is not just bad news for women, because it means that women’s abilities and skills are not being fully utilised in business and the economy. The Government are committed to reducing the gap between men’s and women’s earnings, and tackling the obstacles that prevent people from achieving their potential. We can help by means other than anti-discrimination legislation. The EOC identified one of the main barriers as being the fact that working parents and carers find it hard to access the support that they need. I can proudly say that we have done a lot to support working families: we have created more than 1 million child care places; there are now more than 1,000 Sure Start centres across the country, providing families with support and advice; the right to request flexible working has made a huge difference, because in the five years since its introduction the number of new parents working flexibly has trebled; and we have just extended the right to request flexible working to carers of adults, giving the right to 2.65 million more employees. Our research shows that flexible working is becoming the norm. Almost all employees surveyed said that some form of flexible working was available.

The Government also have specific, targeted programmes to help the most disadvantaged ethnic groups to find work—for example, the science, technology, engineering and maths access grants given to increase the participation of Afro-Caribbean boys and Pakistani and Bangladeshi girls in those subjects. The programme aims to encourage those groups who are particularly under-represented in related careers. Another such scheme is the partners outreach programme, which is designed to help Pakistani and Bangladeshi women who neither work nor claim benefits.