Agenda item

6.1  The Chair welcomed to the meeting Cllr Carole Williams Cabinet Member for Employment, Skills and Human Resources and Sonia Khan Head of Policy and Strategic Delivery.

 

6.2  This is an update on the Single Equality Scheme for Hackney 2018 -2022 covering the priorities and progress of the scheme.  The officer commended by providing some background information about the scheme and its development.  The main points from the presentation were:

 

6.2.1  In terms of the Council’s response and its approach to promoting equalities.  The officer advised they want to ensure equalities is embedded and delivered in all services and engages residents in a business as usual way.

 

6.2.2  The Council’s Single Equality Scheme does not articulate everything they would like partners or services need to do in relation to promoting equalities.  For example this scheme would not outline the work schools need to do to ensure children have the best education.  The scheme outlines how they wish to proactively tackle specific inequalities.  From the Council’s assessment a main stream approach for all services would not be enough to shift the borough’s complex inequalities.  This is because it may be that there are external factors and structural inequalities a group faces that leaves them more disadvantaged than others.  Through this scheme the Council aims to proactively eliminate discrimination and disadvantage that may be faced by certain groups.

 

6.2.3  The scheme sets out the key objectives and associated actions they wish to take.  It also shows how the Council meets the Equalities Act and its public sector equalities duties.

 

6.2.4  The scheme was developed drawing on the insight gathered from the Community Strategy and produced an equalities evidence base - this is publically available.  This information was reviewed alongside other sources of information (resident insight, staff surveys, assessment on progress and scrutiny reviews). 

 

6.2.5  The objectives in this scheme look at both work to tackle poverty and tackling discrimination and disadvantage linked to protected characteristics.  This recognises socioeconomic disadvantage as a key driver.  However, there are other drivers too and the scheme acknowledges the relationship between them.  The third objective is about building a cohesive and inclusive borough.

 

6.2.6  The officer referenced the objectives in the scheme.  There are 2 enabling objectives.

a)  Embedding prevention into service delivery - the Council has done a lot of work to trail preventative approaches.  The Council has a body of work it can use to share across the council to look at how they tackle root causes.

b)  Promoting a culture of inclusive leadership and developing a more diverse workforce – this aims to have a more diverse workforce that thinks diversely in terms of inclusive leadership.  A diverse workforce better represents the demographics of the borough and helps to address some of the inequalities.

 

6.2.7  The scheme has overarching measures of success that are being monitored for key inequalities and gaps.  To ensure that inequalities in education, employment and health do not worsen and if possible are narrowed.

 

6.2.8  In reference to the resident’s survey.  The Council would expect to see that satisfaction rate improves for equality groups where there is a difference and that the borough’s cohesion indicators remain at their high levels.

 

6.2.9  Through the equalities work they are developing a Poverty Reduction Strategy to make sure they have a more cohesive approach to tackling poverty and are delivering tangible new actions that benefit those in poverty and seek to keep people out of poverty.

 

6.2.10  The officer explained the equalities evidence base is complex and highlighted the key inequalities as school attainment, life expectancy and Hackney’s unemployment rate.

 

6.2.11  The officer informed the Commission the progress update being provided was in advance of the formal update in May 2020.  The update has focused on the actions in the scheme which require proactive crosscutting work, rather than the ongoing work which is referenced e.g. Housing Strategy or early years.

 

6.2.12  The priorities for the first year involved developing a Poverty Reduction Strategy.  The Council is currently developing a framework that seeks to embed an approach to poverty reduction in council plans and policies; to support residents who are living in poverty and seeks to prevent poverty.  Within this area of work they have also developed a food poverty action plan and the Inclusive Economy Strategy.

 

6.2.13  The second objective in the priority year was tackling disadvantage and discrimination for groups based on structural inequalities or prejudice and discrimination.  The key focus has been on the following areas:

1.  Improving outcomes for young black men - Three work streams: education, mental health, reducing harm - moving to a youth led accountability structure from April 2020

2.  Young Futures Commission -Commission will share findings and recommendations early in 2020/21

3.  Older People’s Strategy -Ageing Well Strategy being developed through co-production with stakeholders and older people - to go to Cabinet early in 2020/21

4.  Trans and non-binary inclusion in services and facilities - Focus groups to capture lived experience of services in February to inform recommendations

5.  Inclusion and access to leisure centres, parks and libraries - Focus groups going on in leisure centres, Parks strategy being developed

6.  Hackney an accessible place for everyone -Visits to areas, involving staff, residents and Members will begin in February 2020- to look at access and mobility and identify changes that can be made to specific sites and to Policy.

7.  Integrated Communities Programme -Identified and mainstreamed improvements to services supporting migrants.

 

6.2.14  The third objective in the priority year was about cohesion covering the adoption of a cultural strategy and inclusive language guide; to help staff understand how to think inclusively about different people and communities.  The aim of the guidance for staff is to help improve engagement with the Charedi community.  This information does not provide an exhaustive list but touches on the areas that have been developmental.

 

6.2.15  In terms of the enabling objectives they are beginning to share learning from all locality based approaches that seek to take preventative approaches.  Embedding a user led approach to service design.

 

6.2.16  The second enabling objective was the work to promote an inclusive leadership culture.  This was launched last year and they trained champions.  The champions have trained senior managers.  The Council expects to have all senior managers trained by March 2020.  After the training they will look at how to embed the principles into the organisational culture and training. 

 

6.2.17  In addition is the Council’s work about BAME staff progression.  The Director have talked to over 300 staff and issues a separate survey for anonymous contributions.  They have now worked with staff to shape an action plan which was shared.

 

6.2.18  The priorities for 2020-21

?  Turkish Kurdish inequality - looking more closely at the needs of the community and identifying how outcomes can be improved

?  Encouraging men to seek help earlier (link to wider work to encourage earlier engagement)

?  LGBTQ Equality plan -scoping and actions.  Last reviewed in 2014/15 so doing a refresh of this work.

?  Undertaking further development work into social isolation

?  Making it easier for residents to contribute to community life

?  Developing actions to improve digital inclusion 

?  Developing a better understanding of the nuanced views of the Council - understanding lived experiences of austerity, understanding differentiated views on satisfaction and trust, confidence and fair treatment.

 

6.3  Questions, Comments and Discussion

 

(i)  Members referred to the points made by the Hackney Independent Safeguarding Chair in the Hackney Citizen.  The remarks were made particularly in relation to young people.  He stated “that the problems they are dealing with in here are different from other boroughs because they are multi layered with people moving in with lots of money displacing other people who have been here for a long time, which creates a level of resentment”.  Members commented the scheme highlights very complex issues and asked how much can the local authority do, to mitigate the effects of the inequalities described?

 

(ii)  Member queried what success would look like in relation to the objectives?  Members referred to the engagement work with the Charedi community how many people from the Charedi community and enquired how many residents from this community were employed by the Council.  Members also asked to what extent increased efforts have been made in that area. 

 

(iii)  Members asked for further clarity about the guidance asking if it was a full training programme, its aims and the measures it be judged against?

 

(iv)  Members referred to the Inclusive Economy Strategy and asked how ambitious is the strategy?  Members enquired if the strategy covered the work of partners?  Members pointed out the local hospital has 300 staff employed by a sub-contractor that does not pay the London living wage.  Members asked if the strategy covered this through using the Council’s power on the Integrated Commissioning Board.

 

(v)  Member referred to the report on page 50 in the agenda and referred to this statement “We need to see things from the perspective of the person who is in poverty, and the multiple and compounding ways that this impacts on their life”.  Members asked given the volume of impacts on a number of groups how the council proposed to hear their voices in a meaningful way that gets past the usual groups already engaged?

 

In response the Head of Policy and Strategic Delivery advised the single equalities scheme has been honest on the stark realities.  However, if we were to articulate - like we do in the Inclusive Economy Strategy – the links between change and growth this brings prosperity for some and inequalities for others (Using the links that have been researched).  The principle is that although they recognise this is a big challenge they are starting with that policy position that the safeguarding Chair raised.  Therefore just simply creating opportunities through promoting prosperity alone does not lead to economic and community wellbeing.  The Scheme is a public articulation of that challenge and it is for officers to find a way to practically embed them.

 

In relation to strategy first and action later.  The scheme outlines a lot of plans but also builds on the previous scheme.  This has been a continuous learning process whilst recognising there has been a political reset.  It is an articulation of a point in time based on the evidence at that time of what they need.  The officer pointed out if challenges are reviewed on a service by service basis and do not take a holistic approach to cross cutting issues you will miss things that might help you to prevent issues.

 

In terms of what success looks like, they are scoping out a success criteria.  But overall they will look at the inequalities and assess whether the gap is narrowing for different areas including cohesion and wellbeing.  The officer pointed out this is not just about maintaining cohesion levels but monitoring for change as a result of the work; to assess their impact.

 

In relation to staff for their work on workforce diversity.  There was an assessment of the gap.  Looking at whether staff think the organisation is committed to equality in policy and in practice.  This is covered by questions to staff about perception and if senior managers were committed to inclusivity.  It’s a combination of looking at resident perception in a granular way alongside the equalities evidence base and reviewing the changes.

 

In terms of the Charedi community and workforce diversity plans.  The Council acknowledged they do not have a large number of Charedi residents employed.  The officer advised they have worked on an employment programme in the past with partners like Interlink.  The council is aware of the structural inequalities and barriers.  There is now an approach looking at working with the community to consider employability overall as opposed to developing a council led programme.  They recognise there are different barriers for different groups within the community.  This will be their starting point with the community.

 

In reference to the Council’s work on engagement it is about council services having a consistent approach in terms of understanding the different ways to engage, the different channels and how to engage.  The aim is to create a body of understanding and wisdom for staff to draw on.

 

In reference to the question about the inclusive economy strategy they are started that dialogue.  They held a session inviting local employers who are considered anchor institutions - within a community wealth building approach - the most significant employers, those we are procuring services from and those that have property.  This is not full influence and all the levers but it is a start, the objective being to get employers to work with the council.  This is discussed at the Integrated Commissioning Board.

 

In terms of lived experience and poverty it is important to get information about the lived experience.  For the food poverty work they carried out interviews with people in the community and developed case studies.  Further work is being scoped.  The Council wants to understand how people have come through their experiences of poverty.  They will draw on the insight from other programmes (like the Young Black Men programme) whilst being respectful of people’s time.

 

(vi)  The Cabinet Member for Employment, Skills and Human Resources asked Members for more clarity on why they had focused on the Charedi community within the borough?

 

In response Members explained as a local councillor they had limited knowledge about the community and this session prompted them to ask the question about this community group.  They wanted to understand if the structural barriers of employment are so great or if there is a way to bridge that.

 

The Cabinet Member explained there is interest about other similar research models from the UK and overseas to see whether they can be adopted.  The Cabinet Member advised she will continue these conversations with officers.

 

(vii)  Members referred to the Council’s Ofsted inspections and enquired if the inspection reports were used as an opportunity to reflect on the changes in the workforce where the organisation undergoes period of change.  Members questioned if there was a need to monitor if particular groups are overrepresented in the numbers leaving the workforce e.g. women on maternity leave, single parents or ethnic minorities.  Also if there needs to be further work to look at who is coming in to replace those leaving?

 

(viii)  Members enquired about the involvement of businesses with the Single Equality Scheme objectives?

 

(ix)  Members made the following enquires:

a)  The work of the council in the past?

b)  The measures being put in place

c)  The levels of awareness in terms of the different communications they need to put out to enable young black males to be as equally employable as young white males.

 

(x)  Members referred to the incident in Streatham and enquired what communication the council is going to issue to reduce hate crime that is linked to these types of incidents and affects community cohesion.

 

(xi)  Members referred to the incident in Streatham and enquired what communication the council is going to issue to reduce hate crime that is linked to these types of incidents and affects community cohesion.

 

(xii)  Members enquired how the council is ensuring the environment is friendly for older people in the borough.  Making it intergenerational friendly for both the older and younger generations.

 

(xiii)  Members commented the scheme was an impressive range of actions to tackling a difficult challenge like inequalities.  Members understood the long term outcomes was to narrow the indices raised.  Members enquired how the yearly targets matched against the resources and how they will monitor progress against the longer term objectives.  Members pointed out the report does not provide details about resources and they wanted reassurance there were resources and an intermediate plan to match this for each objective.

 

In response to the questions the Head of Policy and Strategic Delivery advised the following:

 

In relation to how the council understands its workforce profile.  This work came from the working groups carried out with black and ethnic minority staff.  This was also highlighted as good practice.  An organisation is encouraged to understand the workforce profile in detail and the dynamics.  The Council has tried to do both.  The Council has identified improvements which officers are working on.  The Council aims to build on the profile information to provide a more nuanced and granular analysis.  This will include the people coming into the organisation e.g. who is interviewed verses who is recruited; the pipeline of progression and the impact of organisational change.  The Council recognises if it looks at the work force profile data they have now it does not give them an understanding of movements. 

 

The Cabinet Member for Employment, Skills and Human Resources added in reference to the voluntary redundancy (VR) scheme and the overall impact this has had on the workforce.  They are currently analysing the VR data.  The Cabinet Members advised this will be shared with Members once it is complete.

 

There is work on a local recruitment campaign.  This has been launched to ensure they have a representative workforce, one the council wishes to see better reflects the local community.  In addition the Cabinet Member pointed out the apprenticeship scheme achieved its aim of increasing the number of local residents working for the council.  Highlighting the council monitors and reviews the diversity of the apprenticeship programme within the council.  The Cabinet Member informed the apprenticeship profile represents the group’s Members would like to see working for the council (single parents, part time workers, workers with a disability and neurodiverse conditions as well as mental health conditions) from a diverse range of ethnic backgrounds. 

 

(xiv)  Members enquired about receiving a written update on the VR and apprenticeship schemes when available. 

 

The Cabinet Member for Employment, Skills and Human Resources advised a briefing session was being prepared for the next day and information will be sent to Members following further analysis of the impact on the profile. 

 

In response to the question about the involvement of businesses.  The Council has adopted a charter and this outlines the Council’s requests of businesses.  In relation to this charter the Regeneration Team is looking at how the council can work with businesses on employment and sustainable procurement.

 

In response to the questions about the council’s work with young black males.  The Council is evaluating their work to address that inequality in terms of the demographic representations.  Through the Improving Outcomes for YBM programme a group of corporates have put a funding contribution to the programme.  There is work across London with employers to look at the inequality for graduates.  This work is challenging an employer’s idea of employability.  In addition Department of Works and Pension (DWP) through their flexible fund DWP are funding work that is related to the group being discussed.  The Council’s work through the programme has identified what works.  In partnership they are looking at how to mainstream this work.

 

In regards to the Council’s tolerance strategy and policy there is an officer group looking at this area of work.  The scheme seeks to address this before it becomes an issue and its aim is to help the community be as tolerant as possible.

 

In terms of older people they have worked with older people to help to develop the Aging Well Strategy and an update on the strategy’s development went to Health in Hackney Scrutiny Commission (HiH) before Christmas.  Access and mobility is a key strand of work and staff will go out on visits to look at access and space.

 

In terms of the targets the officer acknowledged they were ambitious but pointed out the progress to date and what had been achieved in one year.  The officer highlighted in terms of the Poverty Strategy work success would be achieving a cohesive approach to poverty by the end of the year.  Currently the council has a number of different initiatives but not a cohesive approach.  However after year one they will be in a better position to demonstrate impact.  This is a longer term goal.

 

(xv)  Members referred to the Turkish and Kurdish and the actions presented.  Members pointed out the challenges are not new and have been around for a number of years.  Members referred to the point in the presentation that advised the council would be drawing on the approaches from the YBM programme.  Members asked what this means practically for the Turkish and Kurdish community?  Members also referred to the point about developing a better understanding of the specific inequalities.  Members pointed out there are difference between the 2 community groups as well as difference within the groups themselves and; commented there does not always seem to be an understanding of these community groups and an assumption they can be put together. 

 

(xvi)  Members enquired what outcomes would the council expect to see to show achievement?

 

In response the Head of Policy and Strategic Delivery advised for their work on Turkish and Kurdish communities this has not been addressed in year one.  Some initial research work has been conducted to understand the data and inequalities in relation to education, self-employment, health outcomes and issues for older people.  The Council also needs to complete its work with the VCS representatives and the community.  The next step would be to develop the granular data from insight work about what is driving inequalities to identify the cross cutting lessons.  This means not just looking at an individual service response but taking a more holistic view.

 

In relation to the question about outcomes, for each area there are specific outcomes.  This involves looking at the gap and narrowing the gap.  However, this should not result in an overall drop.  For example in the area of educational attainment, the gap for the community group and overall should not narrow because attainment overall has fallen.

 

The Cabinet Member for Employment, Skills and Human Resources agreed with the point made by Members about the differences within a BMAE group.  Acknowledging that when the terminology BAME is used it is creating one cohesive collective group that is glossing over huge differences between different ethnic minority groups.  Pointing out this is making the ethnic minatory groups invisible when those groups want to be visible. 

 

The Head of Policy and Strategic Delivery added for the Improving Outcomes for YMB programme where they can be specific about the inequalities for different groups and were possible; they have encouraged the approach of being specific and intersectional.