Equality Impact Assessments
Equality
Impact Assessment
Record Form
Attendance and Authorised Absence Policy and Procedures
(2010)
North Norfolk District Council
Page 1
Directorate
Service
Resources
Human Resources/Organisational Development
HR Officer
Attendance and Authorised Absence Policy and Procedures
Title of the policy being
assessed
The status of the policy
1. What are the aims,
objectives and purposes
of the policy?
Person
Date
responsible for assessment
the assessment completed
September 2010
Revised. This document combines the two previously separate documents – (1) Attendance Policy and (2)
Authorised Absence Procedures.
This policy/procedure aims to be a reference point for listing the different types of absence an employee
may take or book in the course of their employment. It is a source of information for employees and
managers alike. Although some specific types of absence (such as maternity leave) are not covered in this
policy, the appropriate reference point for this information is listed at the start of the policy.
The document also sets out roles and responsibilities for employees, managers and Human Resources
(HR) in relation to the policy.
The Authorised Absence Policy and Procedure aims to:
 Recognise that employees may wish for, or require, leave from work under a variety of circumstances.
 Outlines a number of the types of leave available, circumstances under which they may apply, how to
request/arrange the leave and where appropriate - the options available.
 Provide an overview of the available arrangements for when it is not possible for employees to attend
work and help employees to manage work life balance.
The Attendance Policy and Procedure aims to:
 Provide clarity and a positive, fair, sensitive and consistent framework for managing staff attendance.
 Give managers the tools to support employees and manage staff attendance whilst being alert to
frequent short-term absence and/or high levels of sickness absence and taking prompt action as
necessary.
 Recognise that whilst employees will at times be prevented from attending work through ill health, we
have a duty to maintain service delivery and minimise disruption to both service delivery and
colleagues
2
2. Does the policy support
other objectives of the
council?
Yes,
 Business continuity – maintaining service delivery, planning to cover absence, and updating staff on








new developments on their return.
The Corporate Plan ‘Changing Gear’ – first class resource management and the corporate values
of ‘Valuing Staff’ – by providing support (where appropriate) and assisting employees in managing
their work life balance (e.g. through annual leave or time off for training); ‘Equality & Diversity’ –
supporting people to maintain attendance if required, reasonable adjustments for those who need
them, the provisions in the authorised absence section support diversity in the workforce; ‘Continuous
Improvement’ – trying to improve our absence figure, which is still higher than some other local
authorities and has obvious impacts on service delivery, other employees and finances.
Looking after the wellbeing of our staff and supporting wellbeing initiatives/services such as ‘Fit for
business’, the Employee Assistance Programme and the use of Occupational Health.
Disciplinary Procedure – links to the disciplinary procedure under the health capability procedure.
Frequent short term absences that have been investigated and where there is found to be no
acceptable reason for them, would be dealt with under the Disciplinary Procedure (which has its own
equality impact assessment).
Grievance Procedure – if an employee feels they have not been treated fairly under this policy they
are able to raise a grievance (this procedure has its own equality impact assessment).
Health and Safety – duty of care to staff, risk assessments relating to health issues are carried out as
and when appropriate.
The Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) – Ill Health Retirement may be an option for some
employees with ongoing health problems, provided that they are pension scheme members and meet
the relevant criteria. This is mentioned in section 10 of the Attendance Policy.
Legal compliance – for example with the Working Time Regulations 1998; Disability Discrimination
Act 1995 (as amended), Sex Discrimination Act 1975; 1983 and from October 2010 - the Equality Act
2010.
As well as links between the three component parts of the document - Attendance Policy, Authorised
Absence Policy and Health Capability Procedure there are also links with other policies including:
o Maternity Scheme
o Maternity Support Scheme
o Guidelines on the Flex Scheme
o Pandemic Flu Policy
o Equality & Diversity Policy
o Flexitime Guidance
3
o
o
o
o
o
3. Who is intended to
benefit from the policy,
and in what way?
4. What outcomes are
anticipated from the
policy being in place?
Jury Service Guidance
Information on Statutory Adoption Pay and Leave
Pension and Discretionary Benefits Policies
Disciplinary Procedure
Health and Safety Policy
All employees – Improved information regarding all aspects of attendance and authorised absence,
including a framework for managing sickness absence. Provides support and assistance where
appropriate
All managers – Improved information regarding all aspects of attendance and authorised absence,
including a framework for managing sickness absence. Also management information is provided by
ensuring that absence is recorded accurately and consistently
Trade Unions – a framework on how attendance will be managed and the role of trade union
representatives where appropriate, as well as information on all aspects of authorised absence and
attendance
All customers & service users – by maintaining service delivery and appropriately supporting the staff who
provide the service
ICAS (Employee Assistance Programme) – Provides the telephone advisers with contextual information
on which they can base their advice, when contacted by a member of staff
Human Resources – guidance for inputting and recording sickness as well as for where triggers are met
and in supporting Managers who are using the policy, as well as a reference point for the team, employees
and managers regarding all types of authorised absence
Managers and employees having a better understanding of absence management and leave
options/administration.
Better work life balance through improved awareness and therefore greater use of arrangements to assist
work life balance.
Consistent treatment through use of an established framework.
Support offered to employees where appropriate.
A mechanism for handling frequent short term absences and long term absences.
Managers having a better understanding of their role in managing attendance.
5. Identify and select your
assessment team.
Name
Role
HR Officer
Consultees
6. What data have you
Source and
Responsibilities
HR Officer
Various
Owner
4
Lead on assessment
See Appendix A
Findings
Data Gaps
gathered for this
assessment?
How have you analysed
this data?
Age of Data
Sickness Absence
review (SAR) data for
financial years 2008 &
2009
Workforce Profile Data
from Cognos (Cognos is
a tool that allows us to
create reports from the
information held on the
Human Resources
computer system –
‘Resource link’)
Sickness absence
figures analysed by
equality strand (such as
gender, disability etc) –
data from Cognos.
Human
Resources
See Appendix C
n/a
Human
Resources
These reports provide data
regarding the workforce on all 6
of the equality strands covered
by this assessment. Relevant
figures are used throughout the
assessment.
n/a
Human
Resources
These figures give data for a
trend analysis and showed
the average day’s sickness
per employee and that
females employees on
average have more day’s
sickness absence than male
employees. In general there
has been a trend of reduced
absence in the last few years.
Analysis gives
information on where
disabled employees
are having sickness
absence, but does not
show whether or not
the sickness is
actually related to
their disability.
Local Government
Sickness Absence and
Causes (2009)
LGAAR – Local
Govt Association
Analysis and
Research team
Average sickness absence level n/a
for a local authority is 9.2 days
per FTE per year. (Compared to
the figure for the Council which
is currently 8.42 days per FTE
per year.)
According to the LGAAR report,
sickness absence is higher
amongst part time staff.
The most important single cause
of absence was stress,
5
Absence Management
Survey (2009)
CIPD - Chartered
Institute of
Personnel and
Development
Employers forum on
Disability (2009)
Employers forum
on Disability
Ill Health Retirement
Figures (from a cognos
leavers report) for the
previous 2 financial
years- 08/09 & 09/10.
Age discrimination:
reward policies and
procedures (May 2009)
Human
Resources
CIPD - Chartered
Institute of
Personnel and
Development
6
depression, anxiety, mental
health and fatigue. The most
prevalent cause of long term
sickness was stress (accounting
for 29.1%) and the most
prevalent cause of short term
sickness was infections
(accounting for 29.9%).
The national average for
sickness for public and private
sector combined is 7.4 days
(compared to 8.42 at NNDC).
The average cost of absence
per employee is £692 per year.
‘Disabled people in work tend to
have better attendance records,
stay with employers longer and
have fewer accidents at work.’
Only a small number of Ill Health
retirements have occurred in the
last 2 years therefore a full
analysis was not possible or
meaningful.
‘The Age Regulations1
recognise that there may be
occasions when seemingly
discriminatory treatment or
practice is warranted.
Regulation 32 provides a
complete exemption with
respect to some pay and
benefits and a basis for
justification in respect of others
as follows: It is not unlawful for
an employer to award a benefit
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Grievance data
(From the Discipline and
Grievance Spreedsheet;
data since April 2008)
Human
Resources
Staff Survey 2010 –
Ipsos MORI/NNDC
Human
Resources
Intranet INTRAN pages
Previous EqIA of
Attendance Policy
carried out in 2009
Maureen Wells
Human
Resources
to workers based upon their
length of service, where the
length of service is no more than
five years.’
One grievance has been taken n/a
out in relation to this policy, but
not relating to an equality
strand. The grievance may be
resolved by this policy review.
Feelings
of
equality
and n/a
disadvantage by equality strand
– i.e. age, gender, disability and
so on
Services that INTRAN can offer. n/a
Previous assessment of the
old attendance policy. The
action plan fed into the policy
review and all actions have
been completed.
n/a
Views from employee
Human
Changes made following this n/a
representatives
Resources
consultation
are
listed
in
regarding the
Appendix A.
assessment
North Norfolk District North
Norfolk Guidelines on how to make n/a
Councils
accessibility District Council
information more accessible
matters standards
The average rate of sickness absence at the Council currently is 8.42 days per employee per year. This is
lower than the public sector average (according to the LGAAR, 2009) which is 9.2 days.
7. Who are the main
stakeholders of this
policy?
Community

Staff/Members




North Norfolk community
7
All employees
All managers
Members
Trade union representatives
Partners


Occupational Health
ICAS (Employee assistance
programme providers)
8. Are there any concerns
that the policy could have
a negative impact with
regard to race and
ethnicity?
What evidence (actual data or assumptions) do you have to support
this?
In line with the Council’s Diversity and Equality Policy, this policy applies equally to
all employees regardless of race and ethnicity. This is reinforced by the equality
statements in the documents themselves. The policy sets out frameworks for
managing sickness absence and for managing authorised absences. Having this
framework and reference point in place should aid managers and human resources
in taking a consistent approach across all employees in the authority regardless of
their race or ethnicity. UNISON will also be consulted with regarding this policy.
There were X ill heath retirements in the periods 2008/9 & 2009/10. Both employees
were of ‘White British’ ethnic origin, but given the ethnic make-up of the workforce at
North Norfolk District Council (95.91% White British) this is neither surprising, nor
deemed to be of significance. 97.20% of the SAR meetings held were with ‘White
British’ employees, which is also consistent with the race/ethnicity composition of the
workforce.
No
The staff survey asked a general question about disadvantage felt due to
race/ethnicity at the Council, the result was that 0% of staff reported feeling that they
had been disadvantaged a great deal or a fair amount on account of their race.
Whilst this data does not relate directly to the attendance and authorised absence
policy and procedures, it is a positive indication on the whole.
‘INTRAN’ services (translation) would also be available if there was a need to
communicate the policy in another language, for example. This will ensure that the
policy is accessible to all.
There is no evidence that this policy has an adverse impact on any particular
racial/ethnic group.
8
9. Are there any concerns
that the policy could have
a negative impact with
regard to gender?
What evidence (actual data or assumptions) do you have to support
this?
In line with the Council’s Diversity and Equality Policy, this policy applies equally to
all employees regardless of gender or related protected characteristics under the
Equality Act 2010 such as pregnancy, maternity or gender reassignment. This is
reinforced by the equality statements in the documents themselves. The policy sets
out frameworks for managing sickness absence and for managing authorised
absences. Having this framework and reference point in place should aid managers
and Human Resources in taking a consistent approach across all employees at the
Council regardless of gender factors. UNISON will also be consulted with regarding
this policy.
There is a note under section 10.3 of the policy that medical procedures for gender
reassignment would not be classed as ‘elective’, ensuring that there is not an
adverse impact on transgender employees wishing to undergo such procedures.
No
The Flexible Working Survey 2008 showed that women are more likely than men to
have caring responsibilities. There are provisions available for all employees with
caring responsibilities under the authorised absence part of the policy - such as
emergency time off for dependants (section 16), ‘stuck not sick leave’ (section 19)
and an ongoing need for time off (section 20). These types of authorised absence
are available in addition to the provisions whereby employees can request flexible
working arrangements and the flexitime scheme (if applicable). These extra
provisions may increase flexibility for employees, which would be considered
positive when 42% of staff agreed that more flexible working opportunities would
improve performance (Staff Survey, 2010).
Analysis of our sickness absence figures show that our female employees are more
likely to have time off than men – the average days sickness per female FTE is
10.64 days compared to 3.41 days per male FTE. At NNDC women are more likely
to work part time (80.6% of those working part time are females) and therefore this
corresponds with the LGAAR data stating that sickness absence is likely to be
higher amongst part time staff. There is no clear indication from the data as to the
reasons for this, therefore we will need to continue to monitor in the coming years to
see if it is a prevailing trend.
9
A new edition to the attendance policy is section 13 regarding sickness absence
relating to pregnancy, whether or not absence was pregnancy related would be
considered prior to conducting an SAR meeting.
As women are more likely to be working part time (80.6% of those working part time
are women), in order to ensure that all employees receive the information on these
revised version of the policies any briefing sessions would need to be timed
appropriately to catch as many employees as possible – e.g. different days of the
week, different times etc. The procedure should also be communicated in a number
of different formats – intranet, briefing newsletter, team briefings etc. All
communications should comply with the Council Accessibility Matters Standards.
In addition to considering part time employees in the communication of the policy,
related training and so on, there may also be another indirect effect on women. In
order to ensure that a return to work meeting is carried out promptly regardless of
working pattern or gender, the policy now states that the return to work meeting
should be held within three of the employees’ working days.
In terms of equity for part time employees, the Authorised Absence part of the
document sets out how their entitlement to leave is calculated. This is done on a prorata basis and so each part time employee receives leave proportionate to that of a
full time employee. There is also a provision under section 7.2 whereby part time
workers can agree in advance with their managers whether they wish to work an
alternative day in the week where there is a public holiday or to use some of their
annual or flex leave entitlement to cover the day off instead. Whilst women are more
likely to be part time, there is no indirect adverse affect in terms of leave
entitlement/public holidays.
There were X ill heath retirements in the periods 2008/9 & 2009/10. Both employees
were X. Although there are actually more females than males in the Council’s
workforce, due to the size of the sample this is not thought to be significant.
Whilst more females than males have attended ‘review meetings’ under this policy
(in total 121 meetings were triggered with females, compared to 45 males), it is not
10
felt to be significant as there are more women than men in the workforce (61.4% of
our workforce are female).
It was the finding of the Staff Survey 2010 that 3% of employees felt that they had
been disadvantaged on account of their sex at the Council. However, this is not a
finding which relates specifically to this policy/procedure and there is no evidence
that the provisions of this document promote disadvantage, but moreover, improve
the options for those with caring responsibilities, which has a positive ‘knock-on’
effect on gender.
There is no evidence that this policy has an adverse impact on any particular gender
group.
10.Are there any concerns
that the policy could have
a negative impact with
regard to disability?
What evidence (actual data or assumptions) do you have to support
this?
In line with the Council’s Diversity and Equality Policy, this policy applies equally to
all employees regardless of disability status. This is reinforced by the equality
statements in the documents themselves. The policy sets out frameworks for
managing sickness absence and for managing authorised absences. Having this
framework and reference point in place should aid managers and Human Resources
in taking a consistent approach across all employees in the authority regardless of
disability status. UNISON will also be consulted with regarding this policy.
No
In terms of SAR meetings held (meetings held under the policy where frequent short
term absence is identified) these generally reflect the composition of the workforce.
However, there is an over-representation in the case of disabled employees (10.24%
of meetings triggered were with disabled employees, compared to 7.89% of the
workforce declaring that they were disabled in 2009/10). However, this does not
necessarily indicate that there is an adverse impact as the meetings are designed to
highlight any underlying causes of absence and any potential ways that the Council
may be able to help. For this reason SAR meetings can have a positive impact for
disabled employees in helping to identify reasonable adjustments and other support
which the Council may be able to offer the employees.
The findings of the Staff Survey 2010 were that generally 3% of employees felt they
had experienced some disadvantage on account of their disability. Whilst this finding
11
is not specific to this policy/procedure, it does indicate that there may be room for
improvement on a general basis. The policy now contains an additional section on
sickness absence relating to a disability. It makes reference to the disability
provisions of the Equality Act 2010 and contains information on reasonable
adjustments and that disabled employees should not be treated less favourably than
other employees (see section 14.2). The revised version of the self certification form
also contains a section for the employee to indicate where absence is related to a
disability, this will allow a discussion to take place at the return to work interview
regarding any help or support that the Council may be able to offer. This adjustment
to the form will also mean that better monitoring of sickness absence relating to a
disability can take place, particularly in relation to health capability. Going forward
this should highlight if there is any specific cause for concern relating to the
application of this policy/procedure more specifically.
None of the people who have been ill health retired since the original version of the
Attendance Policy came into place have declared themselves as disabled.
This policy should be communicated in a number of different forms – e.g. intranet,
team briefing & briefing newsletter. Communications would need to comply with the
Council’s Accessibility Standards. ‘INTRAN’ services (translation) would also be
available if there was a need to communicate the policy in sign language or Braille
for example.
There is no evidence that this policy has an adverse impact according to disability
status.
11.Are there any concerns
that the policy could have
a negative impact with
regard to age?
What evidence (actual data or assumptions) do you have to support
this?
No
In line with the Council’s Diversity and Equality Policy, this policy applies equally to
all employees regardless of age. This is reinforced by the equality statements in the
documents themselves. The policy sets out frameworks for managing sickness
absence and for managing authorised absences. Having this framework and
reference point in place should aid managers and Human Resources in taking a
consistent approach across all employees in the authority regardless of age.
UNISON will also be consulted with regarding this policy.
12
Generally speaking, 6% of our employees reported that they had felt at a
disadvantage on account of their age (Staff Survey, 2010). However, this
statistic does not relate specifically to this policy/procedure and age is not
often a relevant factor in these policy documents. However there are a small
number of areas where age may be relevant:


Leave entitlements rise after 5 years under section 2 of the Authorised Absence
Procedures (but this is not considered unlawful in line with Regulation 32 of the
Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006).
There were two ill heath retirements in the periods 2008/9 & 2009/10 and both of
these employees were over the age of 50. This is not felt to be significant as the
criteria for ill health retirement are based the likelihood of finding alternative work
in a specified time period or prior to the age of 65. These are national regulations
over which North Norfolk District Council does not have an influence (see section
10 of the Attendance Policy).
In terms of SAR meetings these were most common in the age group 40-49 but this
is the age group with the highest density of staff (nearly 33%).
There is no evidence that this policy has an adverse impact on any particular age
group.
12.Are there any concerns
that the policy could have
a negative impact with
regard to religion/belief?
What evidence (actual data or assumptions) do you have to support
this?
No
In line with the Council’s Diversity and Equality Policy, this policy applies equally to
all employees regardless of religion/belief. This is reinforced by the equality
statements in the documents themselves. The policy sets out frameworks for
managing sickness absence and for managing authorised absences. Having this
framework and reference point in place should aid managers and Human Resources
in taking a consistent approach across all employees in the authority regardless of
religion/belief. UNISON will also be consulted with regarding this policy.
The Staff Survey 2010 found that 1% of staff reported they had felt at a
disadvantage whilst working at the Council on account of their religion. This finding
arose from a general question rather than one specific to this policy, but none the
less, there are provisions in the authorised absence section which in particular could
13
improve recognition of and adjustment according to religion of belief. The examples
below should illustrate this.
The authorised absence part of the policy now contains a section on time off for
religious or cultural observance. This is a new addition and sets out how requests
can be made and considered.
It is also recognised that with different beliefs there may be different requirements at
other times, for example in times of bereavement. This is referenced in section 8.3 of
the authorised absence part of the document.
These provisions should have a positive impact and there is no evidence that this
policy has an adverse impact on any particular religious or belief group.
13.Are there any concerns
that the policy could have
a negative impact with
regard to sexual
orientation?
What evidence (actual data or assumptions) do you have to support
this?
In line with the Council’s Diversity and Equality Policy, this policy applies equally to
all employees regardless of sexual orientation. This is reinforced by the equality
statements in the documents themselves. The policy sets out frameworks for
managing sickness absence and for managing authorised absences. Having this
framework and reference point in place should aid managers and Human Resources
in taking a consistent approach across all employees in the authority regardless of
sexual orientation. UNISON will also be consulted with regarding this policy.
No
The Staff Survey 2010 found that 1% of staff felt disadvantaged in some way at the
Council on account of their sexuality. This is a general finding rather than a specific
question relating to this policy/procedure, therefore it is not known whether this
policy/procedure has contributed to that figure. Monitoring by sexual orientation is a
very recent development at the Council and there is no established data to provide
evidence either way at present, however, all provisions in this policy apply equally to
people of all sexual orientations.
In terms of the workforce, the proportion of employees reporting as
lesbian/gay/bisexual or other is X%. Therefore it is felt that any specific analysis of
this group would not be statistically significant and could compromise confidentiality.
14
A review of the policy does not reveal any areas where there is an adverse impact
on any particular sexual orientation and the policy is designed to be inclusive – for
example the definition of partner under the compassionate leave definition includes
spouse, partner or civil partner (see section 8 of Authorised Absence Procedures).
There is no evidence that this policy has an adverse impact on any particular sexual
orientation group.
14.Could the negative impact
you have identified in
questions 8 - 13 lead to
the potential for adverse
impact if the policy is
implemented?
No
Can this adverse impact be
justified on the grounds of
promoting equality of
opportunity for one group?
N/A
Or any other reason?
N/A
Can the impact be mitigated
by existing means?
N/A
If yes, what actions will you
undertake to mitigate these
impacts and revise the
policy?
N/A
15.Describe the
arrangements for
reporting and publishing
For proposed improvements to this policy, please see Appendix B.
This assessment will be reported to the Equality and Diversity Board and will be published on the
NNDC external website (www.northnorfolk.org)
15
this assessment.
Has this assessment been
undertaken by a minimum of
two staff?
Has this assessment been scrutinised by your
Directorate Steering Group?
Yes
If the policy is new, or requires a decision by Councillors to revise, has this Equality Impact Assessment
been included with the report?
Have any actions identified in this assessment been included in your service equality and diversity action
plan?
Completed by:
HR Officer (HR Officer)
Signed off by:
16
This has been
scrutinised by
Organisational
Development
Equality Impact
Assessment team
Yes
See Appendix B
Organisational
Development
Manager
(Organisational Development Manager)
Appendix A – Consultation information and Edits
People involved in the assessment:






HR Officer
Organisational Development Manager
HR Advisor
HR Officer
UNISON representative
Community Liaison Officer
Actions taken after consultation:





Addition of Staff Survey data to sections 8-13 to illustrate general feelings of equality/disadvantage and give contextual
information
Addition of our absence figure to compare with national figure for sickness absence cited in section 6
Minor amendments to sections 1, 3 & 4 of the form
Addition of ‘First Class Resource Management’ to the information on the corporate plan in section 2 of the form
Addition of our absence figure to compare with Local Government figure in section 6
17
Appendix B – Action Plan
Action
Analysis of sickness absence gives
information on where disabled employees
are having sickness absence, but does
not show whethere or not the sickness is
actually related to their disability.
Therefore including an additional field on
the self certification form will allow an
analysis of disability related absence.
Expected Outcome
Person
responsible
An ability to separate whether or not HR Officer
absence for disabled employees is
related to their disability. This will allow
the Council to identify whether or not the
disability in itself is contributing to
absence. This information will also give
the Council better information on
whether or not the policy is having an
adverse affect on this particular group.
18
Target date
Implementation
date of new self
certification
form

Appendix C: SAR meeting data meetings by year and by equality strand
2008/9
Total
2009/10
Total
Number
Total
M
F
White British
White Other
Chinese
Irish
Asian Other
Other
Prefer not to say
<20
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-64
65+
Disabled - Y
Disabled - N
59
10
49
57
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
9
17
18
12
3
0
2
57
%
100
16.95
83.05
96.61
1.69
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.69
0.00
15.25
28.81
30.51
20.34
5.08
0.00
3.39
96.61
Number
107
35
72
104
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
17
24
44
17
4
1
15
92
%
100
32.71
67.29
97.20
0.93
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.93
0.93
0.00
15.89
22.43
41.12
15.89
3.74
0.93
14.02
85.98
Cumulative
Total
Number
%
166
100
27.11
45
72.89
121
97
161
1.2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.6
1
1.2
2
0
0
15.66
26
24.70
41
37.35
62
17.47
29
4.22
7
0.6
1
10.24
17
89.76
149
This data shows that since the Attendance Policy has been in place, the groups most likely to have an SAR are –
 Females
 White British employees
 Employees aged 40-49 years
 Non-disabled employees
19
It is unsurprising that the above categories are most likely to have had an SAR meeting, as these categories represent the majority
of our workforce. Although the percentages do not exactly mirror the make up of the workforce they are fairly close.
There does appear to be an over-representation in terms of disabled employees having SAR meetings compared to the workforce
totals. Further analysis shows that there are small numbers of employees having multiple SAR meetings, as shown below.
However, these meetings are only held within policy guidelines so there is no evidence that any discrimination of disabled
employees is taking place. It is also important to highlight that the emphasis in the majority of SAR meetings is around looking for
supportive measures.
No of SARs
1
2
3
4
5
6
TOTAL
individual
employees
having SARs
Total meetings
held
Total workforce
TOTAL
2008/9
33
13
0
0
0
0
Frequency
No of
disabled
TOTAL
employees 2009/10
2
35
0
14
0
8
0
4
0
2
0
1
No of
disabled
employees
3
0
1
1
1
0
46
2
61
6
59
340
2
12
107
342
15
27
20
Equality Impact Assessments
North Norfolk District Council
Page 21