STAFF RECRUITMENT STATISTICS
&
UNIVERSITY STAFF PROFILE
1 AUG 07 – 31 JUL 08
PRESENTED TO THE EQUALITY & DIVERSITY COMMITTEE
JUNE 11 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
General commentary & regional HE comparators
1-4
University information
5-8
Table 1 – Recruitment: APT&C posts
9
Table 2 – Recruitment: Academic posts
10
Table 3 – Recruitment: Manual & Catering posts
11
Table 4 – Disability monitoring
12
Table 5 – Aggregated monitoring by ethnicity
13
Table 6 – Current staff population
14
Table 7 – Staff profile by ethnicity / post
15
COMMENTARY ON EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES MONITORING STATISTICS
FOR PERIOD 1 AUG 2007 – 31 JUL 2008
The information has been presented in a similar format as for previous years. To
allow ease of comparison, the data has been divided into three sections;
1. the population of the UK and the West Midlands by gender and ethnicity
2. the regional Higher Education sector by gender, ethnicity, disability and age
3. University recruitment trends for Aug 07 – Jul 08, by disability, gender and
ethnicity followed by profiles of the University staff population
The following commentary should be read alongside the data tables and for ease of
reference all key comparative data appears in bold and all information relating to the
University appears in bold italics.
1. UK/West Midlands
The population for the UK and the West Midlands was studied for comparison. The
information was sourced from the Office for National Statistics website detailing
census data from the 2001 census (www.statistics.gov.uk/census), the
Wolverhampton City Council website (www.wolverhampton.gov.uk) and the Higher
Education Information Database for Institutions (HEIDI) and gives the following
information.
For the UK and West Midlands there are about 10% more men in the working
population than women.
The resident population by ethnic group, for the West Midlands and for England &
Wales was looked at. The census classifies the local authorities of the West Midlands
as incorporating Birmingham, Wolverhampton, Walsall, Dudley, Sandwell,
Staffordshire, Shropshire, Warwickshire, Herefordshire and Worcestershire. As the
University recruits staff from across this area, it has been previously agreed by the
Committee that this is a valid source of comparative data.
Census information shows that for the population of England & Wales, the
black and minority ethnic (bme) population is 7.9%. For the West Midlands, this
figure is 11.3%. For Wolverhampton, the bme population is 22%.
In the past, our academic staff profile was benchmarked against the national bme
percentage figure (7.9%) and for APT&C and Manual staff the local Wolverhampton
figure (22%) was used as a benchmark. These did not take into account the wider
region from which we recruit staff, nor the fact that we have campuses based in other
local authority areas and so it was agreed to use the regional West Midlands figure
for comparison for all posts.
Black and minority ethnic staff account for 16%of the University staff
population. (Source: HEIDI Aug 07-Jul 08). This has increased from 15% from the
date of the last report.
1.
2. The Regional HE Sector
Information is now sourced from HEIDI, which is affiliated to the Higher Education
Statistics Agency (HESA). HEIDI provides reports detailing set information on staff in
all UK HE institutions. This information includes data for casual and VL staff. Broader
comparative information for the sector is also provided from the DLA Piper Workforce
Performance Indicator Report for Higher Education 2008.
The staff profile indicating gender, ethnicity and disability for the academic year
2007-08 is shown in the following three tables. How the University profile compares
with the regional sector profile, where known, is also shown. HEIDI data has been
used as this is the only consistent source providing specific regional sector
comparators. HEIDI data is compiled using information Universities provide annually
to HESA. Not all data provided to HESA is available currently through HEIDI. This
means that only certain comparator information can be provided.
Gender for year 2007-08
TABLE 1 - All staff by gender
Female
51%
51%
56%
59%
57%
58%
64%
BCU
Uni of B’ham
Coventry
Keele
Staffs
UoW’ton
Worcs
Male
49%
49%
44%
41%
43%
42%
36%
HEIDI data shows that for the HEIs listed, women made up an average 56.5%. The
University of Wolverhampton staff population for this period was 58% female, slightly
above the regional sector average. The DLA Piper Report for Higher Education 2008
states that “Within the HE sector, an average 54.8% of the workforce are female,
compared with 63.6% for the Large Public Sector Comparator Group”
For a more local “employer comparison”, the most recent figures available supplied
from the Wolverhampton City Council website showed that for the period 2006/2007
the overall %age of female staff working at the Council was 74%
Ethnicity for year 2007-08
TABLE 2 - All staff by ethnicity
BCU
Uni of B’ham
Coventry
Keele
Staffs
UoW’ton
Worcs
White
Black
Asian
Mixed
77.5%
84%
80%
83%
92%
83.5%
93%
5%
3.5%
3%
0.5%
1%
4.5%
2%
8%
9.5%
10%
3.5%
3%
10%
2.5%
1.5%
2%
1%
1%
1%
1.5%
2%
2.
Not
known
8%
1%
6%
12%
3%
0.5%
0.5%
The percentage figures have been calculated using ethnicity data where known and
rounded up or down to the nearest whole number, except where numbers are small.
HEIDI data shows that for the HEIs listed, ethnic minority staff as an average
percentage of all staff of known ethnicity is 11%. Using these HEIs as comparators,
the university is above the regional sector average, with its known ethnic minority
staff at 16%. This is the highest percentage figure for all known bme staff in the
region, with Birmingham showing 15% and BCU and Coventry respectively showing
14.5% and 14% known bme staff. It should be noted that a number of other
Universities, notably BCU, Coventry and Keele show a higher figure percentage for
staff where ethnicity information is not known. A more complete set of figures for
these Universities could affect the overall average percentage.
The DLA Piper Report for Higher Education 2008 states that “Within the HE sector,
an average 8.9% of the workforce have a Black or Minority Ethnic background,
compared with 7.3% for the Large Public Sector Comparator Group”
For a more local “employer comparison”, figures supplied from the Wolverhampton
City Council website showed that for the period 2006/2007 the overall %age of bme
staff working at the Council was 14.25%
Disability for year 2007- 08
TABLE 3(a) – All staff by recorded disability
Declared
disabled
BCU
Uni of B’ham
Coventry
Keele
Staffs
UoW’ton
Worcs
2.8%
1.9%
3.5%
1.2%
5.2%
2.3%
3%
Information
not given
12%
2.4%
16%
10.5%
5.5%
0.2%
0.5%
The HEIDI data shows that for the HEIs listed, staff recording a disability made up an
average percentage of 2.84% of the total staff population. The University is below
this at 2.3%, however the recruitment figures attached show that for the same period,
2.2% of all appointees were recorded as disabled, the highest figure recorded to
date. It should also be noted that BCU, Coventry and Keele show a higher figure
percentage for staff where this information is not known. A more complete set of
figures for these Universities could affect the overall average percentage.
The DLA Piper Report for Higher Education 2008 states that “Within the HE sector,
an average 2.6% of the workforce report a disability, compared with 2.4% for the
Large Public Sector Comparator Group”
For a more local “employer comparison”, figures supplied from the Wolverhampton
City Council website showed that for the period 2006/2007 the overall %age of staff
considering themselves to be disabled and working at the Council was 1.61%.
3.
Age for year 2007-08
TABLE 4(a)
Age

UoW
total
staff
HEIs
%ge
aged
16-24
%ge
aged
25-34
%ge
aged
35-44
%ge
aged
45-54
%ge
aged
55-64
%ge
aged
65+
4.5%
17.8% 26.7% 29.5% 20.6% 0.9%
4.5%
21.4% 26.6% 26.9% 19.1% 1.5%
Comparative information for this area is taken from the DLA Piper Report for Higher
Education 2008 as age profile information is not available from HEIDI. The DLA
report shows that within HEIs, just over half (53.5%) of the workforce are aged 35 54. The University staff profile is slightly above this at 56.2%. The DLA report states;
“Comparison of the workforce age profile between Higher Education and the Large
Public Sector comparator group is very similar within each of the age groups”.
Information on age is not currently gathered by the University at the recruitment
stage. The following table shows the age percentage breakdown of the actual staff
population across the three main staff groups, compared with the sector average
taken from the DLA Piper report. The DLA Piper information is shown in the shaded
areas;
TABLE 4(b)
Age

Staff group↓
UoW Academic
HEI Academic
UoW APT&C
HEI Non-academic
UoW Manual
HEI
operational/support
%ge
16-24
%ge
25-34
%ge
35-44
%ge
45-54
%ge
55-64
%ge
65+
0.2%
0.9%
8.4%
1.2%
1.6%
8.1%
11.7%
18.9%
26.0%
19.0%
5.5%
24.0%
26.9%
28.9%
27.2%
31.0%
24.6%
23.1%
36.8%
29.0%
21.3%
30.1%
39.2%
24.2%
23.5%
20.1%
16.2%
17.6%
27.9%
18.6%
0.9%
2.2%
0.9%
0.9%
1.2%
1.5%
The University has a higher than sector average percentage of academic staff over
the age of 45 and these make up 61% of the academic staff population. The
University also has a higher than sector average percentage of operational/support
(manual) staff over the age of 45 and these make up 68% of that staff group
population. The University has a higher than sector average percentage of nonacademic (APT&C) staff aged 16-34 and staff under the age of 44 make up 62% of
the non-academic population.
4.
3. The University of Wolverhampton
For University specific data, the statistics refer to the 12-month period 1 August
2007-31 July 2008. During this period, 329 posts were advertised. The percentage
breakdown for each of the staff groups is as follows;
APT&C posts advertised – 67%
Academic posts advertised - 19%
Manual posts advertised - 14%
During the year, 270 appointments were made. Of the posts filled, 95% of these
were filled first time. The DLA Piper report (2008) states that for all jobs in the HE
sector, the average number of vacancies filled first time was 87.5%.
Data has been analysed for the 3 stages of recruitment; application, shortlist and
appointment and broken down for the 3 categories of staff (Tables 1-3). These show
the total number of posts advertised; the total number of applicants; those who were
short-listed and appointed, with gender %age figures for each stage underneath. The
main body of the table shows the actual ethnicity/gender figures for all the above.
Ethnicity is monitored using the 17 categories used in the census model. It was felt
appropriate to include all these categories to show how these translate across our
own activity. The tables show figures for male applicants on a shaded background,
for ease of clarification. Actual figures rather than percentages have been given at
the request of the committee. A percentage breakdown for bme applicants is
included at the bottom of each table.
Table 4 provides both actual and percentage figures for applicants who have
declared any disability. Table 5 provides the aggregated figures for ethnicity since
1996. Table 6 shows the whole University staff population as at 31 July 2008 and
Table 7 shows the staff population at 31 July 2008, broken down to show broadly
where bme staff are working and at what level across the University.
Table 1 - APT&C
67% of the posts advertised were APT&C (220 posts), a rise on previous years.
These attracted 5329 applications (24 applications per post, up from 17 in the
previous 12 month period). If we look at the gender balance, these posts attracted
more females than males (63% of applications were from females), with females
being appointed to nearly twice the number of posts as males (66% of appointees
were female). The highest percentage group of people applying were white British
females, followed by white British males, Indian females (more than doubled from the
previous year) then Indian males. This is the same as for the previous three years.
The next highest category is Black Caribbean females.
16.6% of white female applicants were short-listed with 28% of those being
successful at interview. 20% of white male applicants were short-listed, with 20% of
these being appointed, lower than in 2006-7. By comparison, only 12% of Indian
female applicants were successful at getting short-listed (lower than 2006-7) but this
figure then increased to 19.7% of them being successful at interview stage (higher
than 2006-7). 10% of Indian male applicants were successful at getting short-listed
(lower than 2006-7), with 19% of these being appointed, higher
5.
than 2006-7. 9% of Black Caribbean females were shortlisted, with 21% of these
appointed, lower than for the last two years. Specifically looking at White Other
female applicants, 6.5% of these were short-listed, with none of those being
appointed, lower than the previous two years. A very low number of applicants from a
mixed ethnic background applied and were short-listed with only one being
appointed, the same as for the previous year.
In total, 186 appointments were made. 17.7% of all APT&C appointments were
made to minority ethnic staff. In 2006-7 this figure was 16%.
Table 2 - Academic
19% of the posts advertised were Academic (64 posts). This is lower than in the
previous 12 months, when 34% of posts advertised were Academic. However, the
posts attracted 779 applications (12 applications per post, up from 9.5 applications
per post for the previous 12 months). 59% of applications were from males, with 59%
of all academic appointments being made to males.
The highest number of applicants were white British males, followed by white British
females, white other males and females, Indian males and females and black African
males.
33% of white British male applicants were short-listed with 25% of these being
appointed (higher than 2006-7). 32% of white female applicants were short-listed with
21% of those short-listed being appointed (lower than 2006-7). 19% of white other
male applicants were shortlisted with 8% of these being appointed. 18% of white
other females were shortlisted with 44% of these being appointed. 2.7% of Indian
male applicants were shortlisted as opposed to 18.9% of Indian females. No Indian
males were appointed with 28.5% of Indian females shortlisted being appointed.
9.6% of Black African males were shortlisted, with 33% of those being appointed
(one appointment). Again, a very low number of applicants from a mixed ethnic
background applied and were short-listed with two being appointed.
In total 47 appointments were made. 19% of all Academic appointments were
made to minority ethnic staff, down from 24% in 2006-7 and 23% in 2005-6.
Table 3 - Manual
14% of the posts advertised were Manual or Catering (45 posts) and these attracted
732 applications (16 applications per post). These figures show no marked difference
to the previous 12 months. The gender balance at application stage looks unusual
due to posts advertised for caretakers and/or security officers which historically
receive large numbers of predominantly male applications. This imbalance rectifies
itself at short-listing stage and is reversed at appointed stage due to the numbers of
cleaning and catering posts, historically applied to by women. By far the biggest
group of applicants were white British male, followed by white British female, then
Indian male, Indian female and Black African male. This is exactly the same as 20067.
14% of white British male applicants were short-listed, with 21% of those short-listed
being appointed (slightly higher than 2006-7). 37% of white British female applicants
were short-listed with 25% of those being appointed (slightly lower than 2006-7). 18%
6.
of Indian male applicants were short-listed with 22% being appointed, (the same as
2006-7). 34% of Indian female applicants were short-listed with 9% being appointed,
lower than 2006-7. 12.5% of Black African male applicants were short-listed with
none being appointed. Three people from a mixed background were appointed,
higher than the pervious two years.
In total 37 appointments were made. 29.7% of all Manual appointments were
made to minority ethnic staff. In 2006-7 this figure was 19% and in 2005-6 this
figure was 26%.
In terms of ethnicity, the University is above the national and regional sector
averages for bme staff and shows a higher percentage of bme staff than any of its
nearest competitors. However, the data relating specifically to recruitment shows that
whereas bme applicants made up just under one-third of all applications to the
University, only just over one-fifth of all appointments were made to bme applicants.
This means that applicants were almost 1.5 times more likely to get short-listed if
they were white and nearly twice as likely to get a job offer.
Table 4 – Applicants recorded as being disabled
The total no. of applicants for all posts was 6,844 (on average 21 applicants per post,
higher than for the last four years). Of these, 5.6% were recorded as being disabled –
up from 2.2% for the previous 12 months and the highest figure recorded to date.
The majority of these people (80%) applied for APT&C posts. At short-listing stage,
4.78% of all applicants were recorded as disabled (up from 1.3% in the previous 12
months and the highest figure recorded to date), again with the majority of these
(85%) being for APT&C posts.
In total 2.2% of all people appointed were recorded as disabled, up from 1.3%
for the previous 12 months and the highest figure recorded to date. The actual
figures for this year break down as 8 people recorded as disabled being shortlisted
with one appointed into an academic post (i.e. 12.5% of those shortlisted) and 48
people recorded as disabled being shortlisted with 4 of those appointed into an
APT&C post (i.e. 8.3%). 47 people with a recorded disability applied to manual posts
(87% of these were male) with one being shortlisted and appointed. No people with
recorded disabilities have been appointed into manual posts for the previous three
four years.
Table 5 - Aggregated figures
The next page of figures shows the overall trends for recruitment activity by ethnicity
year on year – these are an amalgamation of the first three tables provided. For
these 12 months, we can see that whereas the number of bme applicants has fallen
slightly, the total number of bme appointments is slightly higher than for 2007. The
aggregated figures hide some detail which the Committee may wish to consider and
which is shown more clearly in Tables 1-5, namely;



lower levels of bme applicant success in general than for white applicants
fewer academic posts advertised, down from 34% to 19% of total jobs
advertised
many more applicants per post, up from 14 in 2006-7 to 21 in 2007-8
7.


highest percentage figures for applicants and appointees recorded as
disabled to date however a continued low success rate of candidates
recorded as disabled into posts
the continued predominance of female appointments for APT&C posts
Academic posts continue to receive fewer applications per post than either of the
other two categories of staff. Females continue to be more successful throughout the
recruitment process, with 56% of all appointments made to women, however we do
not currently have figures to demonstrate how many of these posts were part-time.
8.
TABLE 1 RECRUITMENT TRENDS BY ETHNICITY ACROSS APT&C POSTS
AUG 2007 – JULY 2008
Total APT&C posts advertised – 220
APPLIED
Total applications- 5329
SHORTLISTED
APPOINTED
Total short-listed – 804
Total appointed – 186
MALE - 37%
FEMALE - 63%
MALE - 41%
FEMALE -59%
Male
MALE- 34%
FEMALE - 66%
Ethnicity
WHITE
BRITISH
Male
Female
1266
2119
256
352
Female
52
Male
100
Female
WHITE IRISH
21
29
2
5
0
1
WHITE OTHER
34
91
3
6
1
0
B/BB
CARIBBEAN
46
155
10
14
0
3
B/BB AFRICAN
43
47
4
3
2
0
OTHER BLACK
13
9
0
0
0
0
A/AB INDIAN
350
618
36
76
7
15
A/AB
PAKISTANI
74
68
4
4
0
0
A/AB
BANGLADESHI
25
22
3
0
0
0
CHINESE
23
56
2
1
0
0
OTHER ASIAN
23
26
3
3
0
2
MIXED W & B
CARIBBEAN
10
23
3
3
0
0
MIXED W & B
AFRICAN
8
10
0
1
1
0
MIXED W &
ASIAN
4
13
1
2
0
1
OTHER MIXED
BACKGROUND
8
8
0
0
0
0
OTHER
ETHNIC
BACKGROUND
INFO NOT
GIVEN
6
21
2
1
1
0
14
46
3
1
0
0
TOTAL
KNOWN BME
633
1076
68
108
11
22
TOTAL
1968
3361
332
472
64
122
In %age terms, where ethnicity is known, 32% of all APT&C applicants were bme,
22% of those short-listed were bme and 18% of all those appointed were bme
applicants.
9.
TABLE 2 RECRUITMENT TRENDS BY ETHICITY ACROSS ALL ACADEMIC POSTS
1 AUG 2007 – 31 JULY 2008
Total academic posts advertised – 64
APPLIED
SHORTLISTED
Total applications-779
Total short-listed – 186
MALE – 56%
FEMALE - 44%
MALE - 59%
FEMALE - 41%
Ethnicity
APPOINTED
Total appointed – 47
Male
Female
Male
MALE- 59%
FEMALE - 41%
Female
Male
Female
WHITE
BRITISH
224
172
74
56
19
12
WHITE IRISH
14
4
2
1
2
0
WHITE OTHER
62
50
12
9
1
4
B/BB
CARIBBEAN
6
10
0
3
0
0
B/BB AFRICAN
31
7
3
1
1
0
OTHER BLACK
4
1
2
0
0
0
A/AB INDIAN
37
37
1
7
0
2
A/AB
PAKISTANI
11
4
1
1
0
0
A/AB
BANGLADESHI
2
4
1
0
1
1
CHINESE
21
19
1
2
2
0
OTHER ASIAN
6
4
1
0
0
0
MIXED W & B
CARIBBEAN
1
0
1
0
0
0
MIXED W & B
AFRICAN
3
1
2
0
2
0
MIXED W &
ASIAN
4
1
1
0
0
0
OTHER MIXED
BACKGROUND
3
2
1
1
0
0
OTHER
ETHNIC
BACKGROUND
INFO NOT
GIVEN
12
2
3
0
0
0
18
2
1
0
0
1
TOTAL
KNOWN BME
141
92
18
15
6
3
TOTAL
459
320
107
81
28
19
In %age terms, where ethnicity is known, 30% of all academic applicants were bme,
17.5% of those short-listed were bme and 19% of all those appointed were bme
applicants.
10.
TABLE 3: RECRUITMENT TRENDS BY ETHNICITY ACROSS ALL
MANUAL/CATERING POSTS: 1 AUG 2007 – 31 JULY 2008
Total manual and catering posts advertised – 45
APPLIED
Total applications-732
SHORTLISTED
APPOINTED
Total shortlisted –192
Total appointed – 37
MALE - 63%
FEMALE - 37%
MALE - 46%
FEMALE - 54%
Ethnicity
Male
WHITE
BRITISH
336
171
47
64
10
16
WHITE IRISH
6
3
18
0
0
0
WHITE OTHER
5
8
1
2
0
0
B/BB
CARIBBEAN
11
14
3
8
0
3
B/BB AFRICAN
16
13
2
4
0
0
OTHER BLACK
1
5
1
1
0
0
A/AB INDIAN
49
32
9
11
2
1
A/AB
PAKISTANI
11
1
2
3
0
0
A/AB
BANGLADESHI
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
7
0
2
0
0
OTHER ASIAN
6
1
2
1
0
0
MIXED W & B
CARIBBEAN
4
6
1
3
1
1
MIXED W & B
AFRICAN
3
5
1
1
0
1
MIXED W &
ASIAN
1
1
1
0
0
0
OTHER MIXED
BACKGROUND
3
3
1
2
0
1
OTHER
ETHNIC
BACKGROUND
INFO NOT
GIVEN
5
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
1
1
0
TOTAL
KNOWN BME
112
88
23
36
3
7
TOTAL
461
271
89
103
14
23
CHINESE
Female
Male
MALE- 38%
FEMALE - 62%
Female
Male
Female
In %age terms, where ethnicity is known, 27% of all Man/Cat applicants were bme,
31% of those short-listed were bme and 27% of all those appointed were bme
applicants.
11.
TABLE 4 - RECRUITMENT MONITORING - Disability
Recruitment of people with recorded disabilities - percentage figures based on overall number of applicants, year on year.
Jan-Dec
Jan-Dec
Jan-Dec Aug 06Jul 07
06
Actual
%
Aug 0708
Actual
%
04
05
All Posts:
Applied
2.25%
1.9%
3.2%
101
2.2%
388
5.6%
Shortlisted
1.4%
1.6%
2.8%
21
1.4%
57
4.8%
Appointed
3%
1.3%
1.7%
5
1.3%
6
2.2%
ACADEMIC
Applied
1.35%
2%
2.5%
19
1.8%
33
4.2%
Shortlisted
1.25%
1.3%
1.8%
3
0.9%
8
4.2%
Appointed
2.9%
2.4%
2.1%
3
3.4%
1
2.1%
APT&C
Applied
2.4%
1.9%
3.5%
61
1.9%
308
5.7%
Shortlisted
1.7%
1.9%
2.9%
15
1.6%
48
5.9%
Appointed
3.5%
1%
2%
1
0.6%
4
2.1%
MANUAL
Applied
1.7%
1.9%
2.7%
21
3%
47
6.4%
Shortlisted
0
0.5%
2.4%
4
1.8%
1
0.5%
Appointed
0
0%
0%
0
0%
1
2.7%
12.
TABLE 5 - RECRUITMENT MONITORING BY ETHNICITY
Percentage figures based on overall number of applicants, year on year.
‘96
‘97
‘98
‘99
‘00
‘01
‘02
‘03
‘04
‘05
‘06
’06-07
07-08
Applied
14
17
17
19
20
23
25
28
24
33
34
34
30
Shortlisted
15
16
19
18
19
21
22
25
20
28
27
25
23.5
Appointed
10
10
16
8
14
16
16
16
18
16
22
20
21
ACADEMIC
Applied
8
17
15
19
17
22
23
28
22
26
33
32
30
Shortlisted
10
17
15
17
14
20
19
23
16
25
23
25
17.5
Appointed
3
10
13
11
12
9
15
13
12
14
23
24
19
APT&C
Applied
16
17
15
20
23
24
27
30
28
36
36
38
32
Shortlisted
17
16
22
19
21
21
24
25
23
31
25
28
22
Appointed
10
10
19
6
15
15
16
16
18
17
18
16
18
MANUAL
Applied
8
9
11
12
8
18
19
16
17
24
34
31
27
Shortlisted
11
13
17
16
14
22
15
26
21
22
34
22
31
Appointed
8
8
16
6
10
33
16
20
23
14
26
19
27
All Posts:
13.
TABLE 6
UNIVERSITY OF WOLVERHAMPTON
Staff Diversity Indicators - School / Departmental Percentages 01/08/2007 to 31/07/2008 (excluding casuals and S/VLs)
SCHOOLS
Av. in post
HLSS
RESEARCH
SAD
SAS
SCIT
SEBE
SED
SLS
SOH
SSPAL
UWBS
Sub-Total
Staff in Post
134
31
136
159
102
110
140
58
200
71
107
1248
Staff in Post
15
14
22
6
4
93
39
567
64
27
Av. in
post
Dept
%
Ethnicity
8.9
12
19.3
6
7.3
10
11.3
18
21.5
22
30.9
34
12.8
18
10.3
6
18.0
36
9.8
7
18.6
20
15.2
189
Dept
%
DEPARTMENTS
Aimhigher
Arena Theatre
BCSIP
Business Development Enterprise
Chaplaincy
Dean of Students
Estates
Facilities
Finance Department
Institute of Learning Enhancement
Dept
%
Av. in
post
Ethnicity
6.6
7.1
9.0
16.6
25.0
23.6
2.5
17.4
10.9
7.4
Av. in
post
Dept
%
Male
44.0
35.5
56.0
51.5
55.0
76.0
35.0
43.0
22.0
49.0
56.0
46.6
Dept
%
59
11
76
82
56
84
49
25
44
35
60
581
Av. in
post
Female
56.0
64.5
44.0
48.5
45.0
24.0
65.0
57.0
78.0
51.0
44.0
53.4
Dept
%
Male
Av. in
post
Dept
%
75
20
60
77
46
26
91
33
156
36
47
667
Av. in
post
Av. in
post
Disabled
5.9
0.0
0.7
1.3
2.9
0.0
0.7
8.6
3.5
4.2
0.9
2.5
Dept
%
8
0
1
2
3
0
1
5
7
3
1
31
Av. in
post
1
1
2
1
1
22
1
99
7
2
25.0
71.0
23.0
17.0
50.0
20.0
87.0
38.0
31.0
37.0
4
10
5
1
2
19
34
214
20
10
Female
75.0
29.0
77.0
83.0
50.0
80.0
13.0
62.0
69.0
63.0
11
4
17
5
2
74
5
353
44
17
Disabled
13.3
0.0
0.0
8.7
0.0
6.4
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.0
2
0
0
1
0
6
0
5
0
0
International Relations
IT Services
Learning Information Services
Marketing & Communication
Midland Leadership Centre
Personnel Services
Registry
Risk Safety & Health
University Executive
Wolverhampton Science Park
Sub-Total
20
83
207
82
18
26
162
4
22
37
1512
25
15.6
10.6
13.4
16.6
19.2
9.2
25.0
9.0
18.9
14.6
5
13
22
11
3
5
15
1
2
7
221
15.0
59.0
31.0
35.0
22.0
23.0
18.0
50.0
27.0
43.0
34.9
3
49
64
29
4
6
29
2
6
16
527
85.0
41.0
69.0
65.0
78.0
77.0
82.0
50.0
73.0
57.0
65.1
17
34
143
53
14
20
133
2
16
21
985
0.0
1.2
1.9
3.6
0.0
11.5
1.2
0.0
9.0
0.0
1.9
0
1
4
3
0
3
2
0
2
0
29
GRAND TOTAL
2760
14.8
410
40.1
1108
59.9
1652
2.1
60
14.
TABLE 7 - STAFF PROFILE – ETHNICITY BY SCALE/TYPE OF POST (excluding casual/VL staff)
1.
Total staff
Total bme staff
Percentage known bme staff
2.
All academic staff
Total academic bme staff
Percentage known bme staff
3.
All APT&C staff
Total APT&C bme staff
Percentage known bme staff
4.
All manual staff
Total manual bme staff
Percentage known bme staff
5.
All Heads (inc.PLs)
Total Heads bme staff
Percentage known bme staff
6.
All SO2/PO posts
Total SO2/PO bme staff
Percentage known bme staff
Oct 05
Oct 06
Jul 07
Jul 08
2580
311
12%
2628
332
12.6%
2673
399
14.9%
2760
410
14.8%
824
97
11.7%
833
99
11.8%
880
120
13.6%
758
122
16%
1197
138
11.5%
1222
143
11.7%
1244
179
14.3%
1359
196
14.4%
479
74
15.4%
484
85
17.5%
486
96
19.7%
444
87
19.5%
209
13
6.2%
222
15
6.7%
229
15
6.5%
227
16
7.0%
127
7
5.5%
130
8
6.1%
130
8
6.1%
155
11
7.0%
Key;
Pt. 2 includes professors, PLs, readers, L/SLs, demonstrators, academic related and all temporary academic staff
Pt 3. includes SO2/PO posts, APT&C/SO1 posts, technicians, support workers, study skills advisors and all temporary APT&C staff
Pt. 4 includes Grade 5 caretakers, assistant caretakers, catering/hospitality managers, cleaning supervisors, cleaners, chefs, assistant catering/hospitality managers, CSAs, sports assistants, instructors,
maintenance staff and all temporary manual staff
Pt .5 includes executive, heads/associate heads, professors and PLs
Pt. 6 includes SO2/PO posts
15.