STAFF RECRUITMENT STATISTICS
&
UNIVERSITY STAFF PROFILE
1 AUG 08 – 31 JUL 09
PRESENTED TO THE EQUALITY & DIVERSITY COMMITTEE
MAY 19 2010
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 – Actual staff population
14
Table 7 – Staff profile by ethnicity / post
15
COMMENTARY ON EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY MONITORING STATISTICS
FOR PERIOD 1 AUG 2008 – 31 JUL 2009
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 08 – Jul 09, 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 in Section 1 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.
Comparative information for this section was gathered from the following sources; the
Office for National Statistics census data from the 2001 census
(www.statistics.gov.uk/census)*, Wolverhampton City Council
(www.wolverhampton.gov.uk) and the Higher Education Information Database for
Institutions (HEIDI).
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 16.5%of the University staff
population. (Source: HEIDI Aug 08-Jul 09). This has increased from 16% for the
previous twelve month period.
*This will be the penultimate year that 2001 census data will be used. Although the new census will be carried out in March 2011, the
data will not be available in time for next years’ report.
1.
2. The Regional HE Sector
Comparative information for this section is sourced from HEIDI (see above) which
provides reports on staff in all UK HE institutions. This information includes data for
casual and VL staff. Broader comparative information for the sector has also been
sourced from the DLA Piper Workforce Performance Indicator Report for Higher
Education 2009. Comparative data from Wolverhampton City Council has previously
been used however for the year 2008-09, the Council has recorded problems in
collecting their monitoring information* and can only provide data for just over 50% of
their staff. For this reason, Council data has not been used for comparison in this
report. *Source: Wolverhampton City Council Equality Monitoring Report (Employment) 1 April 2008-31 March
2009
The staff profile indicating gender, ethnicity and disability for the academic year
2008-09 is shown in the following three tables. How the University profile compares
with the regional sector profile is also shown. HEIDI data is compiled using
information Universities provide annually to HESA, however not all data provided to
HESA is available currently through HEIDI and only certain comparator information
can therefore be provided.
Gender for year 2008-09
TABLE 1 - All staff by gender
Female
52%
51%
57%
58%
58%
59%
64%
BCU
Uni of B’ham
Coventry
Keele
Staffs
UoW’ton
Worcs
Male
48%
49%
43%
42%
42%
41%
36%
HEIDI data shows that for the HEIs listed, women made up an average 57%. The
University of Wolverhampton staff population for this period was 59% female, slightly
above the regional sector average. Figures have been rounded to the nearest whole
number. The DLA Piper Report for Higher Education 2009 states that “Within the HE
sector, an average 54.8% of the workforce are female, compared with 58.8% for the
Large Public Sector Comparator Group”
Ethnicity for year 2008-09
TABLE 2 - All staff by ethnicity
BCU
Uni of B’ham
Coventry
Keele
Staffs
UoW’ton
Worcs
White
Black
Asian
Mixed
78%
84%
81%
86%
91%
83%
93%
5%
3%
3%
0.5%
1%
5%
2%
8%
10%
10.5%
4.5%
3%
10%
2%
2%
2%
1.5%
1%
1%
1.5%
2%
2.
Not
known
7%
1%
4%
8%
4%
0.5%
1%
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 11.2%. Using these HEIs as comparators,
the university is above the regional sector average, with its known ethnic minority
staff at 16.5%. This is the highest percentage figure for all known bme staff in the
region, with Birmingham, BCU and Coventry all showing 15% 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 2009 states that “Within the HE sector,
an average 9.3% of the workforce have a Black or Minority Ethnic background,
compared with 8.6% for the Large Public Sector Comparator Group”
Disability for year 2008- 09
TABLE 3(a) – All staff by recorded disability
Declared
disabled
BCU
Uni of B’ham
Coventry
Keele
Staffs
UoW’ton
Worcs
Information
not given
3.2%
2.1%
2.1%
3.1%
5.7%
1.6%
5.6%
8.4%
2.6%
0.4%
6.9%
0.3%
1.1%
5.2%
The HEIDI data shows that for the HEIs listed, staff recording a disability made up an
average percentage of 3.34% of the total staff population. The University is below
this at 1.6%, however the recruitment figures attached show that for the same period,
6.6% of all appointees were recorded as disabled, the highest figure recorded to
date. It should also be noted that BCU, Keele and Worcester show a higher figure
percentage for staff where information has not been given. A more complete set of
figures for these Universities could affect the overall average percentage.
The DLA Piper Report for Higher Education 2009 states that “Within the HE sector,
an average 2.9% of the workforce report a disability, compared with 2.9% for the
Large Public Sector Comparator Group”
3.
Age for year 2008-09
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%
16.5% 26%
30%
22%
1.5%
4.1%
21.4% 26.4% 27.3% 19.1% 1.7%
Comparative information for this area is taken from the DLA Piper Report for Higher
Education 2009 as age profile information is not available from HEIDI. The DLA
report shows that within HEIs, just over half (53.7%) of the workforce are aged 35 54. The University staff profile is slightly above this at 56% with the highest three age
groups showing a higher percentage than for the previous year. 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
2008-31 July 2009. During this period, 221 posts were advertised (down from 329 in
the previous 12-month period). The percentage breakdown for each of the staff
groups is as follows;
APT&C posts advertised – 66%
Academic posts advertised - 25%
Manual posts advertised - 9%
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 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
1997. Table 6 shows the whole University staff population as at 1 July 2009 and
Table 7 shows the staff population at 1 July 2009, broken down to show broadly
where bme staff are working and at what level across the University.
Table 1 - APT&C
66% of the posts advertised were APT&C (145 posts), similar to the previous year.
These attracted 4494 applications (30.9 applications per post, showing a significant
rise for two consecutive years). If we look at the gender balance, these posts
attracted more females than males (69% of applications were from females), with
females appointed to more than twice the number of posts as males (70% of
appointees were female). The highest percentage group of people applying were
white British females, followed by white British males, Indian females, then Indian
males. This is the same as for the previous four years. The next highest category is
Black Caribbean females.
13.6% of white female applicants were short-listed with 23% of those being
successful at interview. 11% of white male applicants were short-listed, with 16.9%
of these being appointed, lower than the previous two years. By comparison, 12.3%
of Indian female applicants were successful at getting short-listed (same as for 200708) with 20% of them being successful at interview (higher than previous two years).
5.7% of Indian male applicants were successful at getting short-listed (lower than
previous two years), with 5.8% of these being appointed, a significant decrease
from 2007-8. 9.7% of Black Caribbean females were shortlisted, with 9% 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.
5.
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 two years.
In total, 109 appointments were made. 23% of all APT&C appointments were
made to minority ethnic staff. In 2007-8 this figure was 17.7%.
Table 2 - Academic
25% of the posts advertised were Academic (56 posts), up from 19% in 2007-08.
Academic posts attracted 553 applications (9.8 applications per post, down from 12
applications per post for the previous 12 months). 53.5% of applications were from
males, with 43% of all academic appointments made to males (down from 59% in
2007-08). For the first time since data has been recorded in this way, the number of
white British female applicants was higher than white British males (historically the
highest group). These groups were followed by white other males and females,
Indian males and females, Chinese males and black African males.
41% of white female applicants were short-listed with 27% of those short-listed being
appointed (higher than 2007-8). 40% of white British male applicants were shortlisted with 22% of these being appointed (lower than 2007-8). 31% of white other
male applicants were shortlisted with 18% of these being appointed. 32% of white
other females were shortlisted with 22% of these being appointed. 16.6% of Indian
male applicants were shortlisted and 23.5% of Indian females. 33% of Indian males
short-listed were appointed and 25% of Indian females shortlisted were appointed.
Again, a very low number of applicants from a mixed ethnic background applied with
none being appointed.
In total 44 appointments were made. 11% of all Academic appointments were
made to minority ethnic staff, showing a continued decrease in bme
appointments (19% in 2007-08; 24% in 2006-7; 23% in 2005-6.)
Table 3 - Manual
9% of the posts advertised were Manual/Catering (20 posts) and these attracted 451
applications (22.5 applications per post, higher than for previous two years). 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 the two previous years.
21.5% of white British male applicants were short-listed (higher than 2007-08), with
9% of those short-listed being appointed (lower than 2007-08). 54% of white British
female applicants were short-listed (higher than 2007-08) with 16.5% of those being
appointed (lower than 2006-7). 22% of Indian male applicants were short-listed
(higher than 2007-08) with none being appointed. 45% of Indian female applicants
were short-listed (higher than 2007-08) with none being appointed. 33% of Black
African male applicants were short-listed with 14% being appointed (both higher than
2007-08).
6.
Very few people from a mixed background applied for Manual/Catering posts with
none being appointed.
In total 14 appointments were made, lower than for previous years, as no
Manual/Catering posts were advertised from February 2009. 21% of all
Manual/Catering appointments were made to minority ethnic staff. In 2007-08
this figure was 29.7%, in 2006-7 it was 19% and in 2005-6 this figure was 26%.
Summary: 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, just over one-fifth of these get short-listed and just under 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. These figures mirror those recorded for previous years
Table 4 – Applicants recorded as being disabled
The total no. of applicants for all posts was 5497 (on average 24.8 applicants per
post, higher than for the last four years). Of these, 4.85% were recorded as being
disabled. The majority of these people (80%) applied for APT&C posts. At shortlisting stage, 11% of all applicants were recorded as disabled (up from 4.8% in the
previous 12 months and the highest figure recorded to date), again with the majority
of these (82%) being for APT&C posts.
In total 6.6% of all people appointed were recorded as disabled, up from 2.2%
for the previous 12 months and the highest figure recorded to date.
The actual figures for this year break down as follows;
For academic posts, 27 people recorded as disabled applied, with 15 of these
shortlisted and four being appointed into an academic post (i.e. 26.5% of those
shortlisted).
For APT&C posts, 213 people recorded as disabled applied with 76 of these
shortlisted and 6 of those appointed into an APT&C post (i.e. 7.8% of those
shortlisted).
For Manual/Catering posts 27 people with a recorded disability applied to manual
posts with two being shortlisted (7.4%) and one being appointed (50% of those
shortlisted).
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 is the
same as for the previous 12 months, the total number of bme appointments is lower
than for the previous three years, mainly due to the drop in bme applicants and
subsequent appointees to academic posts. The aggregated figures hide some detail
which the Committee may wish to consider and which is shown more clearly in
Tables 1-5, namely;
7.







lower number of posts advertised due to University recruitment freeze
lower levels of bme applicant success in general than for white applicants
low numbers of bme applicants and appointees for academic posts, with
those shortlisted showing the lowest figure on record
more applicants per post, (24.8), a continued rise from 14 in 2006-7 to 21 in
2007-8
highest percentage figures for those shortlisted 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
higher numbers of internal posts than for previous years, with just under 20%
of all posts advertised being internal.
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 66% 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
1 AUG 2008 – 31 JULY 2009
Total APT&C posts advertised – 145
APPLIED
Total applications - 4494
SHORTLISTED
Total short-listed-529
MALE - 40%
FEMALE - 60%
APPOINTED
Total appointed-109
MALE - 34%
FEMALE - 66%
Male
MALE- 30%
FEMALE - 70%
Ethnicity
WHITE
BRITISH
Male
Female
1121
1773
124
242
Female
21
Male
56
Female
WHITE IRISH
14
17
2
2
0
0
WHITE OTHER
46
77
6
9
3
3
B/BB
CARIBBEAN
46
113
7
11
1
1
B/BB AFRICAN
54
47
2
4
3
0
OTHER BLACK
12
12
1
2
0
2
A/AB INDIAN
295
447
17
55
1
11
A/AB
PAKISTANI
60
49
4
4
0
0
A/AB
BANGLADESHI
16
23
2
1
0
0
CHINESE
22
27
5
6
2
1
OTHER ASIAN
20
23
4
5
0
0
MIXED W & B
CARIBBEAN
5
21
0
1
1
1
MIXED W & B
AFRICAN
8
4
0
0
0
0
MIXED W &
ASIAN
7
9
3
2
1
0
OTHER MIXED
BACKGROUND
8
9
2
0
0
0
OTHER
ETHNIC
BACKGROUND
INFO NOT
GIVEN
14
10
0
1
0
0
43
41
3
2
0
1
TOTAL
KNOWN BME
568
794
47
92
9
16
TOTAL
1792
2702
182
347
33
76
In %age terms, where ethnicity is known, 30% of all APT&C applicants were bme,
26% of those short-listed were bme and 23% of all those appointed were bme
applicants.
9.
TABLE 2 RECRUITMENT TRENDS BY ETHICITY ACROSS ALL ACADEMIC POSTS
1 AUG 2008-31 JULY 2009
Total academic posts advertised – 56
APPLIED
SHORTLISTED
APPOINTED
Total short-listed-186
Total appointed-44
Total applications-553
MALE – 48%
FEMALE - 52%
MALE - 53.5%
FEMALE - 46.5%
Ethnicity
Male
Female
Male
MALE- 43%
FEMALE - 57%
Female
Male
Female
WHITE
BRITISH
166
178
67
73
15
20
WHITE IRISH
6
3
3
1
0
0
WHITE OTHER
35
28
11
9
2
2
B/BB
CARIBBEAN
2
9
0
2
0
0
B/BB AFRICAN
13
3
1
2
0
0
OTHER BLACK
3
1
0
0
0
0
A/AB INDIAN
18
17
3
4
1
1
A/AB
PAKISTANI
6
3
0
1
0
0
A/AB
BANGLADESHI
4
0
0
1
0
0
CHINESE
14
8
2
2
1
2
OTHER ASIAN
11
2
2
0
0
0
MIXED W & B
CARIBBEAN
0
1
0
0
0
0
MIXED W & B
AFRICAN
5
0
0
0
0
0
MIXED W &
ASIAN
4
1
0
0
0
0
OTHER MIXED
BACKGROUND
1
0
0
0
0
0
OTHER
ETHNIC
BACKGROUND
INFO NOT
GIVEN
3
1
0
1
0
0
5
2
0
1
0
0
TOTAL
KNOWN BME
84
46
8
13
2
3
TOTAL
296
257
89
97
19
25
In %age terms, where ethnicity is known, 23.5 all academic applicants were bme,
11% of those short-listed were bme and 11% of all those appointed were bme
applicants.
10.
TABLE 3: RECRUITMENT TRENDS BY ETHNICITY ACROSS ALL
MANUAL/CATERING POSTS: 1 AUG 2008 – 31 JULY 2009
Total manual and catering posts advertised – 20
APPLIED
Total applications-451
SHORTLISTED
APPOINTED
Total shortlisted –123
Total appointed – 14
MALE – 72.5%
FEMALE – 27.5%
MALE - 55%
FEMALE - 45%
Ethnicity
Male
WHITE
BRITISH
199
78
43
42
4
7
WHITE IRISH
4
0
2
0
0
0
WHITE OTHER
7
3
0
0
0
0
B/BB
CARIBBEAN
7
7
1
1
0
1
B/BB AFRICAN
21
10
7
1
1
0
OTHER BLACK
5
0
1
0
0
0
A/AB INDIAN
53
22
12
10
0
0
A/AB
PAKISTANI
6
1
0
1
0
1
A/AB
BANGLADESHI
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
OTHER ASIAN
4
0
0
0
0
0
MIXED W & B
CARIBBEAN
3
1
0
0
0
0
MIXED W & B
AFRICAN
6
0
1
0
0
0
MIXED W &
ASIAN
2
0
0
0
0
0
OTHER MIXED
BACKGROUND
1
1
0
0
0
0
OTHER
ETHNIC
BACKGROUND
INFO NOT
GIVEN
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
1
0
0
TOTAL
KNOWN BME
114
42
22
13
1
2
TOTAL
326
124
68
56
5
9
CHINESE
Female
Male
MALE- 36%
FEMALE - 64%
Female
Male
Female
In %age terms, where ethnicity is known, 35% of all Man/Cat applicants were bme,
27% of those short-listed were bme and 21% of all those appointed were bme
applicants.
11.
TABLE 4 - RECRUITMENT MONITORING - Disability
Jan-Dec
Jan-Dec
Jan-Dec Aug 06Jul 07
06
Actual
%
Aug 0708
Actual
%
Aug 08Jul 09
Actual
%
04
05
All Posts:
Applied
2.25%
1.9%
3.2%
101
2.2%
388
5.6%
267
4.85%
Shortlisted
1.4%
1.6%
2.8%
21
1.4%
57
4.8%
93
11%
Appointed
3%
1.3%
1.7%
5
1.3%
6
2.2%
11
6.6%
ACADEMIC
Applied
1.35%
2%
2.5%
19
1.8%
33
4.2%
27
4.8%
Shortlisted
1.25%
1.3%
1.8%
3
0.9%
8
4.2%
15
8%
Appointed
2.9%
2.4%
2.1%
3
3.4%
1
2.1%
4
9%
APT&C
Applied
2.4%
1.9%
3.5%
61
1.9%
308
5.7%
213
4.7%
Shortlisted
1.7%
1.9%
2.9%
15
1.6%
48
5.9%
76
14%
Appointed
3.5%
1%
2%
1
0.6%
4
2.1%
6
5.5%
MANUAL
Applied
1.7%
1.9%
2.7%
21
3%
47
6.4%
27
6%
Shortlisted
0
0.5%
2.4%
4
1.8%
1
0.5%
2
1.6%
Appointed
0
0%
0%
0
0%
1
2.7%
1
7%
12.
TABLE 5 - RECRUITMENT MONITORING BY ETHNICITY
Percentage figures based on overall number of applicants, year on year.
‘97
‘98
‘99
‘00
‘01
‘02
‘03
‘04
‘05
‘06
’06-07
07-08
08-09
Applied 17
17
19
20
23
25
28
24
33
34
34
30
30
Shortlisted 16
19
18
19
21
22
25
20
28
27
25
23.5
21
Appointed 10
16
8
14
16
16
16
18
16
22
20
21
18
ACADEMIC
Applied 17
15
19
17
22
23
28
22
26
33
32
30
23.5
Shortlisted 17
15
17
14
20
19
23
16
25
23
25
17.5
11
Appointed 10
13
11
12
9
15
13
12
14
23
24
19
11
APT&C
Applied 17
15
20
23
24
27
30
28
36
36
38
32
30
Shortlisted 16
22
19
21
21
24
25
23
31
25
28
22
26
Appointed 10
19
6
15
15
16
16
18
17
18
16
18
23
9
11
12
8
18
19
16
17
24
34
31
27
35
Shortlisted 13
17
16
14
22
15
26
21
22
34
22
31
27
Appointed
16
6
10
33
16
20
23
14
26
19
27
21
All Posts:
MANUAL
Applied
8
13.
TABLE 6
UNIVERSITY OF WOLVERHAMPTON
Staff Diversity Indicators - School / Departmental Analysis as at 1 July 2009 (excluding casuals and S/VLs)
Dept
%
SCHOOLS
HLSS
RESEARCH
SAD
SAS
SCIT
SEBE
SED
SLS
SOH
SSPAL
UWBS
Sub-Total
Staff in Post
131
32
129
157
94
115
136
59
189
73
107
1222
Aimhigher
Arena Theatre
BCSIP
Business Development Enterprise
Chaplaincy
Dean of Students
Estates
Facilities
Finance Department
Institute of Learning Enhancement
Ethnicity
9.9
13
18.7
6
6.2
8
13.3
21
19.1
18
26.0
30
12.5
17
10.1
6
20.1
38
9.5
7
16.8
18
14.8
182
Dept
%
DEPARTMENTS
Staff in Post
11
12
17
2
5
139
43
571
64
28
Actual in
post
Actual in
post
Ethnicity
18.1
2
0.0
0
11.7
2
0.0
0
60.0
3
15.8
22
2.3
1
18.5
106
9.3
6
3.5
1
Dept
%
Actual in
post
Male
45.0
40.6
59.0
53.5
56.4
68.6
36.0
42.4
22.2
52.0
58.9
47.5
Dept
%
59
13
76
84
53
79
49
25
42
38
63
581
Actual in
post
Male
9.0
58.3
11.8
50.0
60.0
17.4
88.4
38.5
29.7
32.1
1
7
2
1
3
25
38
220
19
9
Dept
%
Actual in
post
Female
55.0
59.4
41.0
46.5
43.6
31.4
64.0
57.6
77.8
48.0
41.1
52.5
Dept
%
72
19
53
73
41
36
87
34
147
35
44
641
Actual in
post
Female
91.0
41.7
88.2
50.0
40.0
82.6
11.6
61.5
70.3
67.9
10
5
15
1
2
114
5
351
45
19
Dept
%
Actual in
post
Disabled
6.1
0.0
0.7
1.9
3.2
0.0
0.7
6.7
3.1
4.1
0.9
2.4
Dept
%
8
0
1
3
3
0
1
4
6
3
1
30
Actual in
post
Disabled
0.0
0.0
5.8
0.0
0.0
5.7
0.0
0.7
0.0
0.0
0
0
1
0
0
8
0
4
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
84
203
54
12
29
137
5
19
36
1491
15
15.4
11.3
14.8
8.3
17.2
12.4
20.0
5.2
22.2
14.95
3
13
23
8
1
5
17
1
1
8
223
15.8
58.3
33
29.6
33.3
20.7
18.25
40.0
42.1
44.4
35.0
4
49
67
16
4
6
25
2
8
16
522
84.2
41.7
67.0
70.4
66.7
79.3
81.75
60.0
57.90
55.6
65.0
16
35
136
38
8
23
112
3
11
20
969
0.0
1.2
1.9
3.7
0.0
10.3
1.4
0.0
5.2
0.0
1.7
0
1
4
2
0
3
2
0
1
0
26
GRAND TOTAL
2713
14.9
403
40.7
1103
59.3
1610
2.0
56
14.
TABLE 7 - STAFF ETHNICITY PROFILE 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 UW9 (SO2/PO) posts
Total UW9 bme staff
Percentage known bme staff
Oct 05
Oct 06
Jul 07
Jul 08
Jul 09
2580
311
12%
2628
332
12.6%
2673
399
14.9%
2760
410
14.8%
2713
405
14.9%
824
97
11.7%
833
99
11.8%
880
120
13.6%
758
122
16%
839
119
14.2%
1197
138
11.5%
1222
143
11.7%
1244
179
14.3%
1359
196
14.4%
1338
188
14%
479
74
15.4%
484
85
17.5%
486
96
19.7%
444
87
19.5%
451
93
20.6%
209
13
6.2%
222
15
6.7%
229
15
6.5%
227
16
7.0%
232
19
8.2%
127
7
5.5%
130
8
6.1%
130
8
6.1%
155
11
7.0%
160
10
6.25%
Key;
Pt. 2 includes professors, PLs, readers, L/SLs, demonstrators, academic related and all temporary academic staff
Pt 3. includes UW9 (SO2/PO) posts, APT&C/UW8 (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 UW9 (SO2/PO) posts
15.