1
Equality and Diversity Impact Assessment
– Initial Screening
Title of Policy, Procedure or Function: Voluntary Severance Scheme (including early retirement) July 2010
School/Department: Human Resources
Author/Position: Mrs Caroline Inglis, Director of HR Date created: 25 th June 2010
1. Aims and purpose of Policy, Procedure or Function:
The objective of the VS scheme is to support a long-term reduction in the total expenditure on core-funded staffing through voluntary measures. This will be undertaken as part of a package of measures to reduce costs and improve efficiencies to ensure the University’s long-term sustainability as a world-leading institution.
2. Stakeholders:
All members of core-funded staff
Line managers
Heads of School/Section
Heads of College/Vice Principals
Senior Vice Principal
Principal
Human Resources Advisers
Campus Trades Unions
University Court
Finance staff
3. Consultation/Involvement
The terms and structure of the VS scheme has been discussed with senior managers within the University and representatives from the recognised Campus Trades Unions. Due to the sensitive nature of the policy, and the financial constraints within which the Scheme is operating, it was not appropriate to consult widely on the terms of the Scheme amongst the
University community in general.
An analysis of the staff compared between core funded and externally funded sources has been undertaken and the equality impact of this segregation was not significant.
The scheme will be open to all members of core funded staff, irrespective of their belonging to a specific equality strand category. As this Scheme covers all core-funded staff and it is voluntary, the Scheme itself does not raise equality issues. The HR Advisers will be working closely with Heads of School in discussing and considering applications that are received and it is anticipated that this close relationship will eliminate the possibility of any equality issues arising in the implementation of the policy. In addition, the Director of Human Resources will be a member of the panel with whom the ultimate decision making authority rests.
The early retirement eligibility criteria is imposed upon the University by the pension scheme
Trustees and therefore, the University has no opportunity to offer this as an option to individuals who do not meet the age-related criteria.
Organisation/person consulted or involved
Date, method and by whom
University Management Group 28 th June 2010
Location of consultation records
Clerk to UMG
Representatives of all Campus
Trades Unions
29 th June 2010 Human Resources

2 a) Brief summary of results of consultation indicating how this has affected the
Policy, Procedure or Function
The University Management Group considered the proposed terms of the VS Scheme and agreed that they were appropriate. It was agreed that early retirement should also be included in the options available to staff as Government proposals announced in the recent budget statement, together with potential changes to pension scheme rules, are likely to reduce our flexibility to be able to reduce our costs through such a scheme in the future.
UMG agreed that a managed approach towards VS at this stage will enable us to continue to invest in priority areas and emerge from the current economic downturn in a stronger competitive position. UMG also agreed that, in view of the driver for the Scheme being reduced core income, eligibility for the Scheme should be restricted to core funded staff.
UMG did not identify any issues of equality relevance relating to the Scheme.
A meeting was held with representatives from the University management and Campus
Trades Unions to discuss the Scheme. The Trades Unions were advised of the UMG view of the Scheme and did not identify any issues of equality relevance.

3
Policy, Procedure or Function (delete as appropriate)
Equality
Relevance to promotion of equality of opportunity, elimination of discrimination and promotion of good relations between people of different minority groups
Race Disability Gender Age Sexual
Orientation
Religion or Belief Gender
Reassignment
1. Does the policy, procedure or function impact directly on the public or (for internal issues) students/staff regarding:
2. Is there any evidence or reason to believe that someone could be affected differently (either individually or as a group) on his or her race, ethnic origin, religion, age, gender, disability, sexual orientation or gender reassignment regarding:
3. Is there evidence that the above mentioned groups are being affected differently regarding:
4. Is there public/political concern that the policy, procedure or function is operated in a discriminatory manner regarding:
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5. Does this policy, procedure or function involve the use or discretionary use of statutory powers or authority regarding:
6. Does this policy, procedure or function present opportunity to improve community relations regarding:
7. Does this policy, procedure or function concern equality of opportunity for students/staff regarding:
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Impact on individual equality strands i.e. Race,
Religion etc.: Score - High (7-5), Medium (4-3), Low (2-1),
0 0 0 2 0 0 0
N/A (0)
Note – Completion of the template requires each strand to be examined individually. The final relevance score is obtained by totalling vertically the number of equality questions that are answered yes in each strand. The highest relevance score will determine the impact of the policy, procedure or function irrespective of diversity strand.

4
4. Impact of policy, procedure or function on equality
High Medium Low
5. Publication
N/A X a) Provide details of arrangements to publish initial screening:
EIA website
6. Review Date: 31 st December 2010 (closure of the scheme). However, an ongoing monitoring process of applications received and considered will be undertaken, with daily updates being provided to Heads of College/University Secretary and Vice
Principals.
Author (Name and Position): Mrs Heather Crabb, Senior HR Manager
Authors signature:
Equality and Diversity Advisor (Name):
Equality and Diversity Advisor signature:
7. Date of submission to Advisory Group on Equality & Diversity:
Approval Yes No