Workforce Disability Equality Standard (WDES) Submission 2023

Workforce Disability Equality Standard (WDES) Submission 2023

Report to: Workforce Committee
Date: 11^th July 2023
Report of: Chief People Officer
Prepared by: Louisa Graham
For approval
For discussion

Executive Summary:

The purpose of this report is to share the data which will form the submission and subsequent publication of the 2023 Workforce Disability Equality Standard (WDES) for our Trust. It sets out priority areas for action based on analysis of the results which include workforce data and findings from the latest staff survey. The Committee are asked to review and approve the contents of the report for publication and to consider the areas for action and associated next steps which are to consult with the Disability Inclusion Forum with regards to the results, understand their lived experience, the actions which will make the greatest impact and to seek feedback on the draft action plan, making changes where necessary.

The priority areas recommended for action are those which are indicating disabled colleagues are being adversely impacted or disadvantaged according to the four-fifths rule:

Metric 3 – Likelihood of colleagues with a disability entering the formal capability process.

Metric 4a – Percentage of colleagues experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse in the last 12 months from patients, service users or the public.

Metric 4b – Percentage of colleagues experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse in the last 12 months from managers.

Metric 4c - Percentage of colleagues experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse in the last 12 months from colleagues.

Metric 6 – Percentage of colleagues who felt pressure from their manager to come to work, despite not feeling well enough to perform their duties.

Metric 7 - Percentage of colleagues saying that they are satisfied with the extent to which their organisation values their work.

It is recommended that the Committee, receive the report, note the content, approve the priority areas for action and approve external publication of our results.

INTRODUCTION

The Workforce Disability Equality Standard (WDES) is a mandated requirement through the NHS standard contract which was launched in April 2019, making this the fifth WDES report. Organisations are instructed to report and publish their WDES data on an annual basis, illustrating organisational progress against ten indicators relating to workforce disability equality.

RESULTS

For each of the indicators the data is compared for Disabled colleagues and non-disabled colleagues. National staff survey averages and organisational results for the last 4 years have been included for comparative purposes where applicable to the metric being reviewed.  

The approach used by the national WDES team with regards to the ongoing Disability Disparity Audit work is to utilise the four-fifths (“4/5ths” or “80 percent”) rule to highlight whether practices have an adverse impact on an identified group, e.g. a sub-group of ethnicity or disability. For example, if the relative likelihood of an outcome for one sub-group compared to another is less than 0.8 or higher than 1.2, then the process would be identified as having an adverse impact.

Summary Data

Improvements have been seen for Disabled colleagues across the following indicators;

• Metric 1 – Representation, we have seen some increases in the percentage of disabled colleagues across our workforce as a whole, furthermore it is positive to note increase in representation in bands 8a, 8c, as well as in Very Senior Manager roles. Whilst there is much more work to do to increase disclosure of disability and supporting disabled colleagues to progress we are making small steps forward.
• Metric 2 – likelihood of appointing disabled candidates from shortlisting. This has improved in year and is now within the expected disparity ratio range of 0.8-1.20.
• Metric 3 – Likelihood of entering formal capability process. This metric has improved in the last 12 months compared to last years return, however disparity ratio is at 1.90 above the recommended range indicating an adverse impact for disabled colleagues. However the numbers of disabled colleagues entering a formal capability process remains low, in addition to this we are aware that not all colleagues with a disability/long term condition have declared this, therefore care must be taken when drawing conclusions.
• Metric 4a – Percentage of colleagues experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse in the last 12 months from patients, service users or the public. The disparity ratio indicates a negative impact on disabled colleagues, however it has improved since last year.
• Metric 4b – Percentage of colleagues experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse in the last 12 months from managers. The disparity ratio indicates a negative impact on disabled colleagues, however it has improved since last year.
• Metric 4c - Percentage of colleagues experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse in the last 12 months from colleagues. The disparity ratio indicates a negative impact on disabled colleagues, however it has improved since last year.
• Metric 4d - Percentage of colleagues saying the last time they experienced harassment, bullying or abuse at work, they or a colleague reported it. This score has both improved since last year and is within the race disparity ratio boundaries to indicate no adverse impact for disabled colleagues.
• Metric 8 - Percentage of disabled staff saying their employer has made adequate adjustments to enable them to carry out their work. This score has improved this year and is above the national average.
• Metric 10 – Board Representation. 10.5% of voting Board members identify as having a disability, this has increased since last year and above the NHS national average.

The following indicator shows a deterioration in the experience of our Disabled colleagues;

• Metric 5 - Percentage believing the trust provides equal opportunities for career progression or promotion. This score has deteriorated since last year, however it remains within the disability disparity ratio boundaries to indicate no adverse impact for disabled colleagues.
• Metric 6 – Percentage of colleagues who felt pressure from their manager to come to work, despite not feeling well enough to perform their duties. This score has deteriorated since last year, it still falls above the disparity ratio boundary indicating that there is an adverse impact for colleagues who are disabled.
• Metric 7 - Percentage of colleagues saying that they are satisfied with the extent to which their organisation values their work. This score has deteriorated since last year and is above the disability disparity ratio boundaries to indicate there is an adverse impact for disabled colleagues.

METRIC 1 – REPRESENTATION

This section details the percentage of colleagues in each of the AFC bands 1-9 and VSM for both clinical and non-clinical colleagues who are disabled and non-disabled compared with colleagues in the overall workforce.

Currently we know that 481 of our colleagues have recorded they have a long-term condition or disability which equates to 4.8% of our workforce. We understand from the most National Staff Survey completions however that 29.3% of those colleagues who took part in the staff survey indicated they have a long-term condition/disability (at least 986 colleagues – as only 47% of total workforce participate in staff survey, so this figure is likely to be more). If these colleagues updated ESR to reflect their long-term condition/disability, this would help to support greater accurate data for this metric, metric as well as metric 2, 3 and 9.

As displayed in the table below, disabled colleagues have stronger representation in non-clinical roles which are at band 3, 7, 8a, 8b and VSM. For a number of bands we have seen an increase in the percentage of disabled colleagues, of note is the band 8a, band 8b and VSM increase.

For clinical roles, there has been an increase in disabled colleague representation in band 2, band 4, Band 5, band 6, band 8a, and band 8c in comparison to 2022 data. For both clinical and non-clinical roles we need to take action to improve the percentage of disabled colleagues in more senior level roles, from band 8a and above.

Agenda for Change Workforce

With regards to the Medical and Dental Workforce, there is limited levels of self-declaration of long-term condition, illness of disability, as illustrated in the table overleaf. Work needs to be undertaken with this workforce group to encourage self-reporting, changing perceptions around disclosing a disability and creating feelings of psychological safety in sharing this information with us as an employer.

Medical and Dental Workforce

*Excludes Lead Employer Medical and Dental Trainees

METRIC 2– LIKELIHOOD OF APPOINTMENT FROM SHORTLISTING

The table below, indicates the likelihood of disabled candidates being appointed from shortlisting. The disparity ratio for this indicator has improved since last year, moving from 1.21 in 2022 to 1.13 in 2023; this now falls within the disparity ratio boundary of 0.80-1.20.

METRIC 3 – LIKELIHOOD OF ENTERING FORMAL CAPABILITY PROCESSES

Metric 3 indicates disabled colleagues are 1.90 times more likely to enter the formal capability process, this is substantial improvement from last years results. Whilst an improvement it is still an area for action as it falls above the disparity ratio. Upon reviewing the supporting data, the average cases are very low, therefore care must be taken before drawing a conclusion, across 2022 - 2023 there was an average of 13.5 formal capability cases per year involving disabled staff and an average of 108 for non-disabled colleagues.

METRIC 4 – BULLYING, HARRASSMENT OR ABUSE

METRIC 4A – PERCENTAGE OF STAFF EXPERIENCING HARASSMENT, BULLYING OR ABUSE FROM PATIENTS, SERVICE USERS OR THE PUBLIC IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS

The data displayed overleaf highlights an improvement from last year’s WDES reporting position for the extent to which colleagues with a disability, LTC or illness experience bullying, harassment or abuse from patients, service users or the public. With a disparity ratio of 1.46, this is it considered to have an adverse impact for colleagues with a disability, LTC or illness compared with colleagues without a disability, LTC or illness as it falls below the range of 0.8 – 1.2.  Our disparity ratio is more favourable for disabled colleagues than the national benchmark.

Organisation Data for 2022 and National Benchmark Comparator

Performance for this indicator as indicated in the table indicates that the disparity ratio continues to be an area for improvement.

Organisation Data Over Time

METRIC 4B – PERCENTAGE OF STAFF EXPERIENCING HARASSMENT, BULLYING OR ABUSE FROM MANAGERS IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS

The data displayed below focuses on colleagues who have a disability, LTC or illness who have experienced harassment, bullying or abuse from managers. The disparity ratio is concerning and show a greater adverse impact for disabled colleagues, the disparity ratio indicates there continues to be a need for further immediate action.

The data displayed below focuses on colleagues who have a disability, LTC or illness who have experienced harassment, bullying or abuse from managers. The disparity ratio is concerning and show a greater adverse impact for disabled colleagues, the disparity ratio indicates there continues to be a need for further immediate action.

Organisation Data for 2022 and National Benchmark Comparator

Performance for this indicator over time as displayed below has been mixed, with the 2021 data showing the worst position since WDES reporting was initiated.

Organisation Data Over Time

METRIC 4C – PERCENTAGE OF STAFF EXPERIENCING HARASSMENT, BULLYING OR ABUSE FROM COLLEAGUES IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS

The data displayed below focuses on colleagues who have a disability who have experienced harassment, bullying or abuse from colleagues. Again, the disparity ratio is concerning and shows a greater adverse impact for disabled colleagues, it is also slightly higher than the national benchmark, indicating a need for further immediate action.

Organisation Data for 2022 and National Benchmark Comparator

Performance for this indicator over time as displayed below has been mixed, with the 2021 data showing the worst position since WDES reporting was initiated.

Organisation Data Over Time

METRIC 4D – PERCENTAGE OF STAFF SAYING THAT THE LAST TIME THEY EXPERIENCED HARASSMENT, BULLYING OR ABUSE AT WORK, THEY OR A COLLEAGUE REPORTED IT

The data found that 53.2% of colleagues with a disability, LTC or illness and 51.7% of colleagues without a LTC or illness reported if they experienced harassment, bullying or abuse. The disparity ratio falls between 0.8 – 1.2 indicating, for this metric, there is no adverse impact for colleagues with a disability, LTC or illness. The organisations score is similar to the national benchmark.

Organisation Data for 2022 and National Benchmark Comparator

Performance for this indicator over time as displayed below is fairly static, however we have now seen improvements for the last 2 consecutive years.

Organisation Data Over Time

METRIC 5 – CAREER PROGRESSION AND PROMOTION

The data found that 52.4% of colleagues with a disability and 61.4% of colleagues without a disability believed that our organisation provides equal opportunity for career progression or promotion. The disparity ratio falls just between 0.8 – 1.2 indicting for this metric there is no adverse impact for colleagues with a LTC or illness. The organisations score is similar to the national benchmark.

Organisation Data for 2022 and National Benchmark Comparator

Performance for this indicator over time as displayed below remains fairly constant, without much movement in disparity ratio.

Organisation Data Over Time

METRIC 6 – PRESSURE TO COME TO WORK WHEN NOT FEELING WELL ENOUGH

The data found that 26.1% of colleagues with a disability and 18.4% of colleagues without a disability, LTC or illness felt pressure from their manager to come to work, despite not feeling well enough to perform their duties. The disparity ratio falls outside of the 0.80 – 1.20 range at 1.42 indicting for this metric there is an adverse impact for colleagues with a disability, LTC or illness. The organisations score is very slightly better than the national benchmark.

Organisation Data for 2022 and National Benchmark Comparator

Performance for this indicator over time as displayed below remains fairly constant, without much movement in disparity ratio.

Organisation Data Over Time

METRIC 7 – FEELING VALUED

The data found that 33.0% of colleagues with a disability and 48.4% of colleagues without a disability felt satisfied with the extent to which the organisation values their work. The disparity ratio falls outside of the 0.80 – 1.20 range at 1.47 indicating for this metric there is an adverse impact for colleagues with a LTC or illness. The organisations score is worse than the national benchmark. This disparity ratio has significantly worsened year on year for this indicator, which is mirrored in the national benchmark figures too.

Organisation Data for 2022 and National Benchmark Comparator

Performance for this indicator over time as displayed below shows that the disparity ratios have steadily declined since 2018.

Organisation Data Over Time

METRIC 8 – ADEQUATE ADJUSTMENTS

This metric is concerned with the percentage of staff with a disability, LTC or illness who say the organisation has made adequate adjustments to enable them to carry out their work, 75.1% of colleagues with a disability, LTC or illness believed this has been their experience. We are unable to apply the disparity ratio to this metric as we do not have comparison data for colleagues who do not have a LTC or illness, as they are not invited to give feedback to this item in the National Staff Survey if they do not self-disclose to fall into having this protected characteristic. The organisations score is better than the national benchmark.

Organisation Data for 2022 and National Benchmark Comparator

Performance for this indicator over time has been mixed, typically with around 70-80% of colleagues with an LTC or illness feeling adequate adjustments have been made to support them to carry out their work across this period.

Organisation Data Over Time

METRIC 9 – ENGAGEMENT AND HAVING A VOICE

METRIC 9A – STAFF ENGAGEMENT SCORE

Colleagues with a disability had an engagement score of 6.4, those colleagues without a disability, LTC illness level of engagement was 7.0. This indicates that disabled staff continue to feel less engaged than non-disabled staff. The disparity ratio falls within the 0.8 – 1.2 range at 0.92 indicating for this metric there is no adverse impact for colleagues with a LTC or illness. The organisations score is the same as the national benchmark.

Organisation Data for 2022 and National Benchmark Comparator

Performance for this indicator has remained stable over time.

Organisation Data Over Time

METRIC 9B – FACILTIATING THE VOICES OF DISABLED STAFF TO BE HEARD

Whilst this is not measured as part of the National Staff Survey therefore it is not possible to share performance in the last 12 months or the disparity ratio for this metric. There is a Living with Disability Ambassador Forum set up within the Trust, along with a Neurodiversity Group offering support and a forum to discuss lived experiences. We are fortunate to have Kate Smyth as Non-Executive Director to be a Board level champion and national lead for disabled colleagues to ensure we continue to strive to improve the experiences of colleagues with a disability, LTC or illness and ensure their voices are heard with responsive actions taken.

METRIC 10 – BOARD MEMBERSHIP

10.5% of the Board's voting membership identify as having a disability, this is greater than the NHS average of 3.7% and increase from our position of 7.14% reported last year. Further actions are required to understand if there are a proportion of Board members who have not disclosed their disability or long-term illness/condition, as well as taking supportive actions which continue to increase the diversity of Board membership.

WDES ACTION PLAN

Nationally, NHS England have set six targeted actions to address direct and indirect prejudice and discrimination, that exists through behaviour, policies, practices and cultures against certain groups and individuals across the NHS workforce.

The improvement plan aims to improve the outcomes, experience and culture for those with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 (although it is not limited to these groups) and links to the NHS People Plan.  The six actions are as follows, all of which have been built into our strategic EDI action plan:

1. Chief Executives, Chairs and Board Members must have specific and measurable EDI objectives to which they will be individually and collectively accountable.
2. Embed fair and inclusive recruitment processes and talent management strategies that target under-representation and lack of diversity.
3. Develop and implement an improvement plan to eliminate pay gaps.
4. Develop and implement an improvement plan to address health inequalities within the workforce.
5. Implement a comprehensive induction, onboarding and development programme for internationally-recruited colleagues.
6. Create an environment that eliminates the conditions in which bullying, discrimination, harassment and physical violence at work occur.

Organisations are mandated to produce a detailed WDES action plan, elaborating on the priority areas identified in this report and setting out the next steps with milestones for expected progress against the WDES metrics. The actions to supporting improvements against WDES are incorporated within the Workforce and Organisational Development strategic action plan for equality, diversity and inclusion. A copy of the strategic action plan is provided in Appendix 1. The strategic action plan, alongside this WDES report will be discussed with colleagues who participate in the organisations Living with Disability Inclusion Forum.

The strategic action plan will address the priority areas for improvement as found through the analysis of our data against the 10 WDES indicators alongside the views, ideas and actions valued by colleagues in the Disability Inclusion Forum. For clarity the strategic action plan for the next 12 months to support WDES improvements are:

• Increase the declaration rates of disabilities and long-term conditions by colleagues
• Reduce the % of ‘not known’ against the disability field in our electronic staff record
• Reduce the likelihood of disabled colleagues entering the formal capability procedure
• Improve the experience of disabled colleagues in respect of experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse from patients, relatives or other members of the public; managers and other colleagues
• Increase the percentage of disabled staff saying they are satisfied with the extent to which the organisation values their work.
• Increase the percentage of disabled colleagues who feel they have equal opportunity to access career development and promotion opportunities.
• Increase the percentage of colleagues who say the organisation has made adequate adjustments to enable them to carry out their work

The Workforce Disability Equality Standard 2023 

The Workforce Disability Equality Standard (WDES) is a set of ten specific metrics which enables NHS organisations to compare the workplace and career experiences of Disabled and Non-Disabled colleagues, as an organisation we are committed to closing those gaps through the development and implementation of actions to bring about continous imporvment over time.

OUR DATA AND KEY FINDINGS

REPRESENTATION - 4..8% of colleagues have declared they have a diability or long-term health condition.

SHORTLISTING - Non-disabled colleagues are 1.13 times more likely to be appointed from shortlisting.

CAPABILITY PROCESS - Disabled colleagues are 1.9 times more likely to enter the formal capability process.