Research Excellence Framework: Equality and diversity

1. Research Excellence Framework: Equality and diversity University of Portsmouth – REF Specific Equality and Diversity Learning Package Version 2 - May 2012 Last update – 8 May 2012 Equality & Diversity Unit

2. Context and aim • Funding bodies have embedded equality and diversity as a key requirement into the REF • All staff involved in the REF are required to undertake the UoP general equality and diverisity e-learning package as well as this REF specific package. • This is to ensure we: • Fulfil our obligations under equalities and employment law • Ensure staff eligible for submission are treated fairly and are not discriminated against

3. University of Portsmouth and the REF • UoP Code of Practice • UoP Information Portal Click to open portal • REF general questions email ref@port.ac.uk • Denise.teasdale@port.ac.uk – REF process/procedures • Kevin.pogorzelski@port.ac.uk – REF database/Technical info • Dave.Small@port.ac.uk – REF Equality & Diversity

4. What is meant by equality and diversity • Diversity: recognises that everyone is different in a variety of visible and non-visible ways, and that those differences are to be recognised, respected and valued (ECU). • Equality: ‘Equality is a fundamental part of a fair society in which everyone can have the best possible chance to succeed in life.’ (Discrimination Law Review, 2007) • Different to quality REF requirements set by Main Panels and University of Portsmouth

5. Why are equality and diversity important in the REF • Ensure staff treated fairly • Better retention, satisfaction and performance • Ensure REF processes meet both funding bodies’ and UoP obligations under equalities law • Evidence from previous exercises indicates lower selection of staff from certain groups eg: women.

6. Lessons from the Research Assessment Exercise 2008 • Report into ‘Selection of staff for inclusion in RAE 2008’: • Selection rate for staff with declared disability lower than for staff without declared disability • 67% of male permanent academic staff selected in comparison to 48% of women. • Women aged 30-50 particularly low rate of selection • Selection rate of staff from the black ethnic group lower than for staff from other ethnic groups. Source: www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2009/09_34

7. Institutional context: lessons from the Research Assessment Exercise 2008 • Learning for UoP • Better timeline for complaints/issues • Better equality analysis of those engaged in the process • Better communication • Better engagement and openness with staff on REF process and outcomes

8. Changing equalities context • Since RAE 2008, equality law has been strengthened and streamlined in England, Scotland and Wales with the introduction of the Equality Act 2010. • Change in types of conduct that are prohibited • Types of prohibited conduct more in line with Northern Ireland equalities law. • Broader range of individual characteristics that need to be consider in HEIs’ REF work to ensure fair selection of staff.

9. Handout – Changing Equalities • The document in this slide, that you can download and print, gives up to date details of equality legislation, what's new since RAE 2008, and the implications for REF2014.

10. Individual characteristics recognised in REF – Equalities Law • Age • Disability • Caring responsibilities (children, disabled and older people) • Gender reassignment • Marriage & civil partnership • Political opinion • Pregnancy & maternity • Race • Religion & belief • Sex (including breastfeeding) • Sexual orientation • Welsh language (Wales only)

11. Individual characteristics recognised in REF – Employment law or REF specific • Paternity and adoption • Part-time and fixed-term employment status • Early career researchers • Junior clinical academic (without CCT)

12. Individual staff circumstances and reduced research outputs • Panel criteria allow for reduction in research outputs in relation to: • Clearly defined circumstances • Clear period/s of leave during the REF period • Part time working • Early career researcher/ Junior clinical academics without CCT • More complex circumstances • Allows for disruption to research of an ongoing or sporadic nature during the REF period due to an equality related reason • May include clearly defined periods of leave

13. Ensuring confidentiality • Information about a staff member’s disability, sexual orientation or gender identity is classified as personal sensitive information under the Data Protection Act and cannot be passed on without explicit consent • Passing on information about a person’s gender identity without the individual’s permission may make you liable for criminal proceedings

14. UoP processes for handling clearly defined and complex circumstances • Staff asked to complete REF disclosure form • Individual and complex circumstances May/June 2012 • Returns viewed by the REF equality Sub-committee. • Individuals informed of any reductions of outputs given • Only number of reductions passed to internal panels

15. Defined circumstances

16. Defined Circumstances:- Maternity/Paternity- Adoption Leave- Early Career Researchers- Part-time working- Career Break- SecondmentThese offer set clearly defined reductions in outputs laid down by REF

17. Example 1 : Defined circumstance:Dr Qureshi first met the definition of an early career researcher (ECR) on 31 Sept 2009. Since becoming an ECR, she has taken two periods of maternity leave during the REF period. One period of maternity leave was for 120 days and the other for 1 year.

18. Example 2 : Defined circumstance:Professor Johnson was on secondment in industry for 1 year and 68 days during the REF period.

19. Example 3 : Defined circumstance:Dr Annan took one period of maternity leave for 3 months, two periods of statutory adoption leave of 2 and 4 months and was seconded to industry during the REF period for 4 months.

20. Early Career Researcher: permitted reduction in outputs

21. Part-time working, secondment or career breaks : permitted reduction in outputs

22. Maternity, paternity or adoption leave

23. Example 1 : Reduction calculations Dr Qureshi first met the definition of an early career researcher (ECR) on 31 Sept 2009. Since becoming and ECR, she has taken two periods of maternity leave during the REF period. One period of maternity leave was for 120 days and the other for 1 year

24. Example 2 : Reduction calculation:Professor Johnson was on secondment in industry for 1 year and 68 days during the REF period

25. Example 3 : Reduction calculation:Dr Annan took one period of maternity leave for 3 months, two periods of statutory adoption leave of 2 and 4 months and was seconded to industry during the REF period for 4 months.

26. Complex circumstances

27. complex circumstances These are circumstances outside of the laid down defined circumstances which a researcher wishes to have considered for reduction of output

28. Considerations When Handling complex circumstances • Information will be treated Confidentially • Researchers may be requested to provide further information where appropriate to help in decision making • Key considerations when working out number of research outputs to be submitted: • establish timeframe affected in line with panel criteria e.g. not just periods of leave but overall period of time research affected. • If working during period affected consider impact on ability to conduct research e.g. effectiveness of reasonable adjustments, ability to conduct or focus on research work, impact on mental wellbeing and so forth.

29. Example 1 : Complex circumstance:Professor Woodrow has had breast cancer during the REF period and continued to work and returned to work on a part-time basis for two years. She received chemotherapy for six months when working part time and while she kept up to date on developments in her field, her research was affected.

30. Example 2 : Complex circumstance:Dr Palmier took one period of additional paternity leave during the REF period lasting 5 months and throughout the REF period has been caring for his mother who has macular degeneration and lives with him.

31. Example 3 : Complex circumstance:Dr Esposito experienced sexual harassment from her colleagues and an HEI investigation supported her complaint and claim that the harassment significantly disrupted her research. It is estimated that her research was disrupted for 2 years.

32. Complex circumstances=There are no set reductions for complex circumstances=There may well be a mixture of complex and defined within an individuals circumstances= Number of reductions for complex circumstances will be decided by UoP REF Equality Sub Committee=Reasons for reduced output will not be shared with UoP units, only number of reductions

33. Complex calculation – ScenarioDR Jenkins had a period of maternity leave from 21 April 2010 to 31 January 2011. In March 2011 it became apparent that Dr Jenkins was having difficulties returning to her research and in July 2011 she was diagnosed with postnatal depression. Following diagnosis Dr Jenkins was signed off work for 2 weeks, referred for counselling and prescribed antidepressants.From 01 October 2011 Dr Jenkins started to work on a 0.6fte basis. Her ongoing recovery from postnatal depression meant that from this point there was minimal disruption to her research .Dr Jenkins took a second period of maternity leave from 21 march 2013. She is due to return to work in January 2014.

34. Complex calculation – Effect on research- 2 periods of maternity leave-2 weeks of sickness leave-17 months of working on a 0.6 FTE basis-Additionally research disrupted during period due to postnatal depression, causing significant disruption to her research from March -October 2011 (supported by occupational health They advise that, as postnatal depression usually starts in the first year of birth, it is likely to have affected Dr Jenkins prior to July 2011)

35. Complex calculation – Reductions in output

36. Complex circumstancesAs the title suggests these types of circumstances can be complex to assess.ECU and REF have produced working examples for organisations to use as guidance for allocation of output reductions.

37. Managers Implications for your role

38. Managers-Implications for your role • Understand and observe institutional REF policies. • If involved in the development of policies for the selection of staff ensure that equality has been considered in the development of policies and procedures. • Ensuring decisions on selection are purely based on research quality and not a staff members personal characteristics. • Be aware of circumstances that may entitle staff to a reduction in research outputs. • Consider equality provisions when discussing REF submissions with staff.

39. Managing the REF • The following few slides give practical examples of situations you may come across from staff. • -look at the scenario and consider: • - what the issues/concerns might be • - how you would advise the member of staff

40. Managing the REF – Scenario 1 A member of staff who has taken a 6 month period of Additional Paternity Leave during the REF period approaches you. He has been informed by his manager that his research will not be included in the institution’s REF submission. His manager is aware that he has had time out of research during the REF period for paternity leave but has said that he needs to submit four research outputs of the required quality to be considered by the institution for REF submission. A woman who has taken maternity leave has been told that she only needs submit three research outputs of the required quality to be considered for submission.

41. Managing the REF – Scenario 1 Concerns? If the institution proceeds with this approach of not allowing the man to have a reduction in output, it could constitute sex discrimination under the Equality Act 2010

42. Managing the REF – Scenario 1 How do you advise member of staff? • Based on the REF panel criteria and UoP code of practice, they are entitled to submit a reduced number of research outputs. In this case, a reduction of one output unless there are other circumstances related to equality. • The member of staff could approach denise.teasdale@port.ac.uk, UoP REF team • You may also offer to approach his manager directly but the scenario raises the issue that managers more generally may not be aware of the UoP code of practice on the selection of staff therefore, you may want to raise the issue with the UoP REF team

43. Managing the REF – Scenario 2 A member of staff in your department has had mental health difficulties during the REF period and you know that in the past they have taken time out of research due to their mental health. You know that the time out amounts to more than 12 months. They have disclosed their circumstances and you understand that they were informed that if they were selected, they would be submitted with a reduced number of outputs. The staff member approaches you as they have been informed that due to the quality of their research, they will not be submitted to the REF.

44. Managing the REF – Scenario 2 Concerns? • The member of staff may feel that the reason they have not been submitted is because they have had mental health problems during the REF period. • However, on the basis of the information that you have to hand UoP appears to have taken this into consideration. The institution could be in breach of the Equality Act 2010 if it did not take mental health problems into consideration that had lasted or were expected to last for twelve months or more and had a substantial affect on the person’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.

45. Managing the REF – Scenario 2 How do you advise member of staff? • Confirm with the member of staff that they where informed that they would have been able to submit a reduced number of outputs. • The member of staff needs to be made aware that UoP can only reduce the number of outputs required in line with panel criteria • As the REF is a competitive exercise for funding allocation in the sector UoP has developed a strategy and criteria that means for certain units of assessment, researchers are required to produce research output at a particular level. This is stated the UoP code of practice • Refer the researcher to the various mechanisms in place to support researcher development

46. Managing the REF – Scenario 3 A member of staff approaches you as they are concerned that they are not being included in the UoP REF submission because they are now working part-time and plan to retire in 2014. Their outputs meet UoP criteria but they understand that if they were to be included a further impact case study would have to be provided. They have complained to their Head of Department who explained that they are not being included to give younger researchers an opportunity for inclusion.

47. Managing the REF – Scenario 3 Concerns? • The circumstances described by the researcher could constitute age discrimination under the Equality Act 2010. If full-time staff were being prioritised over part-time staff this could also be in breach of the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 that apply in all four countries of the UK

48. Managing the REF – Scenario 3 How do you advise member of staff? • Member of staff should approach REF contact denise.teasdale@port.ac.uk regarding the matter. • You may also offer to approach his manager directly but the scenario raises the issue that managers more generally may not be aware of UoP’s code of practice on the selection of staff therefore, you may want to raise the issue with the UoP REF manager.

49. Managing the REF – Scenario 4 You overhear senior staff in your department talking about REF submissions. One of them is laughing in disbelief as apparently an early career researcher (ECR) has said that they should only be required to submit two research outputs. It is not because of when the researcher met the REF definition of an ECR, it is because she cares for her disabled mother and feels that this has considerably disrupted her ability to conduct research. The staff member who is laughing remarks, ‘Most of us in the department care for our parents, since when did the fact that they are disabled make a difference. In fact, my mother is probably disabled!’

50. Managing the REF – Scenario 4 Concerns? • Staff should not be discussing staff personal circumstances in public as in some cases information will be confidential and may be considered personal sensitive information under the Data Protection Act. If other staff heard, it may put them off disclosing. • Not giving a reduction in line with panel criteria may constitute discrimination because of disability under the Equality Act 2010. The researcher is associated with a disabled person. • The early career researcher (ECR) may be entitled to a further reduction in outputs and may appeal and/or take action against UoP.