Trick Question?

[StephF]

Bit of brain scrambling going on again! What is the correct type of response to yet another EU Directive type question ' in regards to this investment(forestry) how will you implement your equality & diversity policy? we work almost 50/50 male female, which I know is Not normal in forestry etc, can't employ certain groups because you have to be fit to be safe etc... What on earth is the answer they are expecting to hear???? I'd love to know how others get around this stupid rubbish because it seems pointless.

( I do have a company Equalit & diversity 'policy' but how can it be applied when we are buying a new processor and laying some hard standing the grant is supposed to be funding?)

Edited May 28, 2015 by StephF

[StephF]

Not surprised no answer yet, not sure if there is one!

[daltontrees]

Not surprised no answer yet, not sure if there is one!

 

You haven't given much information, but it doesn't sound too hard to answer. Is it to buy a processor and install it? If so, who will use the processor? Will there be equal opportunities for the type of person using it? In accordance with your current policy? Does your policy give equal opportunities? If all these are yes, just state the obvious.

[StephF]

I think it's so obvious maybe I'm trying to make it hard? Yes we are upgrading the firewood processor, and log deck and putting some hard standing on the work area, I have no idea what the purpose of the question is.

[agg221]

I think it's so obvious maybe I'm trying to make it hard? Yes we are upgrading the firewood processor, and log deck and putting some hard standing on the work area, I have no idea what the purpose of the question is.

 

The answer to the question is '(insert business name here) is an equal opportunities employer - see attached equality and diversity policy. The funding will enable ongoing competitiveness, securing current jobs and potentially enabling growth where the policy will be implemented in our recruitment strategy.'

 

In answer to your other questions, this has nothing to do with the EU. They may be responsible for many things but this is not one of them.

 

Questions like this get asked for a reason. The available funding is limited so you can't have it just because you want some. You have to think about the objectives of the funding body in making the funding available. If it is just to make a return on investment, go and get a bank loan. Grant funding is designed to engineer change which won't otherwise happen. Sometimes this is to enable development where the risk of failure is too high to borrow against, sometimes to create jobs in areas where there is a shortage, sometimes to address imbalances such as gender-based or ability-based job shortages. It is no good complaining about people sitting around on the dole if there are no jobs they can do. Funding of this type is designed to address this problem.

 

If there is a real positive bias towards a particular target group, great. If not, no bias against them is fine. You could add a sentence about your company enabling access for women to forestry and state your current staff gender balance but it won't make a lot of difference either way.

 

Alec

[StephF]

The answer to the question is '(insert business name here) is an equal opportunities employer - see attached equality and diversity policy. The funding will enable ongoing competitiveness, securing current jobs and potentially enabling growth where the policy will be implemented in our recruitment strategy.'

 

In answer to your other questions, this has nothing to do with the EU. They may be responsible for many things but this is not one of them.

 

Questions like this get asked for a reason. The available funding is limited so you can't have it just because you want some. You have to think about the objectives of the funding body in making the funding available. If it is just to make a return on investment, go and get a bank loan. Grant funding is designed to engineer change which won't otherwise happen. Sometimes this is to enable development where the risk of failure is too high to borrow against, sometimes to create jobs in areas where there is a shortage, sometimes to address imbalances such as gender-based or ability-based job shortages. It is no good complaining about people sitting around on the dole if there are no jobs they can do. Funding of this type is designed to address this problem.

 

If there is a real positive bias towards a particular target group, great. If not, no bias against them is fine. You could add a sentence about your company enabling access for women to forestry and state your current staff gender balance but it won't make a lot of difference either way.

 

Alec

Thank you for your help Alec, I understand what you have explained. I find it hard answering questions that seem to me biased towards companies that employ many staff, when it's often just me and husband it gets difficult to talk about 'implementing' our policy. If it makes no difference that we employ male/female staff, Then am I miss-understanding the point of equality?

[agg221]

Thank you for your help Alec, I understand what you have explained. I find it hard answering questions that seem to me biased towards companies that employ many staff, when it's often just me and husband it gets difficult to talk about 'implementing' our policy. If it makes no difference that we employ male/female staff, Then am I miss-understanding the point of equality?

 

You're welcome

 

Try not to think of the questions as biased - you are a bit smaller than many companies where funding gets implemented but not much (companies of 4 or 5 people are quite common for this). It's actually easier to achieve massive percentage growth in small companies - you take on an extra person and it's 50% growth; try achieving that in a company of 5,000! It's more that the questions address things which you don't normally need to think about, so the terminology is not obvious, but they are not meant to be trick questions.

 

The key metrics are usually creating and safeguarding jobs. If you didn't get the investment and this meant you might have to downsize, this would be a reduction in headcount of 50%, which the funders really want to make sure doesn't happen.

 

If it did happen, would it be you or your husband who went part-time or got another job? If it would be decided based on factors such as ability to get another job or productivity for example, rather than an automatic assumption based on gender, ie it makes no odds, and the same would apply to your hiring policy if you happen to be able to grow, then that is genuine equality, rather than positive (or negative) discrimination.

 

Given your location, jobs safeguarded/created is going to weigh far more heavily than the gender question.

 

Alec

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Hi Alec, thank you for your time here in replying to Steph (hi Steph hope you're well) AND enlightening me at the same time, much appreciated and very informative.

 

Cheers

Paul

[StephF]

Yes, it's great to be able to get some expert help on here when you live somewhere as isolated/remote as Us!, . Tim & I Looking forwards to attending arb show next week!