Annex E - Guidance on Monitoring

Click here to download Annex E as a Word file
Click here to download Annex E as a PDF File

It is essential to monitor the effectiveness of an equal opportunities policy. The Commission for Racial Equality, Equal Opportunities Commission and Disability Rights Commission all offer detailed guidance on monitoring.

Chambers are recommended to monitor all selection decisions whether they be of staff, pupils or tenants. In addition, chambers should monitor the distribution of work to junior tenants and pupils. Selection monitoring data should be analysed after each major recruitment exercise or at least annually. Monitoring of distribution of work should be ongoing and should be undertaken by the clerks using the software programmes in use in the clerks’ room. The chambers Equal Opportunity Officer or other senior member of chambers should have a specific responsibility for implementing monitoring procedures and ensuring that data are collected, analysed and the results reported on to Chambers Management Committee at regular intervals.

Collecting monitoring Data

It is recommended that chambers should collect monitoring data by race, sex and disability status from a question on an application form or using a separate monitoring form. It should be explained why the information is being requested, how the information will be used and how confidentiality will be protected.

Categories of Ethnic Origin

Chambers are recommended to use the categories, which are consistent with the ethnic classifications in the 2001 Census. These are:-

White British
White Irish
Other White
White/Black Caribbean
White/Black/African
White/Asian
Other Mixed
Black Caribbean
Black African
Other Black
Indian
Pakistani
Bangladeshi
Other Asian
Chinese
Other

The above classification is used by the Bar Council for all monitoring purposes and is recommended by the CRE.

Disability Monitoring
Chambers are recommended to use an appropriately worded question such as “Do you consider yourself to be disabled within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995?. Although anonymous monitoring is likely to lead to a better response rate because people will be less worried about the implications of disclosing personal information, the Disability Rights Commission recommends non-anonymous monitoring as this will allow chambers to build up a full picture of its members, employees and applicants for employment or pupillage.

Further, the DRC recommends that non-anonymous monitoring should be combined with an exploration of individuals’ needs for “reasonable adjustments” under the Disability Discrimination Act. This should be supported by systems within chambers (possibly the responsibility of the Equal Opportunity Officer or Chambers Administrator) that ensure that any request for or query about a reasonable adjustment will be followed up promptly and effectively in consultation with the disabled person.

Data Protection Act 1998

Chambers should be aware of the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 in relation to the collection of “sensitive personal data” and the purposes for which such sensitive personal data are held by chambers. Individuals have a right to request access to and to request correction of personal data.

Analysis of Data

Statistical summaries of monitoring data, which do not identify individuals, should be compiled at regular intervals in order to review equality objectives. Each stage of the selection process should be analysed as follows:

Applications

Is the representation of women, different ethnic minorities groups and disabled people proportionate to their representation on the Bar Vocational Course (for pupillage) or among suitably qualified barristers (for tenancies) or the local population (for chambers staff)?

If not, chambers may need to review the publicising of vacancies and take steps to attract applications from a more diverse group of students, barristers or potential employees.

Interview Shortlist

Is the representation of different groups among interviewees proportionate to their representation among applicants? The reasons for different success rates should be analysed to identify any unlawful discrimination.

Success at Interview

Differential success rates at interview should also be investigated to ensure that there is no direct or indirect discrimination in the treatment of candidates at interviews. Further briefing of interviewers may be required if any inequalities are identified in the treatment of applicants at interview.

Tackling Under Representation
Where under representation of particular groups is identified in the monitoring data, chambers may wish to consider the use of the positive action provisions of the Race Relations and Sex Discrimination Acts to increase the rate of application of women or ethnic minority groups. Chambers may also wish to consider setting equality targets as a standard against which to monitor performance. Such equality targets are not quotas and should not be achieved by unlawful discrimination on the point of selection. However, under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 it is lawful to discriminate in favour of disabled applicants in recruitment and selection.

The Monitoring of Work Distribution

Chambers are recommended to undertake regular reviews of work distribution data. These reviews should be carried out by the Chambers Equal Opportunities Officer or other senior members of chambers who should, if necessary, investigate the reasons for differences in the quantity or type of work done (including the potential of work for career development) or fees earned by men, women, ethnic minority or disabled members of chambers. While differences may well reflect differences in preference, ability or experience chambers should be satisfied that they are not the result of biased.

For further details on work allocation monitoring see Action Area B. Paragraphs 140 – 151E.