Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/1431285/UK-Home-Office-Workforce-20Profile-20Report
Timestamp: 2018-07-21 23:38:54
Document Index: 749779670

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 2', 'art 3', 'art 4', 'art 5', 'art 6', 'art 7', 'arts 8', 'art 6', 'art 8', 'art 7', 'art 9', 'art 10', 'art 11', 'art 12', 'art 13', 'art 14', 'art 14', 'art 16', 'art 15', 'art 16', 'art 17', 'art 18', 'art 19', 'art 21', 'art 21', 'art 19', 'art 20', 'art 21', 'art 25', 'art 22', 'art 23', 'art 24', 'art 25', 'art 26', 'arts 28', 'art 26', 'art 27', 'art 28', 'art 29', 'art 30', 'art 31', 'art 32', 'art 33', 'art 34', 'art 35', 'art 36', 'art 37', 'art 38', 'art 39', 'art 40', 'art 41']

UK Home Office: Workforce%20Profile%20Report | Part Time Contract | Race And Ethnicity In The United States Census
UK Home Office: Workforce%20Profile%20Report
This is the first edition of the Workforce Profile Report for the National Probation Service (NPS). The report provides a ‘snapshot’ look at the demographic profile of the NPS workforce as at the 31 December 2003, and is based on information submitted by each of the 42 Probation areas across the UK. It is intended that this report will be produced on an annual basis, and will provide an opportunity to examine the detailed make up of the service, and to see how the workforce changes and evolves over time. This in turn will inform the development of staffing strategy and workforce planning. If you require additional copies of this report please contact Stefan Hendry on 020 7217 8556 or stefan.hendry3@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk To comment on the content or style of the report please send an e-mail to: NPD.workforceinforeport@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Issue 1 November 2004
Introduction Supplementary Notes Diversity Profile Gender Ethnicity Disability Age Service Profile By Region/Area By Job Group By Gender By Ethnicity 17 17 19 20 22 2 6 9 12 1 2
Women make up 2/3rds of the NPS workforce, and outnumber their male colleagues by a ratio of 2:1 Although men constitute only 33.6% of the overall NPS workforce, male representation is much higher in senior operational and management posts (approx 45 – 60%) Representation of black and minority ethnic groups in NPS is at 10.5%, which compares favourably to just 8.0% in the general UK population. This is also well ahead of the current Race Equality milestone target of 8.3% by 2009 Representation of black and minority ethnic groups is strongest in operational posts, and lower graded support posts (>8%), but significantly weaker amongst management posts (< 6%) Analysis of information on staff with disabilities is limited by the high degree of underreporting, with Enforcement, rehabilitation and public protection
By Disability 41% of NPS staff recorded in the ‘Not Stated’ category
The average age of the NPS workforce is 43.1 years, compared to an average of 39 years in the UK labour force. Approximately 50% of staff are over the age of 40 The NPS needs to consider what succession planning strategies it has in place in coming years, with 20% of current staff over the age of 50
The information contained in this report has not previously been published. In reading this report, you should note the following: The report summarises data taken as at 31 December 2003, and as such presents a ‘snapshot’ of the workforce at that date The data contained within this report is not directly comparable with any previous data collected through the RDS Probation Statistics The data collection date of 31 December 2003 coincides with the end of Quarter 3, and as such should correlate with the data for that quarter reported in issue 3 of the Workforce Information Report. However, there is some variation due to the fact that the two sets of data, although referring to the same period, were collected at different times. The discrepancies have been minimized, but still amount to approximately 223 of 19,313.2 FTE across the NPS. This presents a 1.2% margin of error between the two reports All data in this report is presented in terms of headcount, and not full time equivalent (FTE) figures Where applicable and appropriate, this report draws comparison with relevant UK population statistics. This provides a broad reference point against which to compare characteristics of the NPS workforce. Where such comparisons are made, the source of the UK population data is referenced accordingly. This report contains data relating to the 42 Areas within the National Probation Service. It does not include data from the NPD. It is intended that NPD data will be included in future reports. Terminology & Conventions Operational Staff – Represents those staff whose work involves direct contact with offenders on a daily basis Support Staff – Represents all other staff employed within the Service. It is acknowledged that some staff categorised within this group may have some contact with offenders Not Stated – This is used where either the information on a particular variable (such as ethnicity, gender) is either not available, or the individuals concerned have declined to provide their details. Where applicable, the number of staff in the ‘Not Stated’ category is shown Zero Values – As with the ‘Not Stated’ category, there are a number of instances where data is not available for some individuals on a particular variable. Where this is the case, individuals with zero values have been excluded from calculations. This leads to some slight variations in total staffing numbers
Chart 1 - Gender Representation by Region
GENDER BY REGION/AREA As at 31 December 2003 there were 22,147 staff in the NPS. 14,699 of these were women, comprising two thirds of the total workforce (66.4%), and outnumbering their male colleagues by an approximate ratio of 2:1. There were 7,448 (33.6%) men employed in the NPS at this date. The representation of women in the NPS workforce is disproportionately large in comparison to the composition of the general population of the UK. According to data from the National Census 2002, in the UK the population consists of 48.7% men and 51.3% women. In the table at the top of the following page, the percentages given in red against each region show the regional proportions of men and women from the 2002 Census. While there are some fluctuations, generally they are Enforcement, rehabilitation and public protection
No rth West No rth East Yo rkshire & Humberside East M idlands Wales West M idlands M en East o f England So uth West So uth East Lo ndo n Natio nal P ro batio n Service UK 0% 1 0% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 1 00% Wo men
Table 1 - Gender Representation by Area/Region
consistent with the overall representation for the UK, and show a fairly even split between men and women, with women slightly more prevalent. At a Regional level, North West, South West, and Wales have the greatest proportions of men, with each at over 35%. In contrast, South East region has just 31.0% male representation in its workforce. GENDER BY JOB GROUP While women form the majority of the NPS workforce at a general level, looking at gender representation by job group reveals a great deal of variation underlying this. In the operational job category, overall the proportion of female employees is consistent with the generally high representation in the NPS workforce at 61.5%. It would appear that this trend is set to continue, if not strengthen, with 75.5% of Trainee Probation Officers being women. However, there are two job groups within the operational category in which the representation of men and women is quite different to that found in the general NPS workforce. Amongst Senior Probation Officers, the proportion of men and women more closely reflects the general UK population statistics with 47.0% of staff being men, and 53.0% women. This departure from the general trend amongst the operational posts may be explained by a corresponding difference in average length of service between men and women in the operational category. The ‘Service Profile’ section of this report shows that men in operational posts tend to have longer service with the NPS than women. Having longer service may tend to mean that men are more likely to occupy more senior roles within the operational structure. The second job group which contrasts with the general trend is the ‘Other Operational Staff’ category in which just under 59.6% of staff are men. Beyond these exceptions however, women constitute more than 60% of the remaining grades within the operational category, and form as much as 91.3% of the ‘Psychologist’ job group. However, this extreme example should be viewed in light of the fact that this is a very small group of staff. Relatively minor changes in staff could dramatically effect gender representation. As with the operational staff, the support category also shows a wide degree of variation in terms of the representation of
Men Cumbria Cheshire Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside North West Durham Northumbria Teeside North East Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Yorkshire & Humberside Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire East Midlands Dyfed Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Wales
Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands West Midlands Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk East of England Avon & Somerset Devon & Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire South West Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley South East London National Probation Service
Women 83 115 478 222 267 138 198 850 442 492 2120 193 483 240 916 336 180 496 821 1833 268 298 187 171 442 1366 102 176 162 364 804
303 125 267 909 1604 163 167 340 182 179 149 1180 371 338 191 142 118 1160 428 349 200 267 480 1724 1992 14699
Men % 37.6% 36.7% 36.0% 33.4% 35.2% 35.5% 48.4% 34.4% 32.8% 34.2% 33.5% 48.4% 35.4% 37.9% 30.9% 30.7% 32.4% 48.6% 31.8% 36.2% 31.5% 35.2% 34.6% 34.1% 49.1% 40.7% 35.1% 34.4% 37.6% 36.8% 48.4% 39.0%
32.1% 33.1% 31.6% 33.4% 48.9% 27.6% 34.3% 30.6% 29.7% 36.5% 41.8% 33.2% 49.0% 34.8% 36.2% 34.6% 34.9% 34.1% 35.1% 48.6% 31.2% 32.8% 27.0% 35.2% 28.5% 31.0% 48.8% 32.8% 48.4% 33.6% 48.7%
Women % 62.4% 63.3% 64.0% 66.6% 64.8% 64.5% 51.6% 65.6% 67.2% 65.8% 66.5% 51.6% 64.6% 62.1% 69.1% 69.3% 67.6% 51.4% 68.2% 63.8% 68.5% 64.8% 65.4% 65.9% 50.9% 59.3% 64.9% 65.6% 62.4% 63.2% 51.6% 61.0%
67.9% 66.9% 68.4% 66.6% 51.1% 72.4% 65.7% 69.4% 70.3% 63.5% 58.2% 66.8% 51.0% 65.2% 63.8% 65.4% 65.1% 65.9% 64.9% 51.4% 68.8% 67.2% 73.0% 64.8% 71.5% 69.0% 51.2% 67.2% 51.6% 66.4% 51.3%
1165 101 236 125 462 184 110 222 364 880 125 169 86 93 234 707 70 95 85 219 469
194 59 132 420 805 62 87 150 77 103 107 586 198 192 101 76 61 628 194 170 74 145 191 774 972 7448
men and women. Overall, this category consists of mostly women, who make up 77.1% of the staff. This is mainly as a result of the large number of women employed in the ‘Support Staff – Administration’ job group. This group comprises the bulk of staff in the support category (70%), and the fact that 89.4% of the group are women greatly affects the representation figures for the support category as a whole. Outside of the administration grades, it is interesting to note the increased representation of men in the management roles within the support category. In a reversal of the general workforce trend, men make up more than half of those at ‘Chief Officer (55.0%), ‘Deputy Chief Officer/Director’ (53.3%), and ‘ACO & Equivalent’ (56.2%) level. Although women predominate in the ‘Area/District Manager’ category at 70.8%, men are again better represented in the ‘Section or Function Heads’ group (44.8%) than they are in the NPS workforce in general. The representation of men is also more in proportion to that of the general population in both the ‘Support Staff Others’ (52.3%) and ‘Other Specialist Workers’ (44.8%) job groups. Unlike the operational category, men do not have a greater length of service than women in the support job groups, and this variable cannot be used to explain why men tend to hold the more senior roles.
Table 2: Gender Representation by Job Group (Operational Staff)
Men Senior Probation Officer Senior Practitioner Probation Officer Trainee Probation Officer Probation Services Officers Psychologists Other Operational Staff Operational Staff Total 531 84 1958 437 2211 2 644 5867 Women 599 143 3400 1347 3437 21 437 9384 Men % 47.0% 37.0% 36.5% 24.5% 39.1% 8.7% 59.6% 38.5% Women % 53.0% 63.0% 63.5% 75.5% 60.9% 91.3% 40.4% 61.5%
Table 3: Gender Representation by Job Group (Support Staff)
Men Board Members Chief Officers * Deputy Chief Officers/Directors ACO and Equivalent Area/District Managers or equivalent Managers-Section or Function Heads Support Staff-Administration Support Staff Others Other Specialist Workers Support Staff Total 290 22 24 168 26 241 511 208 91 1581 Women 160 18 21 131 63 297 4323 190 112 5315 Men % 64.4% 55.0% 53.3% 56.2% 29.2% 44.8% 10.6% 52.3% 44.8% 22.9% Women % 35.6% 45.0% 46.7% 43.8% 70.8% 55.2% 89.4% 47.7% 55.2% 77.1%
Chart 2 - Gender Representation by Job Group (Operational Staff)
Chart 3 - Gender Representation by Job Group (Support Staff)
Senio r P ro batio n Officer
Board Members Chief Officers Deputy Chief Officer ACO and Equivalent
Senio r P ractitio ner
P ro batio n Officer
Trainee P ro batio n Officer P ro batio n Services Officers P sycho lo gists Wo men
Area/District Managers Section or Function Heads Support Staff - Admin
Other Operatio nal Staff
Operatio nal Staff To tal
Support Staff Total 0% 1 0% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 1 00%
* The total number of Chief Officers included in this report is 40. This is because 2 of these posts were not filled as at 31/12/03. The remaining two posts were appointed to during 2004. Enforcement, rehabilitation and public protection 4
GENDER BY EMPLOYMENT STATUS Part time working arrangements are much more prevalent in the support staff category (32.8% of employees), than they are in the operational staff category (18.8% of employees). This is likely to be because the support category consists largely of lower grade administrative posts, which traditionally are more likely to be offered on parttime working arrangements. Generally the split of men and women between part and full time work is in proportion to their representation in the workforce as a whole. In the operational staff category, of the 18.8% of staff that work part time, 60.1% are women and 39.9% men. For full time staff in the same category, 61.9% are women, and 38.1% men. In both instances this is proportionate to the representation of women and men in the category as a whole (61.5% and 38.5%). In the support category, women make up a large part of the workforce anyway (77%), and their representation in both full and part time employment reflects this fact. Of the 32.8% of support staff that work part-time, 77.5% of these are women and 22.5% men. Similarly, amongst full time support staff 76.9% are women and 23.1% men.
Chart 4 – Proportion of Full vs Part Time Staff by Gender (Operational Staff)
38.1% Men Women 61.9%
Chart 5 – Proportion of Full vs Part Time Staff by Gender (Support Staff)
Table 4: Ethnic Representation by Area/Region
ETHNICITY BY REGION/AREA The regional representation of black and minority ethnic staff (Chart 6) broadly reflects the proportion of black and minority ethnic individuals in the local labour force (Chart 7). London has by far the most ethnically diverse workforce with 31.3% of its staff being from a black or minority ethnic background. This is consistent with the fact that London is the most ethnically diverse area in the UK with almost 28% of the local labour force coming from a black or minority ethnic background. In general, all of the Regions within the NPS either meet or exceed the representation of black and minority ethnic individuals in their community. Consequently, the overall representation of black and ethnic minorities in the NPS exceeds (at 10.5%) that of the general population in the UK (8%). This also means that the NPS is well ahead of the representation target of 8.3% (to be achieved by 2009) set in the Home Secretary’s Race Equality Employment Targets. Amongst black and minority ethnic staff, the largest proportion of this group identify themselves as ‘Black’ (6.4%), followed by those identifying themselves as ‘Asian’ (2.5%). Those from a ‘Mixed’ background make up 1.2% of the workforce, with a final 0.5% identifying themselves as falling into the ‘Other’ category. Charts 8 through 11 display how each of the broad black and ethnic minority categories described above breaks down across the NPS workforce. The number of staff identified as ‘Not Stated’ is reasonably low 7.5% across the NPS. The regions with the highest numbers of staff in the ‘Not Stated’ category are East Midlands (17.1%), London (15.6%), South East (9.8%), and Yorkshire & Humberside (7.6%). The proportion of staff in the ‘Not Stated’ category for the remaining regions are all in the region of 1% to 4%.
Cumbria Cheshire Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside North West Durham Northumbria Teeside North East Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Yorkshire & Humberside Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire East Midlands Dyfed Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Wales Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands West Midlands Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk East of England
White 86.9% 97.8% 83.1% 93.1% 93.0% 89.0% 91.8% 96.4% 97.3% 95.6% 94.4% 75.5% 86.8% 82.1% 85.0% 91.1% 72.8% 93.4% 3.4% 83.4% 73.6% 98.8% 96.3% 93.9% 94.2% 95.2% 95.6% 89.7% 92.2% 71.3% 81.2% 79.1% 95.7% 92.4% 88.0% 86.5% 94.1% 89.9%
Black 0.5% 0.6% 5.5% 0.5% 2.9% 3.1% 0.0% 0.3% 0.8% 0.4% 1.9% 0.3% 3.6% 3.3% 2.8% 3.1% 4.3% 0.4% 0.4% 8.1% 4.3% 0.6% 1.5% 0.4% 1.5% 1.2% 1.2% 0.5% 4.8% 14.4% 9.0% 12.0% 2.0% 2.2% 5.0% 0.7% 3.1% 3.7%
Asian 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.8% 0.4% 1.7% 1.4% 1.7% 0.5% 1.3% 1.3% 0.0% 1.8% 5.7% 3.2% 3.1% 6.2% 1.1% 0.4% 4.6% 3.7% 0.0% 0.7% 0.8% 0.9% 0.7% 1.2% 6.0% 2.3% 7.1% 5.0% 3.1% 1.6% 0.8% 3.1% 1.1% 1.2% 1.6%
Mixed 0.9% 0.3% 1.3% 0.9% 2.2% 1.3% 1.4% 1.0% 0.3% 0.9% 1.0% 0.3% 1.3% 1.4% 1.1% 1.3% 1.1% 0.4% 0.0% 1.0% 0.9% 0.0% 0.7% 1.2% 0.7% 0.7% 1.4% 1.1% 0.3% 1.5% 1.2% 0.4% 0.0% 0.8% 1.5% 0.7% 1.2% 0.8%
Other 0.5% 0.0% 1.1% 0.3% 0.5% 0.6% 0.3% 0.4% 0.0% 0.3% 0.0% 0.3% 0.6% 0.0% 0.2% 0.8% 0.2% 0.4% 0.0% 0.7% 0.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 0.5% 0.3% 0.4% 0.0% 0.3% 0.8% 0.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 1.9% 0.0% 0.4% 0.5%
Not Stated 11.3% 0.3% 7.2% 1.5% 0.9% 4.2% 5.1% 0.3% 1.1% 1.5% 1.3% 23.4% 6.0% 7.5% 7.6% 0.8% 15.4% 4.4% 95.8% 2.1% 17.1% 0.6% 0.7% 3.2% 2.2% 1.9% 0.2% 2.7% 0.3% 5.0% 3.0% 5.3% 0.8% 3.1% 0.4% 11.0% 0.0% 3.5%
Avon & Somerset Devon & Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire South West Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley South East London National Probation Service
89.3% 92.3% 97.9% 92.7% 95.0% 92.6% 80.1% 94.2% 93.4% 70.4% 85.5% 84.3% 53.1% 82.0%
2.8% 0.8% 0.0% 4.1% 1.1% 1.7% 1.1% 1.2% 2.6% 1.5% 6.4% 2.8% 24.9% 6.4%
0.7% 0.2% 0.0% 1.8% 1.7% 0.7% 1.3% 0.8% 0.4% 1.0% 2.5% 1.4% 3.5% 2.5%
0.5% 1.3% 1.0% 0.9% 0.0% 0.8% 0.3% 0.8% 2.2% 1.0% 1.5% 1.0% 2.0% 1.2%
0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.0% 1.7% 0.3% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 1.0% 0.9% 0.6% 0.9% 0.5%
6.5% 5.3% 0.7% 0.5% 0.6% 3.9% 16.7% 2.7% 1.1% 25.2% 3.1% 9.8% 15.6% 7.5%
Chart 6 - Ethnic Representation by Region (NPS) Chart 8 – Representation within the ‘Black’ Ethnic Category
North West North East Yorkshire & Humberside East Midlands Wales West Midlands East of England South West South East London NPS 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 1 00% White Black Asian Mixed Other Not Stated
Chart 7 - Ethnic Minority % by Region (UK, Nov 2003 Labour Force Survey) Chart 9 – Representation within the ‘Asian’ Ethnic Category
North West North East Yorkshire & Humberside East Midlands Wales West Midlands Eastern South West South East London UK 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 1 00% White B & ME
Pakistani 32%
Indian 55%
Chart 10 – Representation within the ‘Mixed’ Ethnic Category
Chart 11 – Representation within the ‘Other’ Ethnic Category
White & Asian 18% Other 38%
White & Black African 12%
White & Black Caribbean 32%
Table 5: Ethnic Representation by Job Group (Operational Staff)
W hite Se nior Proba tion Office r Se nior Pra ctitione r Proba tion Office r Tra ine e Proba tion Office r Proba tion Se rvice s Office rs Psychologists Othe r Ope ra tiona l Sta ff Ope ra tiona l Sta ff Tota l 85.0% 90.3% 80.7% 80.0% 80.6% 78.3% 82.9% 81.2% Bla ck 6.5% 3.5% 7.2% 4.4% 6.5% 4.3% 5.1% 6.4% Asia n 2.4% 0.4% 2.1% 3.3% 2.6% 4.3% 1.9% 2.4% Mix e d 1.1% 0.4% 1.5% 1.8% 1.3% 0.0% 0.8% 1.4% Othe r 0.8% 0.9% 0.6% 0.4% 0.4% 0.0% 0.7% 0.5% Not Sta te d 4.2% 4.4% 7.9% 10.1% 8.6% 13.0% 8.6% 8.2%
Table 6: Ethnic Representation by Job Group (Support Staff)
W hite Board Members Chie f Officers De puty Chief Office rs/Dire ctors ACO a nd Equivalent Area /District Managers or equiva le nt Managers - Section or Function He ads Support Staff-Administration Support Staff Others Othe r Specia list W orkers Support Staff Total 80.2% 97.5% 93.3% 89.3% 92.1% 91.8% 84.1% 64.1% 86.7% 83.8% Bla ck 6.7% 2.5% 2.2% 2.7% 2.2% 2.2% 6.7% 12.8% 3.9% 6.4% Asia n 7.3% 0.0% 2.2% 1.3% 1.1% 1.5% 2.4% 3.0% 3.0% 2.6% Mix ed 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 0.0% 0.4% 0.9% 0.3% 1.0% 0.7% Other 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 1.1% 0.6% 0.5% 0.3% 0.5% 0.5% Not Sta ted 5.1% 0.0% 2.2% 5.0% 3.4% 3.5% 5.5% 19.6% 4.9% 6.0%
ETHNICITY BY JOB GROUP In the operational category the representation of black and minority ethnic staff is broadly consistent with that observed for the NPS in general. As a result, black and minority ethnic representation is significantly higher than the levels found in the general UK population. For all job groups except for ‘Senior Practitioner’. ‘Psychologist’, and ‘Other Operational Staff’ black and minority ethnic individuals make up in excess of 10.0% of the staff in the group, with the representation in the Probation Officer group as high as 11.4%. This compares favorable with the 8.0% representation of black and minority ethnic groups to be found in the general UK population. Additionally, it is encouraging to see that the current black and minority ethnic representation amongst Trainee Probation Officers is well above the figure for the general population at close to 10.0%. An area of concern is the ‘Senior Practitioner’ group in which black and minority ethnic individuals make up just 5.3% of staff. However, it should be noted that there are only a small number of staff in this group, and the representation is therefore subject to potentially large variations over a short period of time. The representation figures amongst the support staff category is somewhat more mixed. Black and minority ethnic representation is particularly strong amongst the ‘Support Staff – Other’ category where they make up over 16.3% of the workforce. Representation of black and ethnic minorities is also above the level in the general UK population amongst Board Members (14.7%), Administration Staff (10.4%), and Specialist Workers (8.4%). In contrast, black and minority ethnic representation is around 2 - 6% for all of the other job groups in this category. These groups cover the majority of senior positions in the organisation. The lowest representation is in the Chief Officer group, where black and minority ethnic staff account for only 2.5% of the total. The representation of black and minority ethnic staff is strong at the operational level, and in the lower grade support posts. But this strong general representation is masking the lack of representation in more senior management posts. 8
Chart 12 – Ethnic Representation by Job Group (Operational Staff)
Chart 13 – Ethnic Representation by Job Group (Support Staff)
Senior Probation Officer Senior Practitioner Probation Officer Trainee Probation Officer Probation Services Officer Psychologist Other Operational Staff Operational Staff Total 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 1 00% White Black Asian Mixed Other Not Stated
Board Members Chief Officers Deputy Chief Officer ACO and Equivalent Area/District Managers Section or Function Heads Support Staff - Admin Support Staff Others Other Specialists Support Staff Total 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 1 00%
Chart 14 – Combined Gender and Ethnic Representation
ETHNICITY BY GENDER There is no substantial difference between men and women in terms of the relative representation of black and minority ethnic staff within each group. Chart 14 shows that each broad ethnic category is represented more or less in equal proportions amongst men and women. The proportions are approximately equal to those observed for the workforce as a whole. DISABILITY BY AREA/REGION The main issue affecting a detailed analysis of the rate of disability in the NPS workforce is the high degree of nonreporting. Of the 22,147 staff in the NPS, 9,071 have been recorded as ‘Not Stated’, equating to 41% of the staff population. Of that 41%, only a minority genuinely reflect a decision by the individuals concerned not to state whether they have a disability or not. In the majority of cases, the information is simply not available, or has not been provided. The missing information can largely be attributed to HR system limitations in the areas. The quality and complexity of the systems used to record this information varies considerably from area to area, and as a result disability information is not always readily accessible. Because of the high degree of staff in the ‘Not Stated’ category, the available disability data cannot be treated as being representative of the true rate of disability in the workforce. The staff for whom we have a declared disability status do not form a representative sample of the workforce population as a whole. As a result, any comments made here on disability are restricted to those regions in which Enforcement, rehabilitation and public protection
White M en 29.19% Black M en 2.39%
Asian M en 1.02%
M ixed M en 0.34% Other M en 0.26%
Other Women 0.30% M ixed Women 0.92% Asian Women 1.64% Black Women 4.48%
White Women 59.46%
the ‘Not Stated’ category is sufficiently low. On the whole, the number of staff declaring a disability is very low. In the North East and South West regions the number of staff with a reported disability is below 1.5%, while the majority of other regions have representation in the order of 2-5%. The best representation of staff declaring a disability is in North West and West Midlands with 7%and 8% respectively. These figures do not compare favorably with the rate of disability in the UK population. Chart 16 shows that 20% of people of working age in the UK have a disability. Of this 20%, just less than half (9%) are currently in employment (Figures drawn from the National Statistics publication ‘Labour Market Trends’ Autumn 2002 – Labour Market Experiences of People with Disabilities). However, because disability is based on self reporting, the low levels of disability amongst staff that have declared their disability status may be contributed to by the fact that many people do not understand or believe that they have a condition that meets the current legal definition of a disability. This definition is more inclusive than most staff will be aware of. 9
Table 7: Reported Disability by Area/Region
No Disability % Not Stated % 0.0% 1.9% 15.7% 7.5% 89.5% 28.7% 0.3% 0.1% 0.3% 0.2% 6.5% 51.4% 5.6% 0.2% 8.3% 0.5% 98.1% 0.0% 2.7% 98.2% 54.6% 0.6% 0.7% 0.4% 0.2% 0.4%
0.6% 0.5% 97.5% 95.7% 69.1% 0.9% 66.5% 98.2% 0.8% 0.7% 0.4% 37.2% 0.0% 0.4% 0.3% 0.0% 91.6% 9.3% 98.4% 91.9% 94.5% 0.7% 0.1% 54.1% 98.6% 41.0%
Cumbria Cheshire Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside North W est Durham Northumbria Teeside North Ea st Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire W est Yorkshire Yorkshire & Humbe rside Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Ea st Midlands Dyfed Powys Gwent North W ales South W ales W ales
S t a ffo rd s h ire W a rw ic k s h ire W e s t M e rc ia W e s t M id la n d s W e st M i d la n d s B e d fo rd s h ire C a m b rid g e s h ire E s s ex H e rt fo rd s h ire N o rfo lk S u ffo lk Ea st o f E n g la n d A vo n & S o m e rs e t D e vo n & C o rn w a ll D o rs e t G lo u c e s t e rs h ire W ilt s h ire S o u th W e st H a m p s h ire K ent S u rre y S us s ex Th a m e s V a lle y S o u th Ea st London N a ti o n a l P ro b a tio n S e rv ic e
4 6 31 52 70 163 10 3 8 21 6 2 68 30 106 11 0 6 1 1 19 0 5 15 21 41
9 0 0 51 60 5 5 0 16 2 5 33 14 0 3 3 4 24 0 22 4 20 5 51 33 551
217 301 1089 562 10 2179 283 715 356 1354 480 139 610 1153 2382 380 9 267 256 11 923 171 264 231 561 1227
485 183 10 6 684 218 80 9 241 278 250 1076 555 528 288 215 11 1597 10 20 11 389 665 1095 8 12525
0 6 208 50 679 943 1 1 1 3 34 149 40 2 225 2 458 0 7 664 1131 1 2 1 1 5
3 1 389 1272 1665 2 169 481 2 2 1 657 0 2 1 0 164 167 612 477 259 3 1 1352 2923 9071
Disability % 1.8% 1.9% 2.3% 7.8% 9.2% 5.0% 22.2% 3.4% 0.4% 2.2% 1.5% 24.2% 1.2% 0.7% 9.5% 2.5% 3.9% 20.6% 2.8% 0.0% 2.2% 0.4% 0.1% 0.9% 18.6% 0.0% 1.8% 6.1% 3.6% 3.2% 23.0%
1.8% 0.0% 0.0% 3.8% 2.5% 19.9% 2.2% 2.0% 0.0% 6.2% 0.7% 2.0% 1.9% 17.2% 2.5% 0.0% 1.0% 1.4% 2.2% 1.3% 19.1% 0.0% 4.2% 1.5% 4.9% 0.7% 2.0% 16.3% 1.1% 17.2% 2.5% 19.3%
98.2% 96.2% 82.0% 84.6% 1.3% 66.3% 77.8% 96.3% 99.4% 97.5% 98.3% 75.8% 92.3% 47.9% 85.0% 97.3% 87.8% 79.4% 96.7% 1.9% 97.8% 97.0% 1.6% 44.5% 81.4% 99.4% 97.4% 93.5% 96.2% 96.4% 77.0%
97.6% 99.5% 2.5% 0.5% 2 8 .4 % 8 0 .1 % 96.9% 31.5% 1.8% 93.1% 98.6% 97.7% 6 0 .9 % 8 2 .8 % 97.5% 99.6% 98.6% 98.6% 6.1% 8 9 .3 % 8 0 .9 % 1.6% 3.9% 4.0% 94.4% 99.1% 4 3 .8 % 8 3 .7 % 0 .3 % 8 2 .8 % 56.6% 80.8%
Table 7 – Figures appearing in red indicate the proportion of Disabled/Non Disabled people in the local population.
Chart 15 – Reported Disability by Region (NPS)
Chart 16 – Disability by Region (Labour Market Trends, Autumn 2001)
North West North East Yorks & Humber East Midlands Wales West Midlands East of England South West South East London NPS 0% 1 0% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 1 00%
North West North East Yorks & Humber East Midlands Wales West Midlands East of England South West South East London UK 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 1 00%
Disability (Employed)
DISABILITY BY JOB GROUP Comment on the rate of disability by job group is again restricted by the exceptionally large number of staff in the ‘Not Stated’ category. While some regions have provided sufficient data for some comment to be made, when the data is summarised by job group this opportunity disappears. All but one of the job groups have more than 20% of staff in the ‘Not Stated’ category. Consequently, any comments made here can only be speculative. As you would expect, the rate of disability amongst the different job groups reflects the very low rate for the NPS as a whole. Amongst operational staff, Senior Probation Officers, Senior Practitioner, and Probation Officer all have around 3% of staff reporting a disability. However, this is still well below the kind of figures we might expect based on the number of disabled people in the general UK population. The remaining operational categories all have less than 3% of staff reporting a disability, including the ‘Psychologist’ group in which no staff have reported a disability. Amongst support staff, the proportion of staff with disabilities is somewhat lower than amongst their operational colleagues. Most job groups in this category have 3-4% of staff reporting a disability. However, the ‘Deputy Chief Officer’ group has no staff reporting a disability, and just 0.7% and 1.84% reporting a disability in the ‘ACO & Equivalent’ and ‘Support Staff - Other’ job groups respectively.
Table 8: Reported Disability by Job Group (Operational Staff)
No Disability % No Disability Not Stated % 45.3% 22.9% 41.1% 42.8% 43.8% 26.1% 31.1% 41.6% Disability % 3.4% 3.1% 3.1% 2.1% 2.3% 0.0% 2.5% 2.7% Not Stated 512 52 2202 764 2473 6 336 6345 Disability 38 7 168 37 132 0 27 409
Senior Probation Officer Senior Practitioner Probation Officer Trainee Probation Officer Probation Services Officers Psychologists Other Operational Staff Operational Staff Total
580 168 2988 983 3043 17 718 8497
51.3% 74.0% 55.8% 55.1% 53.9% 73.9% 66.4% 55.7%
Table 9: Reported Disability by Job Group (Support Staff)
No Disability % Not Stated % 10.9% 45.0% 55.6% 44.1% 16.9% 34.9% 43.9% 31.7% 24.1% 39.5% No Disability Disability % 3.3% 2.5% 0.0% 0.7% 3.4% 2.0% 2.1% 1.3% 2.0% 2.1% Not Stated 49 18 25 132 15 188 2124 126 49 2726 Disability 15 1 0 2 3 11 101 5 4 142
Board Members Chief Officers Deputy Chief Officers/Directors ACO and Equivalent Area/District Managers or equivalent Managers-Section or Function Heads Support Staff-Administration Support Staff Others Other Specialist Workers Support Staff Total
386 21 20 165 71 339 2609 267 150 4028
85.8% 52.5% 44.4% 55.2% 79.8% 63.0% 54.0% 67.1% 73.9% 58.4%
In considering the above figures, it should again be noted that self reported disability may underestimate the actual disability rate in the workforce Enforcement, rehabilitation and public protection
because of a lack of understanding (and consequently reporting) on behalf of staff regarding what conditions are presently considered as constituting a disability. 12
Chart 17 – Disability by Job Group (Operational Staff)
Chart 18 – Disability by Job Group (Support Staff)
Senio r P ro batio n Officer Senio r P ractitio ner
B o ard M embers Chief Officers Deputy Chief Officer
P ro batio n Officer Trainee P ro batio n Officer P ro batio n Services Officers P sycho lo gists Other Operatio nal Staff
A CO and Equivalent Disability No Disability No t Stated A rea/District M anagers Sectio n o r Functio n Heads Suppo rt Staff - A dmin Suppo rt Staff Others Other Specialists
Operatio nal Staff To tal 0% 1 0% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 1 00%
Suppo rt Staff To tal 0% 1 0% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 1 00%
DISABILITY BY GENDER AND ETHNICITY Chart 19 shows the Gender and Ethnic proportions of those staff who reported that they have a disability No particular gender or ethnicity is disproportionately represented amongst staff with disabilities. The proportions are approximately equal to those observed for the workforce as a whole. AGE BY REGION* The NPS workforce is older on average than the general UK working population. According to National Statistics, the average age of the labour force in the UK in 2001 was 39 years. However, the average age of the NPS workforce is much higher than this at 43.1 Years. The average age in the NPS varies regionally, with the oldest workforce being in the South West where the average age is 44.4 years. The majority of regions have an average age at or above 42 years, with the youngest workforce in the East Midlands at 41.8 years. Chart 21 (page 13) is a cumulative distribution showing the relative proportions of staff above and below each of the age group categories. This distribution shows that across the NPS as a whole, just under 50% of the workforce is over the age of 40. The age of the population has implications for succession planning, as there are a significant number of staff who are at or approaching an age where they will be considering their future working options. Chart 21 demonstrates that approximately 20% of the NPS workforce are currently over the age of 50. Enforcement, rehabilitation and public protection
Chart 19 – Combined Gender and Ethnic Representation of Staff with Disabilities
Asian M en 0.56% Black M en 2.26% M ixed M en 0.75% Ot her M en 0.56%
White M en 36.65%
Whit e Women 55.08%
Other Women 0.38% M ixed Women 1.13%
Black Women 2.44% Asian Women 0.19%
Chart 20 – Average Age in Years in Years by Region
* Age data was not available for all Board Members and Chief Officers and as a result they have been excluded from all age related analyses 13
Chart 21 – Cumulative Distribution of Age in Years for NPS
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 15 - 19
Table 10 – Average Age in Years by Job Group (Operational Staff) and Gender Men Women Overall
49.9 45.7 47.9 34.3 47.4 33.5 47.6 46.8
46.3 45.2 43.0 31.1 40.3 30.7 41.1 40.4
47.9 45.4 44.8 31.9 43.1 30.9 44.9 42.9
Table 11 – Average Age in Years by Job Group (Support Staff) and Gender
Men Deputy Chief Officers/Directors ACO and Equivalent Area/District Managers or equivalent Managers-Section or Function Heads Support Staff-Administration Support Staff Others Other Specialist Workers Support Staff Total 48.5 50.2 48.5 48.0 39.9 45.5 41.4 44.2
Women 47.5 47.3 47.3 45.7 43.1 41.6 40.2 43.3
Overall 48.0 49.0 47.6 46.7 42.8 43.7 40.7 43.5
AGE BY JOB GROUP On average operational staff are marginally younger, with an average age of 42.9 years, than those who work in the support category who have an average age of 43.5 years. This is principally because the two job groups with the lowest average age are classified as operational. Trainee Probation Officers are on average much younger than the rest of the NPS workforce with an average age of 31.9 years. The other group is the Psychologists who have an average age of just 30.9 years. However, these two groups are out of the ordinary in the operational category. The remaining job groups in this category have an average age of 43 to 48 years old, which makes them broadly comparable to the average age for the workforce overall, and with the majority of job groups in the support category. Amongst support staff, the most notable difference is the increased average age for those in management positions, all of whom have an average age in excess of 45 years old. According to these figures there is a large portion of the NPS workforce approaching either the current normal retirement age, or an age at which they may begin planning for their retirement. Of that group a good proportion occupy the most senior roles in the organisation. Chart 25 (page 15) maps the average age of each Job Group (X axis) against the Region in which they are based (Y axis). The higher the average age, the more red the display on the chart. The redder areas identify age ‘hotspots’, which are particular job groups within selected regions where the average age of staff is approaching possible retirement age. For example, the graph shows that potential retirements may be an issue amongst ‘Deputy Chief Officer/Directors’ in East of England in particular, but also in the North East and South East regions. There are also similar issues for Senior Practitioners in North East, and for Senior Probation Officers and Psychologists in Wales.
Chart 22 – Average Age in Years by Job Group (Operational Staff)
Chart 23 – Average Age in Years by Job Group (Support Staff)
Chart 24 – Cumulative Distribution of Age in Years: Operational vs Support Staff
45 49 Support
Chart 25 – Average Age in years Mapped by Job Group and Region
NPS London South East South West East of England West Midlands Wales East Midlands Yorkshire & Humberside North East North West Area/District Manager SectionHeads Support Staff Admin Support Staff Others Specialist Workers 60-65 55-60 50-55 45-50 40-45 35-40 30-35 25-30 20-25 15-20
AGE BY GENDER A comparison of the age distribution of men and women (shown in Chart 26) reveals that male employees in the NPS are on average older than female counterparts. This difference is greatest amongst operational staff, where the average age of men is 46.8 years, compared to just 40.4 years for women. By comparison, while men are still on average older than women in the support group, the difference is much smaller at 44.2 years and 43.3 years respectively. However, length of service is higher amongst women in the support job groups, so the same explanation does not follow for this category. However, age is a variable that may give us an insight into the reason why men are more prevalent in the senior posts within the NPS than they are in the rest of the workforce. As men are generally older in NPS, it is likely that they have been in general employment (on average) longer than their female comparators. If this is true, then it may also follow that they have gained relatively more skills and experience during the course of their careers, and would in turn be more likely to have attained more senior posts as a result.
While the difference is greatest amongst operational staff, it is consistent across all job groups. Charts 28 and 29 (page 16) show that men are on average older than women in every job group Chart 26 – Comparison of Age Distribution (Years) for Men and Women in both the operational and support categories, except for ‘Administration Support’ where women employees are on 18% average 3.2 years older than men. The distribution of ages is interesting when considered in conjunction with the representation of men and women by job group. We identified earlier that while men overall make up only a third of the workforce in the NPS, they are much more prevalent in selected Senior operational posts, and in management posts in the support category. Greater length of service amongst men in operational posts was identified as one factor that may explain the difference in this category. Enforcement, rehabilitation and public protection
Probation Serv Officer
Deputy Chief/Director
Snr Probation Officer
ACO and Equivalent
Snr Practitioner
Trainee PO
Women 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% M en
Chart 27 – Comparison of Cumulative Age Distribution (Years) for Men and Women
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% Women M en
30% 20% 10% 0% 15 - 19
Chart 28 – Average Age in Years by Job Group (Operational Staff) and Gender
35 M en 30 Women
Chart 29 – Average Age in Years by Job Group (Support Staff) and Gender
M en Women
LENGTH OF SERVICE BY AREA/REGION The average length of service of staff in the NPS is 7.1 years. This is slightly higher for staff in the support staff category at 7.2 years, compared to 7.0 years for staff holding an operational post. Regionally, the longest serving workforces are in Wales, the West Midlands, and North West, all of which have an average length of service at or in excess of 8 years. At the opposite end of the spectrum, East Midlands and the South East region have the shortest serving staff on average at 5.6 years and 4.8 years respectively. LENGTH OF SERVICE BY JOB GROUP For the operational category, the average length of service largely conforms with the seniority of the job group concerned. There is a steady reduction in the average length of service from ‘Senior Probation Officer’ (12.9 years) down to ‘Trainee Probation Officer’ (1.5 years*). This stands to reason, as the structure of these posts is such that people normally join the NPS as a trainee, and then over the course of their service have the opportunity to obtain more senior posts. It is rare for staff to join the NPS in a senior operational post, as the appropriate experience and skills are difficult to come by in other employment. The situation is quite different in the support staff category. The job group with the longest service on average is ‘ACO and Equivalent’ at 13.5 years. After this group, there is a steady decline in average length of service roughly in line with seniority, in much the same pattern as for the operational posts. However, in contrast to the operational posts, the job groups more senior to the ‘ACO & Equivalent’ category also show a steady decline in average length of service, with Deputy Chief Officers and Chief Officers at 9.6 years and 2.8** years respectively.
Table 12 – Average Length of Service in Years by Area/Region
Cumbria Cheshire Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside North West Durham Northumbria Teeside North East Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Yorkshire & Humberside Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire East Midlands Dyfed Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Wales Staffordshire
Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands West Midlands Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk East of England
7.1 7.3 7.8 6.8 9.6 7.9 5.7 7.8 6.2 6.9 6.5 5.3 8.2 7.3 7.2 5.8 5.5 6.0 4.8 5.8 5.6 23.8 5.4 5.8 6.8 8.4 9.7
7.9 6.4 7.7 8.0 5.3 7.2 7.8 5.6 6.0 7.3 6.8 7.1 6.7 9.4 2.0 6.2 6.7 0.0 6.8 6.4 6.5 5.6 4.7 7.4 7.0
6.8 6.3 8.3 8.8 8.6 8.1 7.7 8.6 6.6 7.9 6.2 5.7 8.9 6.7 7.1 6.6 6.8 5.1 3.3 4.9 5.4 19.6 8.0 7.1 8.7 10.0 12.0
8.0 6.5 8.5 8.9 5.4 5.8 6.8 5.3 5.3 6.8 5.8 7.5 5.3 6.5 2.0 5.8 5.8 0.2 8.6 4.8 7.1 6.2 5.0 8.4 7.2
Overall 7.0 7.1 7.9 7.3 9.3 8.0 6.2 8.0 6.3 7.2 6.4 5.4 8.4 7.1 7.1 6.1 5.8 5.7 4.2 5.6 5.6 22.2 6.3 6.2 7.4 8.9 10.4
7.9 6.4 8.0 8.2 5.3 6.8 7.6 5.5 5.9 7.1 6.6 7.2 6.2 8.4 2.0 6.1 6.4 0.1 7.3 5.7 6.7 5.8 4.8 7.7 7.1
* Ordinarily the length of Service of a TPO is a maximum of two years. Any extension to this would be in exceptional circumstances only e.g. due to long-term sickness. Also, the figures are based on service start date. Some staff may take up a TPO role after having served with the NPS in another capacity for a period of time, resulting in a service figure greater than 2 years ** Chief Officer service calculations are based on the available information, which only provides the date at which each CO was appointed to their current role. Therefore the service figure is a reflection of time in post, rather than total service Enforcement, rehabilitation and public protection
Chart 30 – Average Length of Service in Years by Region
Chart 31 – Average Length of Service in Years by Job Group (Operational Staff)
Chart 32 – Average Length of Service in Years by Job Group (Support Staff)
LENGTH OF SERVICE BY GENDER Overall, men have a greater average length of service with NPS than women. Male employees have on average been with the NPS for 7.7 years, compared to their female colleagues who have an average length of service of 6.7 years. However, this difference does not hold true for both the operational and support job categories. The difference in average length of service for men and women is much stronger in the operational job group. Men in operational posts have an average length of service of 8.0 years, while women in the same category on average have served 6.3 years with NPS. As discussed earlier in the report, this difference may in part account for increased representation of men in the more senior operational posts in the NPS. In the support category, the trend is reversed. Women have a greater average length of service at 7.5 years, than their male colleagues who have served on average 6.5 years. However, analysis of average length of service by specific job group explains why this change occurs. In the operational category men have consistently longer average service across all of the job groups in the category, except for ‘Probation Services Officer’ where women have a marginally higher average. In the support category on the other hand, women tend to have longer average service in most job groups, except for the ‘Chief Officer’, ‘ACO and Equivalent’, and ‘Section/Function Head’ groupings. The significant point is that those groupings where women have greater length of service are the largest (in terms of number of staff) in the category. Consequently, these job groups (particular the administrative posts) have a significant effect on the overall average for the group.
Chart 33 – Average Length of Service in Years by Job Group and Gender
Table 13 – Average Length of Service in Years by Gender (Operational Staff)
Men Senior Probation Officer Senior Practitioner Probation Officer Trainee Probation Officer Probation Services Officers Psychologists Other Operational Staff Operational Staff Total 15.1 11.0 10.7 1.5 5.8 3.0 5.7 8.0
Women 11.0 9.5 7.7 1.5 6.0 2.6 4.6 6.3
Diff 4.0 1.5 3.0 0.1 -0.2 0.4 1.2 1.8
Table 14 – Average Length of Service in Years b y Gender (Support Staff)
Men Board Members Chief Officers Deputy Chief Officers/Directors ACO and Equivalent Area/District Managers or equivalent Managers-Section or Function Heads Support StaffAdministration Support Staff Others Other Specialist Workers Support Staff Total 2.7 2.8 9.1 14.5 14.1 11.4 4.4 4.4 5.4 6.5
Women 2.6 2.9 10.1 12.3 11.6 11.0 7.3 4.7 7.1 7.5
Diff 0.1 -0.2 -1.1 2.2 2.5 0.4 -2.9 -0.4 -1.7 -1.0
Tables 13, 14 – The ‘Difference’ column is calculated by subtracting the average length of service of men from that of women. Positive numbers in red indicate a greater length of service for men over women, and negative numbers indicate the reverse
5 M en (Op) Women (Op) M en (Sup) Women (Sup) M en Overall Women Overall
Chart 34 – Average Length of Service in Years by Gender and Job Group (Operational Staff)
16 14 12 10 8 M en 6 4 2 0 Women
Chart 35 – Average Length of Service in Years by Gender and Job Group (Support Staff)
LENGTH OF SERVICE BY ETHNICITY White employees have a greater average length of service than those from black and minority ethnic groups across the board in the NPS. This statement is true of both operational and support staff, and for all individual Job groups apart from ‘Psychologist’. Nationally, white employees have been with the NPS for an average of 7.4 years, while staff from black and minority ethnic groups have average service of 5.5 years. This is a difference of 1.9 years on average. In the operational category the difference in average service between white employees and those from a black or minority ethnic background is less than the overall average at 1.6 years, while in the support group it is much higher at 2.4 years.
Table 15 – Average Length of Service in Years by Ethnicity (Operational Staff)
White Senior Probation Officer Senior Practitioner Probation Officer Trainee Probation Officer Probation Services Officers Psychologists Other Operational Staff Operational Staff Total 13.5 10.2 9.1 1.5 6.2 2.6 5.6 7.3
B & ME 9.6 9.0 7.6 1.3 4.9 2.8 3.8 5.6
Diff 3.9 1.1 1.5 0.3 1.4 -0.2 1.8 1.6
This difference is likely to be a reflection of two things. First, the diversity of the UK population has increased markedly over the last decade or so. According to National Statistics the number of individuals from an ethnic group other than ‘White’ in the UK population increased by 53% in the 10 years from 1991 to 2001. As a result, the number of people recruited into the NPS during that same period would have reflected the changing representation. Secondly, and in conjunction with the changing representation in the general population, there has been an increasing focus within the public sector in general on issues of diversity. The combination of these two factors has lead to increasing representation of black and ethnic minority staff in the NPS over the same period, and consequently the average length of service of these staff as a group is on average lower than their White colleagues.
Table 16 – Average Length of Service in Years by Ethnicity (Support Staff)
White Board Members Chief Officers Deputy Chief Officers/Directors ACO and Equivalent Area/District Managers or equivalent Managers-Section or Function Heads Support StaffAdministration Support Staff Others Other Specialist Workers Support Staff Total 2.6 2.8 9.6 14.3 12.7 11.4 7.3 5.3 6.4 7.6
B & ME 2.8 3.0 9.0 7.2 7.6 8.4 5.6 3.2 5.9 5.2
Diff -0.2 -0.2 0.6 7.1 5.1 3.0 1.7 2.1 0.4 2.4
Tables 15, 16 – The ‘Difference’ column is calculated by subtracting the average length of service of ‘White’ employees from that of ‘B & ME’ employees. Positive numbers in red indicate a greater length of service for ‘White’ employees over ‘B & ME’ employees, and negative numbers indicate the reverse
Chart 36 – Average Length of Service in Years by Job Group and Ethnicity
8 8 7 7 6 6 5 White (Op) Black & M inority Et hnic (Op) Whit e (Sup) Black & Whit e Overall M inorit y Ethnic (Sup) Black & M inorit y Et hnic Overall
Chart 37 – Average Length of Service in Years by Ethnicity and Job Group (Operational Staff)
8 White 6 4 2 0 B &ME
Chart 38 – Average Length of Service in Years by Ethnicity and Job Group (Support Staff)
16 14 12 10 8 White 6 4 2 0 B & ME
Table 17 – Average Length of Service in Years by Disability (Operational Staff)
Disability Senior Probation Officer Senior Practitioner Probation Officer Trainee Probation Officer Probation Services Officers Psychologists Other Operational Staff Operational Staff Total 14.8 8.6 11.5 1.8 9.2 0.0 8.3 9.9
No Disability 13.2 10.4 9.2 1.4 6.1 2.6 5.9 7.2
Diff 1.6 -1.9 2.3 0.4 3.0 N/A 2.4 2.7
LENGTH OF SERVICE BY DISABILITY As with earlier analysis of disability data, our ability to comment on and trends is severely limited by the high degree of underreporting. Generally the data shows that in most cases, employees with a disability have a greater length of service than those without. On average employees who report having a disability in the operational staff category have been with the NPS for 9.9 years, compared to those reporting no disability who have 7.2 years service. This is a difference of 2.7 years on average. Similarly, staff reporting a disability in the support staff category have on average served 9.8 years with the NPS, compared to 7.4 years for those who do not have a disability. This is a slightly smaller difference of 2.4 years. However, there is a high degree of fluctuation in the data that can be attributed to the large number of employees in the ‘Not Stated’ category. With over 40% of staff not included in the analysis it is impossible to draw any firm conclusions on any actual service related differences in the NPS workforce related to disability.
Table 18 – Average Length of Service in Years b y Disability (Support Staff)
Disability Board Members Chief Officers Deputy Chief Officers/Directors ACO and Equivalent Area/District Managers or equivalent Managers-Section or Function Heads Support StaffAdministration Support Staff Others Other Specialist Workers Support Staff Total 2.8 3.0 0.0 1.0 23.7 15.1 10.2 11.6 5.5 9.8
No Disability 2.6 2.7 10.0 13.9 12.7 12.0 7.4 4.4 6.2 7.4
Diff 0.2 0.3 N/A -12.9 10.9 3.0 2.8 7.2 -0.7 2.4
Tables 17, 18 – The ‘Difference’ column is calculated by subtracting the average length of service of employees with a disability from that of employees with no reported disability. Positive numbers in red indicate a greater length of service for employees with a disability over staff with no reported disability, and negative numbers indicate the reverse
Chart 39 – Average Length of Service in Years by Job Group and Disability
0 Disability (Op) No Disabilit y (Op) Disability (Sup) No Disability (Sup) Disability Overall No Disabilit y Overall
Chart 40 – Average Length of Service in Years by Disability and Job Group (Operational Staff)
16 14 12 10 8 Disability 6 4 2 0 No Disability
Chart 41 – Average Length of Service in Years by Disability and Job Group (Support Staff)
24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Disabilit y No Disability
REFERENCES All statistics relating to the population of the Labour Force in the United Kingdom were sourced from the National Statistics website www.statistics.gov.uk Specific articles referred to in the creation of this report were: 1. Labour Market Trends: August 2002 – Labour Market Experiences of People with Disabilities 2. Labour Market Trends: February 2003 – Implications of Population Ageing for the Labour Market In addition to the above specific articles, data on population characteristics was downloaded from the National Statistics NOMIS database www.nomisweb.co.uk
Documents Similar To UK Home Office: Workforce%20Profile%20Report
2016 Cayci Ms Hs Survey Final 1
SAS Proc Report at Work
argumentessay 2
iseman- project 1 literacy inquiry
Majorities Are the New Minorities
Somos Independents Slam Pro-Life Christians for Tolerating Politicians Who Use Dehumanizing Terms Towards People
pg-taught
National Science Foundation: e20050136
Yilmaz, I - JMMA Differential Legal Treatment
Ashley Brooks SFBR Job Application
AshReBoo
changing gears interim report