雇主的平等认证是否改善了平等结果?对英国 "两点 "和 "残疾自信 "计划的评估

IF 1.3 2区 管理学 Q3 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR
Kim Hoque, Nick Bacon, David Allen
{"title":"雇主的平等认证是否改善了平等结果?对英国 \"两点 \"和 \"残疾自信 \"计划的评估","authors":"Kim Hoque,&nbsp;Nick Bacon,&nbsp;David Allen","doi":"10.1111/bjir.12799","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article contributes to debates on equality, diversity and inclusion by exploring the efficacy of employers’ equality certifications, focusing on the UK government's Two Ticks and Disability Confident certifications. In Study 1, using data on Two Ticks certification matched into the nationally representative Workplace Employment Relations Study 2011, we found the adoption of disability equality policies and practices, the prevalence of disabled people in the workforce and disabled people's experience of work were no better in Two Ticks than in non-Two Ticks workplaces. In Study 2, using Department for Work and Pensions data on Disability Confident certification matched into WorkL 2021–2023 data (the world's largest employee experience database), we found that the proportion of the workforce that is disabled is no higher in Disability Confident Level 1 ‘Committed’ organisations and Level 3 ‘Leader’ organisations than in non-Disability Confident organisations. While the proportion of the workforce that is disabled is higher in Disability Confident Level 2 ‘Employer’ organisations than in non-Disability Confident organisations, just 22 per cent of Disability Confident organisations are at this level. Disabled people's experience of work was no better in Disability Confident than in non-Disability Confident organisations. Our findings therefore question the efficacy of these employers’ equality certifications.</p>","PeriodicalId":47846,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Industrial Relations","volume":"62 4","pages":"734-759"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjir.12799","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do employers’ equality certifications improve equality outcomes? An assessment of the United Kingdom's Two Ticks and Disability Confident schemes\",\"authors\":\"Kim Hoque,&nbsp;Nick Bacon,&nbsp;David Allen\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/bjir.12799\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This article contributes to debates on equality, diversity and inclusion by exploring the efficacy of employers’ equality certifications, focusing on the UK government's Two Ticks and Disability Confident certifications. In Study 1, using data on Two Ticks certification matched into the nationally representative Workplace Employment Relations Study 2011, we found the adoption of disability equality policies and practices, the prevalence of disabled people in the workforce and disabled people's experience of work were no better in Two Ticks than in non-Two Ticks workplaces. In Study 2, using Department for Work and Pensions data on Disability Confident certification matched into WorkL 2021–2023 data (the world's largest employee experience database), we found that the proportion of the workforce that is disabled is no higher in Disability Confident Level 1 ‘Committed’ organisations and Level 3 ‘Leader’ organisations than in non-Disability Confident organisations. While the proportion of the workforce that is disabled is higher in Disability Confident Level 2 ‘Employer’ organisations than in non-Disability Confident organisations, just 22 per cent of Disability Confident organisations are at this level. Disabled people's experience of work was no better in Disability Confident than in non-Disability Confident organisations. Our findings therefore question the efficacy of these employers’ equality certifications.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47846,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Industrial Relations\",\"volume\":\"62 4\",\"pages\":\"734-759\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjir.12799\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Industrial Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjir.12799\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Industrial Relations","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjir.12799","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文以英国政府的 "两点"(Two Ticks)和 "残疾自信"(Disability Confident)认证为重点,探讨了雇主平等认证的有效性,为有关平等、多样性和包容性的讨论做出了贡献。在研究 1 中,我们使用了与具有全国代表性的 "2011 年工作场所雇佣关系研究 "相匹配的 "两点 "认证数据,发现 "两点 "认证工作场所的残疾人平等政策和实践的采用情况、残疾人在劳动力中的普遍程度以及残疾人的工作体验并不比非 "两点 "认证工作场所好。在研究 2 中,我们利用就业与养老金部的残疾自信认证数据与 WorkL 2021-2023 年数据(全球最大的员工体验数据库)进行了比对,发现在残疾自信一级 "承诺 "组织和三级 "领导者 "组织中,残疾人在劳动力中所占比例并不比非残疾自信组织高。虽然二级 "雇主 "组织中的残疾人比例高于非残疾自信组织,但只有 22% 的残疾自信组织达到了这一水平。残障人士在残障自信组织中的工作体验并不比在非残障自信组织中好。因此,我们的研究结果对这些雇主的平等认证的有效性提出了质疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Do employers’ equality certifications improve equality outcomes? An assessment of the United Kingdom's Two Ticks and Disability Confident schemes

This article contributes to debates on equality, diversity and inclusion by exploring the efficacy of employers’ equality certifications, focusing on the UK government's Two Ticks and Disability Confident certifications. In Study 1, using data on Two Ticks certification matched into the nationally representative Workplace Employment Relations Study 2011, we found the adoption of disability equality policies and practices, the prevalence of disabled people in the workforce and disabled people's experience of work were no better in Two Ticks than in non-Two Ticks workplaces. In Study 2, using Department for Work and Pensions data on Disability Confident certification matched into WorkL 2021–2023 data (the world's largest employee experience database), we found that the proportion of the workforce that is disabled is no higher in Disability Confident Level 1 ‘Committed’ organisations and Level 3 ‘Leader’ organisations than in non-Disability Confident organisations. While the proportion of the workforce that is disabled is higher in Disability Confident Level 2 ‘Employer’ organisations than in non-Disability Confident organisations, just 22 per cent of Disability Confident organisations are at this level. Disabled people's experience of work was no better in Disability Confident than in non-Disability Confident organisations. Our findings therefore question the efficacy of these employers’ equality certifications.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of Industrial Relations
British Journal of Industrial Relations INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR-
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
11.50%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: BJIR (British Journal of Industrial Relations) is an influential and authoritative journal which is essential reading for all academics and practitioners interested in work and employment relations. It is the highest ranked European journal in the Industrial Relations & Labour category of the Social Sciences Citation Index. BJIR aims to present the latest research on developments on employment and work from across the globe that appeal to an international readership. Contributions are drawn from all of the main social science disciplines, deal with a broad range of employment topics and express a range of viewpoints.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信