Can someone explain how this is fair?

[Changednameforthispost11]

Nc for this as outing from previous posts.

I work for the nhs, in a clinical role which includes membership of a professional body.

Our profession is on the nhs pay-scale, which means that qualified staff at the same banding would all be paid the same rate of pay which increases with number of years qualified. There is no negotiation of salary.

We received a message this week from our professional body stating that they were trialling a scheme to ring-fence a pot of money to be made available to qualified staff who are bame, to allow them to access courses and other post degree training. (Most of the time we have to fund any external courses and further training outside of our job role ourselves).

Being totally honest, when I read this, my first reaction was that this feels unfair. I could understand if funds were made available for anyone who had a particular situation or hardship, but to ring fence them specifically based on race makes me feel uncomfortable. Especially due to the fact that all qualified staff are paid at the same rate.

Would anyone else feel the same? Or am I being unreasonable? If you disagree with me, could you explain why you think this is a positive thing?

Tia

Solely from the point of view of a white person yes it seems unfair. But think about it from the pov of a black person who is at disadvantage in so many areas of their life compared to that white person. Does it feel fairer now?

Any redress of inequality, irrespective of whether this is based on gender, age, ethnicity, ability etc. Is a positive change.

From your post, it appears that this is not salary pot, but paid subscriptions to a professional body that uses this to enhance training and monitor professionals. Am I right? If so, how is this unfair on you? Have they increased subs so you’re paying for this?

This is white privilege in action. Just because you don’t see the injustice or inherent racism that impacts bame individuals accessing training, doesn’t mean it’s not there. You paid for your training, not all people can.

I get you might feel a hardship fund might level the playing field, but you need to understand that by targeting bame groups, this is where they can make a bigger difference. It’s promoting the availability of funding to a group that needs it most.

If you’re really that bothered, ask for details and updates on the effectiveness of the scheme.

And frankly, these schemes are here because of people with your attitude have historically ignored racist factors that contribute toward inequality. I know this sounds rude, but your post comes across as extremely racist. Feel free to clarify your point and put me in my place.

@Snorkello

Any redress of inequality, irrespective of whether this is based on gender, age, ethnicity, ability etc. Is a positive change.

From your post, it appears that this is not salary pot, but paid subscriptions to a professional body that uses this to enhance training and monitor professionals. Am I right? If so, how is this unfair on you? Have they increased subs so you’re paying for this?

This is white privilege in action. Just because you don’t see the injustice or inherent racism that impacts bame individuals accessing training, doesn’t mean it’s not there. You paid for your training, not all people can.

I get you might feel a hardship fund might level the playing field, but you need to understand that by targeting bame groups, this is where they can make a bigger difference. It’s promoting the availability of funding to a group that needs it most.

If you’re really that bothered, ask for details and updates on the effectiveness of the scheme.

And frankly, these schemes are here because of people with your attitude have historically ignored racist factors that contribute toward inequality. I know this sounds rude, but your post comes across as extremely racist. Feel free to clarify your point and put me in my place.

This with spades on. Perfectly put.

I understand you’ve said lay is equal across bands. But could it be that there is evidence that people from bame backgrounds are less likely to progress up bands which they’re trying to address?

Ok to clarify, the funding is not to be used to fund degrees or professional body fees. It is for special interest courses, related to but not essential for our job role, which anyone can book onto, you don’t need to get permission to do so. The courses are done outside of working hours and typically cost £300-£500. It is entirely optional to do them and once completed there would be no promotion or increase in pay. ((Of course it would enhance your cv though). Pre children I self funded a couple, but now with 3 dc I just cannot justify the expense, the same as many of my colleagues.

This is a national initiative, and I can only really speak for our specific hospital department. We have a large number of staff from a range of ethnic groups both male and female. The lower banded (non qualified) staff are predominantly white females. The middle banded staff are a broader mix of white males and females and bame males and females. Probably slightly higher numbers of females. The higher banded clinical staff are predominantly male, with high numbers of bame males and some bame and white females. The higher banded, management staff are predominantly male/white.

To me, it seems that the problem is more male/female rather than white/bame. That is, if you see it as a problem at all. There may be a multitude of reasons for the lesser numbers of higher banded females, including personal choice.

I suppose you could argue that putting initiatives in place to help females progress could be a good thing, but then I don’t feel that a free course would be the answer, moreover a gradual shift in societies’ perceptions.

If that's the case, I don't really see what you're complaining about. I'd thought it would make them more qualified, therefore better paid than you and I could see how that would feel unfair - it actually is but whether you're fine with it or not depends on your perspective of positive action.

But if the course has no bearing on promotion/salary, except to look good on cv - why, if they chose to leave? - then I really don't think it's something to get worked up over. Fine, you've had to pay for yours and suddenly someone's getting it free but do you honestly think you'll be talking about unfairness if this scheme was for only women and men were exempt?

There was a thread recently about black women trying to progress their careers, (the respondents were mostly in NHS) and at every stage being questioned if they were able enough to do the job, less experienced white men getting promotions ahead of them again and again and again. It was such an eye-opener. So YABU.

Sometimes its hard to stop the first thought being 'its not fair why do they deserve that!?'

But there are so many other factors, not just the money. But funding is sometimes a really helpful factor.

I'm trying not to be too generalising/presumptuous but:

BAME individuals might not see the benefit of these courses. Funding perhaps encourages a section of people that wouldn't ordinarily 'waste' their money. The value of the courses is maybe less for others than you. It might look great on a CV for you - increase your chance of a job by 50%, but just okay for a BAME applicant - only increase theirs by 20%...but the course is still the same price.

It could even be biases in their current team. Bosses might be just that tiny bit less understanding or giving about a longer lunch / day off for a course lecture or test. Just saying 'i need x day off for my funded course' is slightly more weighty that 'i need x day off for my course'

They may well already have a hardship fund (if not maybe you can feed that back) but sometimes even having a fund name as BAME fund encourages a more diverse applicant, in the same way advertising for an apprentice / junior might well encourage younger applicants.

So what is the relevance of all the info you included about you all being on the same pay if the courses would not increase your salary

@CocoaN

Yabu, you have a privilege which will assist you in progressing career wise, your BAME colleagues do not have this. As a pp said, nothing is being taken away from you. This is about addressing imbalance in career progression and representation at senior levels.

I disagree. You say nothing has been taken away? The opportunity to access these funds seems to have been taken away from the OP.

Privilege is complicated. I don't think it's limited to race, and to limit access to this type of initiative on such a basis doesn't sit right with me.

I feel very uncomfortable with this massive focus on race that we are seeing now. Just as an example, writing this makes me feel as if I should declare what race I am, so that anyone who reads this can add that filter to my comments (I won't be doing that)

@BakedBeeeen

There was a thread recently about black women trying to progress their careers, (the respondents were mostly in NHS) and at every stage being questioned if they were able enough to do the job, less experienced white men getting promotions ahead of them again and again and again. It was such an eye-opener. So YABU.

How is it ever possible to know exactly what the deciding factor is when it comes to someone's lack of progress? From what you write it seems that race was the perceived issue here and I am curious to learn why.

Being questioned about your ability to do the job you are applying for is surely a normal part of the interview process? Who hasn't been through this?

It sounds like a great scheme!

The structural inequality and embedded racism in the U.K. is horrific. So anything to redress this is a wonderful thing.

You’re not wrong that there could be other schemes to benefit other minority groups too, but blocking this one because YOU can’t access it is a really reductive.

Equality isn’t about everyone getting the same thing. It’s about making sure the everyone has equality access and opportunities which means there needs to be crucial adjustments and differences in how people can access those opportunities. This is one of those adjustments.

“ do you honestly think you'll be talking about unfairness if this scheme was for only women and men were exempt?”

I suppose that’s my point really and I’m not sure I’ve explained it very well.

I can’t imagine a situation (within an organisation of qualified professional people) where something would be offered for men only, or women only. It would feel inherently unfair and would potentially alienate 50% of the workers.

I believe very much in equality and also fairness. As a female, I would not want to feel I had got a job (for example) to fulfil a quota, but rather would want it to be on merit.

I feel similarly with this situation, although I agree, as people have already alluded to, it is not actually making much difference to me personally.

There are many minority groups, I’m sure all of which will be on the receiving end of certain unfairnesses and bias. It feels like they have just jumped on this particular bandwagon? Or is it just sour grapes on my part?

I believe very much in equality and also fairness. As a female, I would not want to feel I had got a job (for example) to fulfil a quota, but rather would want it to be on merit.

Saying people get things on “merit” spectacularly misses the point. And so yes it does sound ike sour grapes on your part.

“Equality isn’t about everyone getting the same thing. It’s about making sure the everyone has equality access and opportunities which means there needs to be crucial adjustments and differences in how people can access those opportunities. This is one of those adjustments.”

Yes I can see where you’re coming from. And, for example of offering scholarships and bursaries to underprivileged children and schemes to encourage recruitment of bame people into policing etc I can fully understand.

But this feels different to me somehow.

@Changednameforthispost11

Ok to clarify, the funding is not to be used to fund degrees or professional body fees. It is for special interest courses, related to but not essential for our job role, which anyone can book onto, you don’t need to get permission to do so. The courses are done outside of working hours and typically cost £300-£500. It is entirely optional to do them and once completed there would be no promotion or increase in pay. ((Of course it would enhance your cv though). Pre children I self funded a couple, but now with 3 dc I just cannot justify the expense, the same as many of my colleagues.

This is a national initiative, and I can only really speak for our specific hospital department. We have a large number of staff from a range of ethnic groups both male and female. The lower banded (non qualified) staff are predominantly white females. The middle banded staff are a broader mix of white males and females and bame males and females. Probably slightly higher numbers of females. The higher banded clinical staff are predominantly male, with high numbers of bame males and some bame and white females. The higher banded, management staff are predominantly male/white.

To me, it seems that the problem is more male/female rather than white/bame. That is, if you see it as a problem at all. There may be a multitude of reasons for the lesser numbers of higher banded females, including personal choice.

I suppose you could argue that putting initiatives in place to help females progress could be a good thing, but then I don’t feel that a free course would be the answer, moreover a gradual shift in societies’ perceptions.

BAME women often have barriers to accessing courses you wouldn’t even think about if you weren’t part of that community. For example many Asian and African women don’t progress because they have to have freshly cooked food on the table for 10 people by a certain time - not the kind of batch cooked food most other people would be familiar with but complex hand made and freshly made food (often multiple courses and different dishes for different people). Imagine making 50-100 samosas (including the filo pastry and filling), 50 hand rolled rotis, two curries, dals, rice, everyday and also having to prioritise learning in your ‘free’ time. It doesn’t happen especially if you need to pay for them - so these activities being sponsored really helps.

@BakedBeeeen

There was a thread recently about black women trying to progress their careers, (the respondents were mostly in NHS) and at every stage being questioned if they were able enough to do the job, less experienced white men getting promotions ahead of them again and again and again. It was such an eye-opener. So YABU.

Might this be a situation where using the term BAME if what you mean is black isn’t necessarily helpful?

Clearly there is an issue about progression and it will need equity rather than equality to right it. But I wonder whether just ring fencing money might just be an ‘easy’ fix rather than an effective one for a situation that might be a bit more complicated.

Just because you've never seen grants like this just for women doesn't mean they don't exist. A white, female friend of my was awarded a diversity grant for her MBA, as much fewer women do MBAs than men.

@Changednameforthispost11

“Equality isn’t about everyone getting the same thing. It’s about making sure the everyone has equality access and opportunities which means there needs to be crucial adjustments and differences in how people can access those opportunities. This is one of those adjustments.”

Yes I can see where you’re coming from. And, for example of offering scholarships and bursaries to underprivileged children and schemes to encourage recruitment of bame people into policing etc I can fully understand.

But this feels different to me somehow.

Many BAME nurses do the same job as their white colleagues but come home, make a hand-made freshly prepared meal for 10 people, do all the chores, shopping, education, caring, and also have to face severe restrictions on what they can’t and cannot do. Mum used to say work was a break for her which is why she kept it up long beyond when she probably should have given it up.

YABU

It isn't equality. It's equity.

You just have to look around at almost any profession to see that ethnic minorities are severely under represented and that in hospitals for example the nursing and medical staff do not typically mirror the communities they serve.

There is so much stacked against many people from ethnic minority backgrounds - systemic racism, lack of access to education and training... this is an attempt to level the playing field. Good on them.

Have you ever read about white privilege? I recommend that you and others on this thread educate yourselves.

But wouldn’t a better option then be to work out some sort of system for that training to take place during part of their normal working day, Grumpy?

That’s not to say that isn’t already being done, but I can’t help thinking that just making it free isn’t really helping with they underlying issues about why some minority groups aren’t accessing that training.

@RafaIsTheKingOfClay

But wouldn’t a better option then be to work out some sort of system for that training to take place during part of their normal working day, Grumpy?

That’s not to say that isn’t already being done, but I can’t help thinking that just making it free isn’t really helping with they underlying issues about why some minority groups aren’t accessing that training.

Sponsored short courses tend to be in the working day

@Stompythedinosaur

I'm a nurse, and I would fully support this. A tiny bit of money for training is a drop in the ocean compared to the privilege I get by being white. Subconscious racism will mean that a white nurses will find it easier to be accepted on to training courses, this is just a way of giving a tiny bit of compensation.

I totally agree. I could hug you ❤️.

It's incredibly unfair. Schemes like this only serve to increase the amount of racism in the world. It should be available to everyone who meets certain criteria but that should not include skin colour.

YANBU I went to school in Australia, and the university entrance requirements were significantly lower for aboriginal people. This created a lot of ill feeling, IMO Australia is a very racist country.