Category: HR

Restoring control or reinforcing exclusion? UK immigration policy and international students

Author sarahcawthra | Posted on

By Chathushka Kiriella

“Is it still worth staying in the UK?”

That’s a question many international students are asking themselves now. Not about their coursework or career ambitions, but about whether the future they planned is still possible. For many, the answer is becoming increasingly uncertain.

In May 2025, the UK government released its white paper Restoring Control Over Immigration, outlining a series of reforms aimed at reducing net migration. While framed as necessary and pragmatic, the changes have had a profound effect on how international students experience studying and imagining a future in the UK.

But beyond the policy details lies a deeper shift. International students are no longer framed as global learners or future professionals but increasingly as a potential risk and ‘regulated, conditional migrants’.

A system that changed midway

For years, the UK presented a clear and structured pathway for international students: study, gain work experience, and potentially transition into long term employment and settlement. Students made life changing decisions based on that promise.

They paid significantly higher tuition fees than domestic students. They navigated complex visa processes, proved their English proficiency, and contributed financially through visa costs and healthcare surcharges. Many invested not just money, but years of planning and personal sacrifice. Now, that pathway is narrowing.

Recent reforms include:

  • Restricting dependants to PhD level students only
  • Reducing post study work visas from two years to 18 months
  • Raising the skilled worker salary threshold significantly
  • Extending settlement timelines

Individually, each change may seem technical. Together, they fundamentally reshape what is achievable.

Students who arrived under one set of expectations now find themselves navigating a very different reality.

The human impact behind the policy

What these changes look like on paper is one thing, what they feel like in practice is another. Many students I work with are experiencing growing anxiety, not because they lack ambition or ability, but because the goalposts have moved.

Carefully mapped plans are becoming unworkable. Career routes that once seemed realistic now feel out of reach. For some, the UK is no longer a place to build a future, but a temporary stop with an uncertain ending.

And yet, these are students who did everything “right.” They followed official guidance. They complied with every requirement. They invested in a system they believed was stable.

When that system shifts, the impact is not just logistical. It is deeply personal.

The power of language

Alongside these policy changes, there has been a noticeable shift in how migration and migrants are discussed. The white paper uses terms like “explosion,” “burden,” and “loopholes.” These are not neutral descriptions. They shape how people understand the issue.

When migration is framed as a crisis, those within it, regardless of their legal status, risk being seen through the same lens.

One of the most concerning aspects is the lack of distinction between different types of migrants. International students, who are legally sponsored, financially contributing, and closely monitored, are often folded into broader narratives about migration pressures. This blurring matters.

It creates a perception that all migrants are equally responsible for strain on public services or infrastructure, despite vast differences in their circumstances and contributions. Language does not just reflect policy. It reinforces it.

What is missing from the conversation

While the economic contribution of international students is often acknowledged, the conversation rarely goes further. Missing are the less measurable but equally important contributions: the diversity of perspectives in classrooms, the exchange of ideas across cultures and the role students play in shaping globally connected institutions.

International students are not just fee payers or future workers. They are participants in a shared academic space, contributing to knowledge, debate and innovation.

Reducing them to numbers or targets overlooks the very purpose of higher education as a global and collaborative endeavour.

When policy enters the classroom

As an academic, I have found my role changing in ways I did not expect. My work is no longer just about teaching and research. Increasingly, it involves helping students make sense of policies, navigate uncertainty and rethink their futures.

The questions I receive have shifted:

“Can I still stay after I graduate?” “Should I bring my family?” “Is there any point applying for jobs here?”

These are not questions I was trained to answer.

At the same time, while universities do have support systems in place for  international students including the Immigration Advice Service team, Careers services, and the Global Centre. There are limits to what these teams can do when wider policy decisions are beyond their control. In many ways, they become messengers navigating constantly shifting immigration and political landscapes. Although staff continue to support and guide students as best they can, universities themselves are also operating within constraints, creating a difficult position where institutional support can only go so far against broader political and policy changes.

On one hand, I am part of an institution that recruits international students and operates within government frameworks. On the other, I see firsthand the emotional and practical consequences of those frameworks. There is a constant tension between compliance and care.

For those of us who were once international students ourselves, that tension is even more pronounced. Students often see us as proof that the system works, a “success story.” That perception builds trust, but it also comes with responsibility.

We become advisors, advocates and sometimes simply listeners, absorbing the uncertainty students carry. This is rarely recognised as part of academic work, but it is becoming increasingly central to it.

A question of responsibility

The current narrative often places responsibility on students, suggesting misuse of the system or excessive burden but this overlooks a key point.

International students operate within a system designed and regulated by governments and institutions. If there are gaps, inconsistencies, or exploitation within that system, responsibility does not lie solely with those who entered it in good faith.

Holding institutions accountable for quality and oversight is necessary but broad restrictions that affect all students risk punishing those who have done nothing wrong.

What kind of system are we building?

The UK continues to position itself as a global destination for education. Universities actively recruit international students, highlighting opportunity, diversity and long term potential.

At the same time, immigration policies are becoming more restrictive, more conditional and more uncertain. This raises a fundamental question: can a system invite international students in while simultaneously limiting their ability to stay, contribute, and belong?

Conclusion

Policies aimed at restoring control may achieve certain political objectives. But they also reshape the experiences of those within the system, students and educators alike.

International students are not abstract figures in migration statistics. They are individuals who make significant investments, contribute meaningfully to academic communities and plan their futures based on the rules set before them. When those rules change, the consequences extend far beyond policy documents.

If the UK is to remain a genuinely global education hub, it must move beyond seeing international students as numbers to be reduced and recognise them as people to be supported. Because the question students are asking now, “Is it still worth it?”, is not just about their future.

It is about the kind of higher education system the UK wants to be.

Job sharing in the South West – meet, learn and connect

Author sarahcawthra | Posted on

By Chathushka Kiriella

On 21st January 2026 the Job Share South West (JSSW) inaugural event brought together leaders, managers and researchers to explore the potential of job sharing. Organised by Clare Freshwater-Turner and Annabelle Richards from Lloyds Banking Group and Sarah Houghton and Louise Cuthberston from BT Group, the event, held at the Lloyds Banking Group Harbourside Office, offered a combination of academic insight, real-world experience and practical discussions culminating in a networking breakout session that fostered connections and community building.

Opening with a warm welcome from Annabelle Richards and Clare Freshwater-Turner who introduced the keynote speaker Professor Susan Durbin from the College of Business and Law, University of the West of England (UWE). Drawing upon her specialisms in gender, employment and women’s careers in male-dominated industries Professor Durbin presented her findings on part-time work, flexible working and job share partnerships (JSPs).

This research conducted by Professor Durbin and Stella Warren (UWE) and Professor Jennifer Tomlinson, Leeds Business School, focused upon senior level men and women who job share (although male participation in job sharing remains low). It demonstrated that the outcomes of JSPs are similar for men and women. It also highlighted the significant benefits for those who engage in JSPs including improved work-life balance with alternating work patterns enabling flexibility without sacrificing productivity; high levels of job satisfaction compared with part-time working and a strong sense of achievement amongst participants in the study. Importantly career progression was found not to be negatively impacted by JSPs. Key to the success of JSPs was trust, partnership, collaboration and friendship between job sharers.

Notable challenges to JSPs were that employers appear reluctant to embrace this way of working due to JSPs often operating on slightly over full-time contract hours. However Professor Durbin argued that rather than seeing this as a cost employers should recognise the ‘value for money’ when two highly skilled and experienced senior managers come together to work in a JSP. She also argued for the significant benefits when those in JSPs are able to maintain a work-life balance and thus give their ‘whole selves’ when they are at work. Professor Durbin also reflected upon the need to conduct a larger study to include more men in order to identify any potential gender differences in the experiences and perceptions of JSPs and to consider the potential pitfalls of JSPs from both the employer and employee perspectives.

Presentations at the Jobshare Network inaugural event

The presentation by Professor Durbin concluded with a thoughtful Q&A session where the audience explored the practical realities of job sharing in more depth. Questions focused on how job share partners navigate change together particularly during periods of job share partner promotions and how alignment and communication can be maintained as a pair. Attendees also asked about the benefits and challenges of job sharing from an employer’s perspective including productivity, continuity and management perceptions. Another area of interest was whether generational differences between job sharers create challenges with discussion around how differing experiences, working styles and expectations can be addressed through trust, openness and clear ways of working.

The subsequent panel discussion hosted by Louise and Sarah featuring leaders with direct experience of JSPs and managing JSPs included Justin Jennings, Head of Finance at Lloyds Banking Group; Racheal Nash a job-sharing Business Support Manager at Lloyds Banking Group; Zak Mensah Co-Chief Executive of Birmingham Museum Trust; and Katherine Carr, Director of Strategy and Corporate Affairs at the National Armaments Director Group (Job Share) and Ministry of Defence (Job share).

The discussion explored how JSPs work in senior roles and highlighted recurring themes of the importance of trust, establishing a shared way of working and complementary skills in the JSP. The hardest part was believed to be at the start of a JSP, one panel member expressing ‘Once you can say, “We’ve done it, it worked, we proved it, you can overcome many barriers.”’ The panel also spoke of the initial scepticism towards JSPs from colleagues or members of the board and that this is ‘normal’. One panellist recalled how the board had initially questioned the JSP she was in regarding who from the JSP would attend board meetings but after two or three sessions the attendance by one or other of the JSP was fully accepted.

A key takeaway from the panel was that visibility of JSPs matters. Panellists encouraged those in JSPs to role-model the arrangement at all levels. As one panellist commented:

“Whatever level you’re at, if you’re in a job share, tell people, be visible, role model it.”

It was emphasised that educating colleagues about JSPs is essential to building organisational acceptance.

Work-life balance was another recurring theme for panellists who described how managing non-working days required adaptation but ultimately provided freedom and focus. One participant explained how job sharing had changed the ways she had previously worked on a part-time basis as she was always playing ‘catch up’ on her two non-workdays. She said ‘My time and energy were spent managing, not leading; job sharing changed that completely.’ Maintaining a consistent rhythm, clear handovers and shared communication channels were cited as key strategies for making JSPs seamless.

Another important insight was the power of complementary skills. Panellists explained that successful JSPs often thrive when partners bring different strengths: “One of us is more analytical, the other more creative. Together it’s stronger than either of us alone.” These dynamics allowed job sharers to cover each other’s blind spots, celebrate successes together and reduce managerial oversight.

The panel also challenged the common stereotype that job sharing is primarily for those with childcare responsibilities. Job sharing was framed instead as a leadership strategy enabling senior talent to thrive sustainably while bringing fresh perspectives to their organisations.

“People always assume a job share is because of childcare. There’s no reason why more people can’t do job shares at any stage of life.”

The event concluded with a ‘Chat & Connect’ breakout session led by Louise, Sarah, Clare and Annabelle where participants shared experiences, discussed tools and tips and explored ways to expand job share opportunities. The importance of community, mentoring and peer support was emphasised as central to making job sharing a sustainable mainstream approach: “Once people see it working, the questions stop,” noted one participant.

Key takeaways from the event included the importance of trust, role modelling, complementary skills, consistent rhythms and visibility. Work-life balance, career progression and job satisfaction were all achievable through job sharing while the challenges such as handovers, continuity and organisational culture could be mitigated through careful planning and communication.

The Job Share SW inaugural event highlighted the growing momentum behind job sharing as a sustainable and effective way of working. Through academic research, lived experience and open discussion the event reinforced that job sharing thrives when built on trust, visibility and strong collaboration and that it can support career progression, wellbeing and organisational resilience at all levels. The event received an average feedback score of 4.9 out of 5 reflecting the strong engagement and positive response from attendees. In particular participants highlighted the value of community and the opportunity to connect with others navigating similar experiences.

The Job Share SW inaugural event demonstrated that job sharing is far more than a flexible working arrangement. It is a powerful strategy for sustainable, inclusive and resilient leadership

By embracing collaboration, trust and complementary strengths senior roles can become accessible and effective for a wider range of people helping organisations thrive in an evolving workplace.

Looking ahead the collaboration between the Job Share Network South West and the University of the West of England marks an exciting next phase. We are delighted to announce that Professor Susan Durbin and Chathushka Kiriella (UWE) have been awarded Higher Education Innovation Funding to work with industry partners to develop this network. The aim is to reach further into the South West of England to enhance the knowledge exchange and impact activities currently centred in Bristol. This will involve setting up a regional workshop bringing together employers, academics, practitioners and policymakers to explore how to mainstream JSPs and identify key enablers and challenges (e.g. recruitment, workload balance, governance, dual site roles). It will also enable us to explore the feasibility of a regional job share register to expand access, improve sustainability and support long term impact.

Breaking barriers: what HR professionals need to know about disabled students and placements

Author sarahcawthra | Posted on

By Dr Hilary Lowe

Placements are a key part of employability in higher education. They give students real world experience and help employers spot future talent. However, for disabled students, placements can involve barriers that are not always visible.

In a recent systematic literature review co-authored with Dr Laura William from the University of Greenwich and published in Studies in Higher Education1, we explored these challenges in detail. In this blog post, we focus on what the findings mean for HR professionals and placement providers and why inclusive pathways into work matter.

Why building awareness of disability and placements matters for HR and workforce planning

Many employers use placements to build talent pipelines and assess potential recruits. Yet there remains a 27.9 percent employment gap between disabled and non disabled people, alongside widening pay gaps. These inequalities often begin long before formal recruitment.

Placements are frequently a student’s first interaction with an employer. This makes HR teams central to shaping experiences that can influence confidence, skills development and long term career outcomes. Inclusive placements are therefore not just beneficial for students, they are critical for fair workforce planning.

Four key barriers HR should address

Our review of the existing literature identified four connected themes that affect disabled students’ access to and experiences of placements.

1. Organisational processes and systems: The most significant barrier is the lack of timely and effective reasonable adjustments. While the Equality Act 2010 places a legal duty on employers to remove barriers, this duty is often reactive and poorly understood.

Students describe delays, inconsistent support and anxiety about disclosing a disability. For HR professionals, this points to the importance of proactive policies, clear communication and training for managers so adjustments are put in place quickly and confidently.

2. Low expectations: Disabled students often face assumptions about what they can or cannot do. These low expectations can damage confidence and limit opportunities to learn and progress.

Employers who underestimate students’ potential risk missing out on skilled and motivated talent. HR professionals can help by challenging bias, promoting inclusive recruitment practices and designing placements that focus on strengths rather than perceived limitations.

3. Bio-social factors: Many students manage health related needs alongside placement demands. Balancing work and impairment can be particularly difficult when placements are inflexible.

Rigid schedules and limited understanding from supervisors can make challenges worse. HR teams can reduce these pressures by supporting flexible working, enabling access to healthcare where possible and recognising that disability often intersects with factors such as gender, age or cultural background.

4. The nature of the placement: Some placements involve poorly defined tasks, pressure to over perform or feelings of isolation. These conditions can be especially challenging for disabled students.

Inclusive placement design can make a significant difference. This includes meaningful tasks, clear expectations and visible support networks. When placements are well structured, both students and employers benefit.

Implications for HR practice

These barriers reflect wider patterns of disablism in the labour market. For HR professionals, the message is clear. Inclusive placement practices are not only about legal compliance, they are a strategic priority.

By building accessibility and equity into early career programmes, organisations can reach a wider talent pool, improve diversity and strengthen their reputation as inclusive employers.

Our next steps: empirical research

Before starting the systematic review, we established an Advisory Group that brought together placement officers, academics and employer representatives. This helped ensure the research was grounded in practical experience and informed by different perspectives.

As we move into the next phase of our research, we will continue working with this group to gather lived experiences from disabled students and placement providers. This collaborative approach will allow future recommendations to reflect real world insights and support the development of HR policies, employer training and inclusive placement design.

  1. Read the full article here:
    William, L., & Lowe, H. (2025). Barriers and challenges for disabled students when engaging with non-compulsory placements: a systematic literature review. Studies in Higher Education, 1–16.     ↩︎

Exploring Neurodiversity in Engineering: A Video Series by Vanda Papafilippou and Lucy Downes

Author ripleywk | Posted on

Vanda Papafilippou and Lucy Downes, have recently published a series of videos exploring their findings around their research on neurodiversity in engineering. They have made these videos so that the information from their research is free and accessible, publishing the information on YouTube for all to access. More information on each video can be found below as well as a brief bio of each author.

Introducing the study.

The first video in the series,  Introducing the study neurodiversity in engineering, introduces a study conducted by Dr. Vanda Papafilippou (Principal Investigator) and Miss Lucy Downes (co-Investigator). The study, carried out in 2023, focused on the experience of neurodivergent engineers in the workplace.

Getting in.

91% of survey respondents found that there were barriers in the recruitment process for neurodivergent people. The second video, Neurodiversity in Engineering: Getting in, addresses the topic of recruitment and selection. What parts of the recruitment process pose the biggest barriers – what works well? The video looks at what organisations can do to remove barriers from the selection process, and what Neurodivergent people look for when applying for a new role.

Moving on.

The third video, Neurodiversity in Engineering: Moving on, presents the main findings of the research on neurodiversity in engineering, focusing on the experience of neurodivergent engineers once in the workplace. What are challenges both physical and social that  they face and how HR processes and the questions of ‘’disclosure’’ can have an impact.

Moving up.

Part four of the series, Neurodiversity in Engineering: Moving up, explores the findings related to career development and progression, and how this interacts with neurodiversity in engineering. How lack or role models and certain role requirements not inline with the skill set such as people management created barriers to progression in the workplace.

Implications for practice.

Finally, the last video in the series, Neurodiversity in engineering: Implications for practice, discusses the implications of the research findings for smaller teams, line managers, senior managers, HR policies and practices, and organizational culture more broadly.

About the Authors

Dr. Vanda Papafilippou is a Senior Lecturer in Human Resources Management at the University of the West of England (UWE Bristol), specializing in Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) in the workplace. Her research focuses on addressing gender inequality, improving diversity management practices, and promoting inclusive recruitment, as evidenced by her leadership on projects exploring women’s networks, the experiences of European expatriates, and neurodiversity in engineering. Combining her academic expertise in qualitative research methods with her active engagement with industry, Vanda has developed and delivered inclusive recruitment and selection training for organizations, created EDI training materials for social enterprises, and served as a judge for the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development’s Applied Research Conference, making her a prolific researcher and practitioner dedicated to fostering more equitable and inclusive workplaces.

Lucy Downes, a Lecturer in Human Resource Management at UWE Bristol. She has achieved Fellow status with the Higher Education Academy and is close to completing the Post Graduate Certificate in Academic Practice. Lucy’s research interests centre on equality, diversity, and inclusion in the workplace. As part of her dissertation, she explored the social factors that support or hinder the professional identities of senior female aerospace engineers. Since joining UWE Bristol, she has worked on a research project investigating the experiences of international students during the COVID-19 pandemic.

She has also collaborated with an interdisciplinary team on a Higher Education Innovation Fund-supported project to develop a framework to help engineering organizations recruit and retain neurodiverse employees.

Invisible Work on Maternity Leave: How the Covid Pandemic intensified and exposed the unpaid work of Mothers

Author ripleywk | Posted on

Dr Jenna Pandeli, Dr Chloe Tarrabain and Dr Mahwish Khan

In this blog, we draw upon our own research that explored the experiences of new mothers on maternity leave during the pandemic. We unravel the immense layers of unpaid work that mothers undertake and define this as ‘Invisible Work’. Our work aids understanding of the complex layers of emotion work, physical work, and mental load that women are expected to undertake during maternity leave.

What is Invisible Work?

The term ‘Invisible Work’ was developed by feminist academic Arlene Kaplan Daniels (1987) to describe women’s unpaid labour, such as housework and volunteer work. The concept has since been expanded and used to describe lots of different types of work (not just ‘women’s work’); work that is not valued economically, legally, culturally and work that is socially marginalized, physically out of sight or some combination thereof (Hatton, 2017). Invisible Work is unseen, unacknowledged and neither defined nor recognized or compensated as labour (Kaplan, 2022). Examples of Invisible Work have included prison labour (Pandeli et al, 2019), ‘dirty work’ (Duffy, 2007; Simpson et al., 2012), sex work (Kotiswaran, 2011), student internships (Hatton, 2017), emotion work and so on. Essentially, Invisible Work is being undertaken everywhere, but because this type of work is hidden in some shape or form, this obscures the fact that work is being performed and therefore this contributes to its economic devaluation.

So, what does ‘Invisible Work’ have to do with maternity leave and the pandemic?

For families, the pandemic meant a collapse of the boundaries between public and private space, where work, childcare and personal time all happened within the home. Research on parenting during the pandemic shows how the lack of separation between these spaces impacted mothers in a more pronounced way than fathers. Findings suggest that mothers experienced far greater anxieties and a greater sense of responsibility for their child’s safety (Ben Yaakov and Ben-Ari, 2021) often assuming accountability for making decisions and warding off the virus (Dutta et al., 2020; Kelly and Senior, 2021), and had an increased mental load (Dean et al. 2021; Kelly and Senior, 2021) than their male counterparts. Maternity leave makes this collapse of boundaries more extreme. Women having babies and taking maternity are removed from the economic labour market and confined to the domestic space. Without respite through social interaction, family and professional support, these women sat at the sharp end of the Covid pandemic. They were completing vast layers of unpaid work – emotional, physical and mental.

Dr Jenna Pandeli, Dr Chloe Tarrabain and Dr Mahwish Khan, all researchers at the University of the West of England gave birth (each to their first child) during the lockdowns of the global pandemic in 2020. Their experiences were understandably distressing, emotional and painful. On returning to work, they joked that they felt like they were ‘on holiday’ – being back at work felt like a holiday, which really made them realise that they had undertaken real, sweated labour while on maternity leave…exhausting, stressful and all-consuming labour…If their (professional, stressful, busy) paid jobs felt like relief/a break, what the hell had they been doing on maternity leave!? As a result, they undertook research, using their own experiences as well as interviewing 13 women who had given birth in 2020 to gain a deeper understanding of the type of work they were undertaking whilst on maternity leave in a pandemic.

What type of work were mothers undertaking on maternity leave in the pandemic?

Their research found that new mothers were undertaking significant layers of work during their maternity leave in the pandemic that included such things as:

  • Managing the expectations of maternity leave versus the reality of their experiences
  • Struggling to be heard and advocate for themselves in the absence of support
  • Managing safety, fear, and risk to keep themselves and their babies safe during the pandemic
  • Managing boredom, monotony, and loneliness due to isolation, restrictions, lockdown, and the confinement of motherhood more generally
  • Managing the relentlessness of caring for a baby whilst never being able to ‘switch off’
  • Managing and worrying about societal expectations of being the ‘ideal mother’

The Covid-19 pandemic dramatically altered the expectations and experiences of mothers during their maternity leave; adjusting to these changes and managing their expectations took its toll. Initially anticipating a period of bonding and shared joy, many women found themselves isolated, with limited social interactions and a sense of stolen moments. The absence of crucial social support networks left mothers mourning the maternity leave they had envisioned. The emotional and mental work needed to manage these expectations was often overlooked.

Many mothers felt that their experiences were devalued, leading to feelings of abandonment and disempowerment. Without adequate professional and social support, they had to navigate complex healthcare decisions and the challenges of early motherhood largely on their own, often feeling dismissed. They encountered the usual trope of being considered overly emotional, irrational, and hysterical. Their struggles were not treated as legitimate, and they were forced to ‘just get on with it’ at every stage. Fielding-Singh and Dmowska (2022) have shown us that women experience gaslighting during pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum; their realities are denied and thereby destabilized; mothers are rendered non-credible, and their experiences are not taken seriously. Even large organisations are now starting to acknowledge gender bias in healthcare and pain (See Nurofen’s recent ‘See My Pain’ Campaign here: See My Pain | Nurofen). Therefore, women were forced to undertake intense amounts of labour in order to advocate for themselves and their children during this time, and ensure their voices were heard.

Balancing the risks posed by the pandemic with their emotional wellbeing became a complex challenge for many mothers on maternity leave during this time. The lifting of restrictions introduced new fears and anxieties e.g. ‘Restrictions have eased but is it actually safe to go out?’ or ‘I had planned to meet a friend outside for coffee, but she has been in contact with someone who has covid – should I cancel plans?’ Constantly having to make these decisions with limited information, not only for themselves but also to protect their baby only added to their emotional burden and decision fatigue.

Additionally, loneliness and monotony became prominent features of maternity leave during covid as the absence of social support intensified feelings of isolation. Women had to form networks, reach out, socialise while physically and mentally exhausted in order to manage their mental health on maternity leave. Organising coffee meetups or play dates with the added pressure or masks, navigating lockdown rules and restrictions, lateral flow tests etc. was challenging and exhausting, albeit necessary for survival.

Mothers felt immense, relentless pressure to meet unrealistic expectations of being the ‘perfect’ mum, which was exacerbated by the lack of social support, resulting in feelings of exhaustion, guilt, shame, and a distorted sense of self-worth. Society tells us:

“You must feed your child healthy, home-cooked food, but you must still make time to play with them, you must not use screen time, but you must ensure your home is always clean. You must be a calm and gentle parent, but you must parent without support. You cannot use soothers, but your child must nap independently…. actually, don’t let your child nap independently enjoy this time together and have contact naps. You should breastfeed but not for too long. You should go back to work after your maternity leave, but if you do go back, you are neglecting your child. You must ensure you have some ‘me time’ but only after everyone else in your household is sorted and your chores are done. Motherhood is a blessing, and you must enjoy every minute so please don’t complain…. oh, and by the way, when are you going to have another child?’

These are the constant messages, often conflicting and confusing, that women are bombarded with on a daily basis. Mothers are expected to strike exactly the right balance in all areas of their child’s life and development and are considered failures if they can’t meet these impossible expectations, whilst isolated and doing it all alone. Inevitably, this pressure leads to burnout for many mothers.

These are just a handful of examples of the emotional, physical, and mental work taking place whilst on maternity leave and well into motherhood.

What does this tell us about maternity leave more generally? are these experiences only relevant to the pandemic?

Overall, the research argues that these experiences are not necessarily unique to the pandemic, instead what was discovered was the Invisible Work of maternity leave more generally. The pandemic allowed us to see more clearly the work that new mothers were forced to undertake whilst on maternity leave. Covid-19 exacerbated the difficult experiences of motherhood, isolating mothers, removing support, and pushing Invisible Work to an almost unbearable extreme. But we can learn from these experiences as we can now see more clearly the multiple layers of work being undertaken on maternity leave.

You can find out more about this research, read the full report and see the recommendations we make to organisations, policymakers and families going forward here. Please get in touch with Jenna Pandeli if you would like to know more.

References

Ben-Yaakov, O. and Ben-Ari, O.T (2022) Covid-19-Related anxieties and parenting stress among first-time mothers and fathers in their first year of parenthood. Psychology & Health, 37(11),1327-1341.

Dean, L., Churchill, B., & Ruppanner, L (2021) The mental load: building a deeper theoretical understanding of how cognitive and emotional labor overload women and mothers. Community, Work & Family, 25(1), 13-29.

Duffy M (2007) Doing the dirty work: gender, race, and reproductive labor in historical perspective. Gender & Society, 21(3): 313–36.

Dutta, M., Agarwal, D., & Sivakami, M. (2020 The “invisible” among the marginalised: Do gender and intersectionality matter in the Covid-19 response. Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, 5(4), 302-308.

Fielding-Singh, P. & Dmowska, A (2022) Obstetric gaslighting and the denial of mothers’ realities. Social Science & Medicine, 301: 1-8.

Hatton, Erin (2017). Mechanisms of invisibility: rethinking the concept of Invisible Work. Work, Employment and Society, 31(2): 336–351.

Kaplan Daniels, Arlene (1987). Invisible Work. Social Problems, 34(5): 403–415.

Kaplan, Amit (2022). ‘Just Let it Pass by and it Will Fall on Some Woman’: Invisible Work in the Labor Market. Gender & Society, 36(6): 838-868.

Kelly, S., & Senior, A (2021) Towards a feminist parental ethics. Gender, Work & Organization, 28(2): 807-825.

Kotiswaran P (2011) Dangerous Sex, Invisible Labor: Sex Work and the Law in India. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Pandeli, J., Marinetto, M. and Jenkins, J., 2019. Captive in cycles of invisibility? Prisoners’ work for the private sector. Work, Employment and Society, 33(4): 596-612.

Simpson R, Slutskaya N, Lewis P, Höpfl H (eds) (2012) Dirty Work: Concepts and Identities. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Exploring the experience of neurodivergent engineers in the workplace: Re-crafting engineering?

Author ripleywk | Posted on

Dr Vanda Papafilippou & Miss Lucy Downes

The neurodiversity paradigm views neurodiversity as natural variations in human cognition that should be equally valued and celebrated (Chapman, 2022) thus challenging earlier research (and practice) that tended to take a deficit perspective and referred to ADHD, Autism, Dyslexia, Dyscalculia, etc. as disorders that needed to be ‘treated’ (Chapman and Bovell, 2022). Nevertheless, despite the increased awareness of the strengths of neurodivergent thinking and the value that diverse perspectives can bring to organizations (Kirby and Smith, 2021), neurodivergent people may experience discrimination and marginalization once disclosing to their employer (Baldridge and Swift, 2013; Johnson and Joshi, 2017). What is more, to date there is limited research that explores the perspectives of neurodivergent employees to gain an understanding of contextual factors that might create barriers in the workplace (Doyle and McDowall, 2021) but also about how neurodivergent people approach work in general. 

This blog entry looks at neurodiversity from both an academic/research and practitioner perspective, offering some practical future directions for employers. We are specifically focusing on an aspect of our findings: how neurodivergent engineers engage in job crafting. In order to do so, we draw upon Lazazzara et al.’s (2020) job crafting process model which considers the job crafting motives, the impact of context, the forms of job crafting, personal factors and the job crafting consequences.

Our exploratory study focused on how neurodivergent engineers (all sectors, including software) experience the entire employee lifecycle (i.e., recruitment, career development and progression). We chose to focus on engineering as, anecdotally, there are many neurodivergent individuals in the profession as neurominority thinking strengths align to engineering skills, such as creative thinking and attention to detail (Engineering Council, 2022; Loiacono and Ren, 2018). 

Background

Wrzesniewski and Dutton (2001) noted that the need for control over work, establishing a positive self-image and connections with others motivate to engage in job crafting, which, in its turn, is argued to enhance the person-career fit (De Vos et al., 2020) and stimulate employees’ career growth (Hall and Las Heras, 2010). Employees may be proactively and/or reactively motivated to craft their jobs and that the form of job crafting depends also on contextual factors, such as organisational climate and job design components (e.g., resources, workload, demands) (Lazazzara et al., 2020).

However, to date there are no studies on how neurodivergent employees might engage in job crafting. An important gap considering that neurodiverse employees are often excluded and marginalised in the workplace due to negative stereotyping (Den Houting, 2019; Patton, 2019; Priscott and Allen, 2021) and negative organisational cultures (Kapp et al., 2019; Saleh et al., 2022) and this might impact their self-confidence, relationships with colleagues and control over work (Booth, 2016; Sheppard et al., 2016). Taking into consideration that there is little research on neurodiversity and employment (Doyle and MacDowall, 2021) this gap becomes even more pertinent. Therefore, we asked:

What processes can be identified that illustrate when and how neurodiverse engineers engage in job crafting?

How do contextual factors (i.e., organisational climate and job design) influence neurodiverse engineers to engage in job crafting?

 This was a qualitative study drawing upon in-depth semi-structured interviews. We interviewed 35 engineers (i.e., chemical, mechanical, aerospace, civil, software, oil & gas), male (24) and female (11), mostly of White British, one White Australian and 2 from ethnic minority backgrounds (British Asian, British Black). Participants were mainly employed (i.e., in large and smaller organisation) apart from two who were self-employed/ contractors. The participants were recruited using purposive sampling and access was sought via personal contacts, social media (Facebook groups, Twitter, LinkedIn), support from large Engineering organisations (HR and Employee Resource Groups), the Engineering Council, and snowballing. The interview schedule was developed following guidance from Norris et al. (2020) to acknowledge the challenges that autistic participants in particular might encounter. Towards this end we have also included semantic prompting (i.e., a general prompt before asking for a specific instance) and visual prompting.

Findings

To analyse our findings, we drew upon Lazazzara et al.’s (2020) job crafting process model which considers the job crafting motives, the impact of context (supportive vs. constraining), the forms of job crafting (i.e., approach job crafting, avoidance crafting and crafting in other domains), personal factors (supportive vs. constraining) and the job crafting consequences.

The engineers in our sample seemed to engage in job crafting mostly reactively (e.g., because of pressure to behave as ‘engineers’ and work following a specific pattern) but also proactively (e.g., shape their careers/roles according to their strengths, use some strategies in order to improve their performance), depending on how supportive their organisational context was. However, most of them, and especially those in larger organisations, appeared to be experiencing constraints not only due to the organisational context (e.g., negative stereotyping, lack of support from HR and especially their line managers) but also professional standards (e.g., they struggled to ‘fit the box’ of being a chartered engineer). In some cases, line managers ruled out progression opportunities based on the stereotypical assumption that neurodiverse individuals lack the social skills needed to manage a team. The forms of job crafting that are emerging so far are: approach crafting (e.g., adding tasks they enjoyed doing more of, establishing different ways of managing their teams), avoidance crafting (e.g., avoiding networking or socialising, avoiding for going for certain promotions) but also crafting in other domains (e.g., adjusting their working hours when working remotely, changing their physical environment, etc.).

Practical Implications

Our findings can provide a set of practical implications for Engineering as a sector and organisations. Given the current skills shortage of engineers (Armitage et al., 2020), it is of crucial importance that the sector adapts its practices to ensure that it attracts, recruits, and retains neurodiverse engineers through building a genuinely inclusive professional culture which is also reflected on the criteria for chartership (i.e., being less prescriptive). The key learnings for HR are:

Commitment to an inclusive workplace culture

Organisations need to move away from deficit thinking around neurodiversity and work towards a more positive and inclusive culture which in its turn, will provide a supportive context for job crafting and most importantly enhance the sense of organisational and professional belonging.

Retention of talent: revisiting job descriptions career progression criteria

Organisations need to carefully reconsider job design (e.g., Do all engineers need to approach the problem in the same way? What skills and experience are essential?) and ensure that they offer autonomy in carrying out job activities (but also support when neurodiverse employees might struggle with their work-life balance).

Performance management

All line managers should be trained in how to manage, support, and review the progress of neurodiverse employees. HR could also evaluate performance management, using a neurodiversity lens, and identify which encouraged behaviours (e.g., being ‘diplomatic’) or practices (e.g.., networking) might impede career progression and/or influence what considered ‘good performance’.

References

Armitage, L., Bourne, M., Di Simone, J., Jones, A. and Neave, S. (2020). Engineering UK 2020: Educational pathways into engineering. EngineeringUK.

Baldridge, D.C. and Swift, M.L. (2013) Withholding requests for disability accommodation: The role of individual differences and disability attributes. Journal of Management. 39 (3), pp.743-762.

Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Stott, C., Bolton, P. and Goodyer, I. (1997) Is there a link between engineering and autism?. Autism. 1 (1), pp.101-109.

Booth, J. (2016) Autism equality in the workplace: Removing barriers and challenging discrimination. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Chapman, R. (2020) Defining neurodiversity for research and practice. In Chapman, R., ed. (2020) Neurodiversity Studies. London: Routledge, pp. 218-220. 

Chapman, R. and Bovell, V. (2022) Neurodiversity, advocacy, anti-therapy. In Matson, J. and Sturmey, P. (2022) Handbook of Autism and Pervasive Developmental Disorder. Springer, Cham, pp. 1519-1536. 

Costello, E., Kilbride, S., Milne, Z., Clarke, P., Yilmaz, M. and MacMahon, S.T. (2021) September. A Professional Career with Autism: Findings from a Literature Review in the Software Engineering Domain. In European Conference on Software Process Improvement. Springer, Cham.

De Vos, A., Van der Heijden, B. I. J. M. and Akkermans, J. (2020). Sustainable careers: Towards a conceptual model. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 117: 103196, pp. 1-13.

Den Houting, J. (2019). Neurodiversity: An insider’s perspective. Autism. 23 (2), pp. 271-273.

Doyle, N. and McDowall, A. (2021) Diamond in the rough? An “empty review” of research into “neurodiversity” and a road map for developing the inclusion agenda. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal. 41 (3), pp.352-382.

Engineering Council (2022) Neurodiversity Celebration Week. Available from: Engineering Council (engc.org.uk) [Accessed 4 January 2023]. 

Hall, D. T. and Las Heras, M. (2010) Reintegrating job design and career theory: Creating not just good jobs but smart jobs. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 31, pp. 448–462.

Johnson T, D. and Joshi, A. (2016) Dark clouds or silver linings? A stigma threat perspective on the implications of an autism diagnosis for workplace well-being. Journal of Applied Psychology. 101 (3), pp. 430–449.

Kapp, S.K., Steward, R., Crane, L., Elliott, D., Elphick, C., Pellicano, E. and Russell, G. (2019) People should be allowed to do what they like:  Autistic adults’ views and experiences of stimming. Autism. 23 (7), pp.1782-1792.

Kirby, A. and Smith, T. (2021) Neurodiversity at work: Drive innovation, performance and productivity with a neurodiverse workforce. London: Kogan Page Publishers.

Lazazzara, A., Tims, M. and de Gennara, D. (2020) The process of reinventing a job: A meta–synthesis of qualitative job crafting research. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 116: 103267, pp.1-18.

Loiacono, E.T. and Ren, H. (2018) Building a Neurodiverse High-tech Workforce. MIS Quarterly Executive. 17 (4),  pp.263-279.

Norris, J. E., Crane, L. and Maras, K. (2020) Interviewing autistic adults: Adaptations to support recall in police, employment, and healthcare interviews. Autism. 24 (6), pp. 1506–1520.

Patton, E. (2019) Autism, attributions and accommodations: Overcoming barriers and integrating a neurodiverse workforce. Personnel Review. 48 (4), pp.915-934.

Priscott, T. and Allen, R.A. (2021) Human capital neurodiversity: an examination of stereotype threat anticipation. Employee Relations: The International Journal. 43 (5), pp. 1067-1082.

Saleh, M.C., Chang, H.Y., Bruyère, S.M. and Vogus, T.J. (2022) Employment Selection Methods and Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder. In: Bruyère, S.M. and Colella, A. eds., (2022) Neurodiversity in the Workplace: Interests, Issues, and Opportunities. New York: Routledge.

Sheppard, E., Pillai, D., Wong, G.T.L., Ropar, D. and Mitchell, P. (2016) How easy is it to read the minds of people with autism spectrum disorder?. Journal of autism and developmental disorders. 46 (4), pp.1247-1254.

Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001) Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as active crafters of their work. The Academy of Management Review. 26 (2), pp. 179–201.

Researching equality, diversity, and inclusion in Italy: why are transsexual individuals not included in the ‘equality debate’?

Author ripleywk | Posted on

Please note, this article discusses topics of suicide and discrimination and may be distressing or triggering for some. Links for support on topics that are discussed in this article can be found at the bottom of this page.

Sara Fanti

As an international PhD student researching pay gaps, gender, and sexual orientation in the context of my native country – Italy, I read a number of Italian newspaper articles to keep up with the latest business world news as well as current events in general. One article, in particular, caught my attention. This article left me baffled and in deep grief for my country, my community, and humanity: The suicide story of a transgender woman.

The story of Cloe Bianco

A single tree with a rope swing sits on a pink field with a baby blue sky, giving connotations of the trans pride flag.

Cloe Bianco was a high school teacher at the “Scarpa-Mattei” Agricultural School in San Donà di Piave (VE), Italy. In 2015 Cloe decided to ‘come out’ as a transgender woman to the school where she had worked for years. Specifically, to come out to her students, finally living her life as the person she had always felt she was “since she was 5 years old” (La Stampa, 2022). On the morning of 27th of November, Cloe walked into her classroom and introduced herself with her new name, asking her students to refer to her using the correct pronouns she/her. Unfortunately, Cloe’s courage to be herself did not sit well with some of the parents of her students, who promptly e-mailed the regional alderman for the Ministry of Education to complain about what had happened. This resulted in Cloe receiving a disciplinary sanction resulting in a three-day suspension, followed by a demotion to administrative roles in a back office of the school where she was permanently employed, and subsequentially any other schools in her Region (i.e. Veneto) where she tried to work as teacher (Open, 2022)[1].

On the 11th of June 2022, the remains of Cloe’s body were found in a torched campervan where she had been living in isolation for seven months. The investigation that followed uncovered a suicide letter left in her blog. The verdict: Cloe died of suicide at the age of 50, after she had been actively prevented from fulfilling her fundamental Constitutional right and duty to work (Art. 4 of the Italian Constitution).

Cloe’s story is just one of the many where active discrimination in the workplace undermines the lives of Italian LGBT+ people every single day. Whilst most western countries focus, more or less effectively; on developing inclusivity within the labour market, Italy falls far behind.

Even failing to legislate basic, protective laws against discrimination for gay, bisexual, transgender or non-binary people.

So, my question, as an extremely frustrated Italian academic is this.

Why, in Italy, is it so easy to ruin the life of somebody who works in the public sector by explicitly discriminating against them and get away with it?

To answer this question, it is first important to understand the influence of culture on the debate around gender vs. assigned-at-birth sex, and how this ultimately results in the lack of interest when including sexual and gender-based minorities in the equality, diversity, and inclusion debate.

Gender vs. Sex

The debate of gender and gender identities is not new in literature. Nonetheless, the definition of ‘What is gender’ is still very relevant and in a constant flux of redefinition and negotiation. A simple definition accepted by LGBT+ literature is that gender refers to the psychological sense of self, it relates to how someone deeply and truly feels on the inside and that this is based on their individual understanding of genders. Anatomical sex (or assigned-at-birth sex) is typically assigned at birth based on biological and physical characteristics such as chromosomes, hormones, genitals, body hair etc.

Queer theorists define gender as the result of power performances, negotiated within societies which are influenced by culture and the historical period (Foucault, 1981; Butler, 1990, 1993; Harding, 1998) It is performed in every moment and aspect of individuals’ lives throughout external appearance – gestures, language, clothes – prior to any choice of gender identity (Butler, 1990). Soon-to-be-parents are told what sex the baby will be, and while raising them, project their own socially learnt bias of gender. These include a series of norms on how to behave, how to dress, how to express emotions and, how to care for others, which differ depending on the assigned-at-birth sex.

The biological sex assigned at birth, plays a pivotal role in the societal expectations placed upon an individual. These expectations are dependent on whether they are born with female or male characteristics and can begin to form before they are even born. Gender identity however, develops within an individual’s sense of self and defines what an individual believe about themselves and who they are. Sometimes, this might not coincide with the anatomical or biological sex. Transgender, transsexual, gender-queer (GQ), gender-fluid, non-binary are all terms that are used to describe people whose gender identity does not align with their anatomical or biological sex (Stonewall, 2020).

“Gender identity develops within an individual’s sense of self and defines what an individual believe about themselves and who they are…”

Nevertheless, this definition of gender is often refused by institutions of conservative countries such as Italy, where an essentialist idea of sexuality is still very predominant. Within a gender essentialist paradigm every person is believed to be born with a male or female “essence” which is determined by the biological sex assigned at birth (Gagnon & Parker, 1995). Femininity and masculinity are, therefore, understood as a natural contraposition of sexes that is at the essence of sexuality regardless the culture and historical time, is defined by biology and chromosomes, and is carried within it a definite set of personality traits. The first gentle and maternal, and the other aggressive and strong (Segal, 1994).

Essentialist standpoints are often used to rationalise gender-based biases and heterosexist or transphobic discourses. For example, to justify the gender segregation of the labour market, gender pay gaps, and to withhold legislation in support of LGBT+ rights. Gender essentialists’ standpoints are clearly taken in the Italian political debate and supported by the Catholic Church which deeply influence political choices and welfare measures in Italy in a clientelist relationship.

When inclusivity is not even in the picture

A slate-grey city scape immersed in fog, displaying a foreboding scene

The first attempt to give a definition of gender as opposed to anatomical sex has been introduced in the proposal of the so-called DDL Zan (Disegno Di Legge, tr. Law Draft). Drafted in 2019, by Alessandro Zan, a member of the Chamber of Deputies and leading member of the gay association Arcigay. The DDL Zan (Senato della Repubblica, 2020) included a total of ten articles. Five of which suggest modifications to existent articles in the penal code giving aggravating circumstances for crimes against gay, bisexual, transexual, disabled people, and women. This law draft provides a definition for biological sex, gender, sexual orientation, and gender identity; it defines the line between the right to freely express an opinion as opposed to hate speech against sexual minorities and women; it proposes a national awareness day against homophobia, bi-phobia, and trans-phobia; and, finally, it proposes a strategy to collect hate crime data on a national scale and a plan to actively fight against homophobia, transphobia, and gender discrimination.

The opposition to this law was strongly supported by far-right parties – i.e., La Lega, Fratelli D’Italia (FdI), Il Popolo della Famiglia etc. – as well as the Catholic Church and pro-life associations. The main point of debate was precisely the Article 1 which provides a definition of gender and anatomical sex as two distinct concepts as outlined above. The opposition would have been willing to vote in approval of the law only if that definition was cancelled from the draft (La Repubblica, 2021). Terminating Article 1, however, would have further alienated trans people, excluding them from being protected against discrimination and transphobic crimes. Finally, without reaching an agreement, the drafted law was voted out by the Senate of the Republic in April 2021. A new discussion was scheduled in April 2022, but to date (June 2022) nothing has happened.

Conclusions

Cloe’s story is just one of many discrimination cases that end in tragedy. Gay Help Line, the main call centre helpline that provides phone support for LGBT+ people, reported in 2021 a steady increase of calls concerning discrimination such as: discrimination in accessing the labour market, or maintaining a job after coming out (35%); discrimination in accessing private (25%) or public services (22%) such as healthcare or housing; discrimination as customers (18%). It is also reported a 10% increase in calls concerning hate crimes against trans people, especially bullying, stalking, non-consensual sharing of private photos in the workplace (15%), aggressions and threats (19%). Also, 42% of cases concern family abuse, 59% of which are perpetuated by adult family members and 9% by partners; 21% of the cases concern violence perpetuated by strangers. 17% of all calls come from transgender or non-binary people. Gay Help Line also reported that very few people in the LGBT+ community report this type of crimes to the police.

The Italian Constitution proclaims equality and dignity amongst all citizens regardless of their personal or social condition (Art. 3). Sex and sexual orientation discrimination in the workplace and in the hiring, process is illegal under the Article 7 of the Legislative Decree no.165/2001; the Article 15 of Law no. 300/1970; and the Legislative Decree no. 216/2003. However, it appears clear that trans people are not included in the equality debate, and there is close to no interest in providing them the Constitutional right of equality and inclusion in society, let alone in the workplace.

Finally, the newly elected right-wing government, not only has purposely left out any reference to equality, diversity, and inclusion in their election campaign, but has also actively promoted legislations against adoption rights and surrogacy which have been contested by LGBT+ activists as discriminatory and homophobic (BBC, 2022) raising concerns for the future of equal and civil rights in Italy.

[1] To read an English version of the story, please see – https://jane-67706.medium.com/of-suicide-and-transphobia-1b077865b73f

Links for support

LGBT Foundation – Helpline and Email Support

Samaritans | Every life lost to suicide is a tragedy | Here to listen

Mindline Trans+ – Trans+ emotional support helpline

Citations

Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. London and New York: Routledge.

Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of sex. New York, 38.

Foucault, M. (1981). The history of sexuality: An introduction, volume I. Trans. Robert Hurley. New York: Vintage.

Gagnon, J. H., & Parker, R. G. (1995). Conceiving sexuality. Conceiving sexuality: Approaches to sex research in a postmodern world, 3-16.

Gay Help Line. (2021). Report Gay Help Line. [online] Available at: https://gayhelpline.it/report-gay-help-line/.

Harding, J. (1998). Sex acts. Practices of Femininity and Masculinity, London.

L’Unione Sarda English. (2022). Coming out at school, then marginalization: the story of Cloe Bianco, the trans teacher who set herself on fire. [online] Available at: https://www.unionesarda.it/en/italy/coming-out-at-school-then-marginalization-the-story-of-cloe-bianco-the-trans-teacher-who-set-herself-on-fire-a7ttj2qu [Accessed 20 Jun. 2022].

La Repubblica, 2021. DDL Zan, cos’è e cosa prevede, articolo per articolo e il testo integrale. la Repubblica. Available at: https://www.repubblica.it/politica/2021/06/22/news/omofobia_legge_zan_ecco_che_cosa_prevede-307139790/ [Accessed March 15, 2022].

La Stampa. (2022). La storia di Cloe Bianco, la prof transgender che si è data fuoco nel suo camper: ‘Ora sono libera’. La scuola la sospese dopo il coming out. [online] Available at: https://www.lastampa.it/cronaca/2022/06/14/news/la_storia_di_cloe_bianco_la_prof_transgender_che_si_e_data_fuoco_nel_suo_camper_ora_sono_libera_la_scuola_la_sospese_do-5405846/ [Accessed 20 Jun. 2022].

Open. (2022). Dal coming out a scuola al suicidio, tutta la storia di Cloe Bianco: la prof di fisica uccisa dalla transfobia. [online] Available at: https://www.open.online/2022/06/15/cloe-bianco-transfobia-suicidio-storia/.

Segal, L. (1994). Straight sex: Rethinking the politics of pleasure. Univ of California Press.

Senato della Repubblica , 2020, Misure di prevenzione e contrasto della discriminazione e della violenza per motivi fondati sul sesso, sul genere, sull’orientamento sessuale, sull’identità di genere e sulla disabilità available at: https://www.senato.it/service/PDF/PDFServer/DF/356433.pdf

Senato della repubblica, n.a., Constitution of the Italian Republic retrieved from https://www.senato.it/documenti/repository/istituzione/costituzione_inglese.pdf

Stonewall (2020). List of LGBTQ+ Terms. [online] Stonewall. Available at: https://www.stonewall.org.uk/help-advice/faqs-and-glossary/list-lgbtq-terms.

Kirby, P. (2022) Who is Giorgia Meloni? the rise to power of Italy’s new far-right PM, BBC News. BBC. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63351655

.

The “Necessary evil” of a compliance role for HR: Examining the day-to-day realities of human resources (HR) practice

Author ripleywk | Posted on

Dr Helen Mortimore and Dr Catherine Mackintosh

The problem for HR practitioners

When was the last time you heard somebody praise their HR department: “oh, they’re so helpful” or “they’re great at what they do”? HR professionals battle for credibility in organisations and struggle to convince others of their contribution. Many organisational members probably do not really know or have any interest in knowing what HR practitioners actually do on a day-to-day basis, never mind understand what doing it “well” might look like. Even more challenging for HR professionals though, is this lack of understanding and interest in the realities of HR practice is arguably just as true of many of the academics who study it.

The current narrative of most HR academics, practitioners, and the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) emphasises the value of HR professionals as business partners to line managers who carry out devolved people management activity (e.g., Guest, 1987; Ulrich, 1997). In other words, it is suggested that to be strategic, HR practitioners should advise but not intervene with line managers who “do” people management. This idea of the “devolution” of HR management (HRM) is broadly accepted (Purcell & Hutchinson, 2007) but, nevertheless, is problematic for practitioners. It creates a tension where they are required to relinquish power to line managers but the accountability for HR outcomes remains with them (Sheehan et al., 2014). Current research tends to under-play and under-examine the influence of national regulation on HR practice (Gilbert et al., 2015). In the UK, where our research was undertaken, this means there is not sufficient consideration of how protective employment law, such as the Equality Act (2010), influence the work of HR professionals. In the UK, tribunals are the enforcement option for handling employment rights and HR practitioners are tasked by their organisations with managing legal risk and avoiding claims. However, this aspect of HR practice is near impossible to fulfil if HR professionals fully embrace the logic of devolution. Instead, the regulatory context creates an “interventionary” compliance role for HR, yet the HRM narrative that promotes devolution delegitimises such activity and may leave HR practitioners reluctant to promote this element of their role.

Our research

To gain insight into how HR professionals understand and navigate this tension between devolving people management activity to line managers, and the need to ensure compliance with national regulation, in our study we focused on talking to HR practitioners about what they actually do day-to-day (rather than what HR work “ought” to be). Our findings indicate that HR practitioners frame their role as both advisory and interventionary: they take an advisory, non-interventionary role when line managers’ decision-making is within a ‘safe zone’ but intervene when line managers risk provoking a tribunal claim. Both HR and line managers, from the perspective of the HR professionals, accept the need and value of this compliance role, seeing it as a “necessary evil” to protect the organisation.

Our findings highlight the strategies HR practitioners use to encourage compliant behaviour from line managers. At times, HR practitioners need to involve and garner support from those higher up the organisational hierarchy (e.g., the senior management team) in order to compel line manager action. As such, our data reveals that even in scenarios where a HR practitioner does not have the power to dictate line manager decision making (e.g., because HR lacks status within the organisation or the individual practitioner is more junior) they still have methods of moving between an advisory and interventionary approach to working with their stakeholders. When they consider it necessary to intervene, HR practitioners will also highlight the risk of tribunal claims and/or procure specialist legal advice to persuade line managers to adopt a specific course of action. This evidences how line managers can be unwilling to accept the recommendations of HR practitioners without the reinforcement of external legal advice, and therefore the challenges HR professionals face in establishing credibility with organisational actors. Importantly, while HR practitioners have strategies for overcoming these challenges and to influence line manager behaviour, these tactics do not necessarily resolve their struggles for status.

Despite HR practitioners use of employment lawyers to persuade and appease line managers, they do not simply regurgitate the third-party advice they have sourced. Our findings also demonstrate how HR professionals add value through their own balancing of the legal position and the specific needs and context of their organisation (e.g., taking into account the employer’s management of previous similar cases). However, HR professionals will not necessarily disclose this value adding activity to line managers as it may undermine the force and influence of obtaining the third-party advice. As such, aspects of HR’s compliance role, the skills and knowledge that they use to support positive outcomes for organisations, can go unseen and undervalued.

So what?

Based on the findings of our study, we propose that the value of and craft involved in HR’s compliance role has been downplayed by academics and the profession. We bring into question the nature of HR business partnering in organisations by highlighting that in their day-to-day working lives practitioners move between interventionary or advisory approaches to working with managers. We therefore suggest that intervention is not incommensurate with a HR Business Partner role but can be an essential element of it, and a component of effective HRM. Consequently, we call for researchers and the CIPD to acknowledge the need for and value of HR’s regulatory and compliance responsibilities in support of HR departments and professionals more clearly demonstrating their contribution to organisations.

If you are interested in this research and would like to know more, please contact: helen.mortimore@uwe.ac.uk or catherine.mackintosh@uwe.ac.uk

Building Organizational Resilience in small and medium enterprises (SMEs): The role of high performance work systems

Author jyotishaw | Posted on

This guest blog is written by Dr Tinkuma Edafioghor, Senior Lecturer Human Resource Management – Programme Leader Msc HRM. This research was completed in collaboration with colleagues from Leeds University Business School and York Management School.

Organizational resilience capability, or a firm’s ability “to cope with unanticipated dangers as they become manifest” (Wildavsky, 1988, p.70), has emerged as an important internal capability that organizations need to develop if they are to survive and succeed in turbulent business environment (Hillman & Guenther, 2020; Linnenluecke, 2017). Some scholars propose that HRM is critical to building organizational resilience (Carvalho & Areal, 2016; Lengnick-Hall, Beck, & Lengnick-Hall, 2011). Supporting this notion, empirical research, based mainly on case studies, has shown that HR practices such as job security and employment relations (Gittell, Cameron, Lim, & Rivas, 2006), and staffing level (Meyer, 1982) can contribute to organizational resilience.  

Despite these efforts, there are two important limitations in the existing literature. First, prior research has predominantly used restropective case analysis revealing how resilience unfolds in specific events or organizational contexts to identify influential factors. While these findings are informative, the overreliance of the case study approach has resulted in a collection of potentially impactful HR practices that are context specific and therefore limited in their generalizability to other contexts or future events (Linnenluecke, 2017). Moreover, such an approach does not lend well to a systematic HRM approach for organizational resilience capabilities that has long been proposed by scholars (Lengnick-Hall et al., 2011).

Second, studies examining organizational resilience capabilities in SMEs have been rare, and even fewer have been done to understand how HRM contributes to organizational resilience capability. Although much research has shown that the systematic HRM approach in SMEs can contribute to desirable organizational outcomes such as firm performance (Patel & Conklin, 2012; Patel, Messersmith, & Lepak, 2013; Sheehan, 2014) and innovation (Shahzad, Arenius, Muller, Rasheed, & Bajwa, 2019), there is a lack of development of a comprehensive understanding of how HRM systems can accumulate relevant resources for organizational resilience, resulting in optimal performance in the SME context.  This is a surprising omission as relative to large organizations, SMEs are more prone to disruptive and challenging situations (e.g., Aleksic, Stefanovic, Arsovski, & Tadic, 2013; Allas et al., 2021). Also, SMEs, having relatively less employees, rely more on HRM practices to develop a unique and innovative knowledge pool that gives them a sustainable competitive advantage (Patel & Conklin, 2012).

Therefore, we were interested in examining how high-performance work systems (HPWS) build organizational resilience by developing relevant human capital in the SME context. To achieve this objective, our study clarifies the conceptual confusion regarding organizational resilience in the existing literature and provides empirical evidence for two distinct forms of organizational resilience capabilities: ‘bounce-back’ and ‘bounce-forward’ resilience capabilities. Bounce-back resilience refers to an organization’s capability to recover and resume normal operations after disruptive events while bounce-forward resilience can be defined as an organization’s capability to learn and develop new strategies or organizational operations through disruptive events.

Our study deviates from currently existing research which only focuses upon identifying individual HRM practices in specific situations and demonstrates how HRM can systematically impact different aspects of human capital (human capital value and heterogeneity) contributing to organizational resilience and firm performance. Human capital value refers to a combination of employee knowledge, skills, ability and others (KSAOs) that has “potential to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the firm, exploit market opportunities, and /or neutralize potential threats” (Lepak & Snell, 2002, p. 519), whereas human capital heterogeneity refers to the variety of or differences in the composition of employees’ KSAOs that offer potential alternatives and skill flexibility for business needs (Way et al., 2015; Wright and Snell, 1998). Hence, different from extant research which only focuses on the relationship between HPWS and human capital in general, our study distinguishes between human capital value and heterogeneity, and examine them as two resource pathways through which HPWS build bounce-back and bounce-forward resilience capabilities.

Our findings suggest that HPWS can build SME’s bounce-back resilience capability through cultivating human capital value and build bounce-forward resilience capability through accumulating human capital value and heterogeneity. In turn, bounce-forward resilience contributes to firm performance. This suggests that HPWS can be an effective management approach to promote SME’s preparedness and resilience for unexpected crises in the future.  Meanwhile, given the different antecedents and consequences of bounce-back and bounce-forward resilience capabilities uncovered in our study, SMEs and their managers can use the distinction between these two types of resilience capabilities to diagnose their current resilience capability levels and develop interventions accordingly.   

Also, if SME managers feel that their companies are not effective in recovering from disruptions or are weak in building new capabilities from the disruptions, they can assess the levels of human capital value and heterogeneity in the company respectively. If the analysis suggests that employees’ KSAO do not meet the needs of the current business strategy, the managers can adjust relevant HPWS components such as recruitment, training and development, and performance appraisal, to purposefully enhance the specific, required knowledge and skills among employees.  However, if the analysis indicates that the problem is with human capital heterogeneity, i.e., a lack of variety and flexibility in employees’ knowledge and skills, which hinders organizational learning, knowledge creation, and creativity, the managers can modify some other relevant HPWS components such as empowerment, team working and reward policies for innovation.  Following this logic, SMEs can target relevant HR practices to improve their bounce-back and bounce-forward resilience capability. 

For further information please contact: tinkuma.edafioghor@uwe.ac.uk

What do we want? Equal Pay! When do we want it? 1970!

Author jyotishaw | Posted on

This blog post was written by Hazel Conley, Professor of Human Resource Management in the Faculty of Business and Law.

Both Karl Marx and President Obama, although one rather more diplomatically than the other, noted that social progress can be measured by the way societies treat women and girls. That observation is as prescient today as it was in the 19th Century.  Some of our sisters are still fighting for even basic human rights and it wasn’t that long ago, 51 years to be precise, that working women in the UK were not deemed worthy of the same rates of payment, regardless of their level of skill, as even the most unskilled man.  The idea of having a skilled male rate, a semi-skilled male rate, an unskilled male rate, a significantly lower woman’s rate, and although never formally acknowledged, the probability of an even lower Black woman’s rate, seems shocking now, but how far removed from the actuality of that are most organisations in 2021? 

An interdisciplinary AHRC funded research project that I am working on with colleagues at UWE, Edinburgh University and UCL tracks the progress made towards women’s formal equality in the UK by examining the history of the equality legislation and the struggles fought by women to achieve it.  My main role in the project is to lead the part of the research that examines equal pay and, more latterly, the gender pay gap.  The starting point of this research is to examine the activism and events that led to the Equal Pay Act in 1970 and the continued efforts to make the law workable in the face of immense structural and attitudinal barriers to its effectiveness.

The research is proving to be fascinating in so many ways.  As part of the research, I have been reading the Castle Diaries, the political autobiography of Baroness Barbara Castle, the Labour Party Politician who oversaw the passing of the Equal Pay Act 1970.  Growing up in a working-class family active in trade unionism of the 1960s and 70s, it is a period in history that I still remember but, politically, it seems almost like reading science fiction. Thinking about a trade union movement with a powerful ‘seat at the table’ feels like another lifetime, but what was clear then and has continued to weave in and out of the history of equal pay, is the tension between collective bargaining and women’s pay equality. The tension is rooted in a conceptualisation of equal pay as a cost: an inflationary cost to the government of the 1960s and 70s, a cost in terms of the public sector pay bill for past and present governments, a cost to men’s wages for trade unions and the cost to private sector employers in the form of a drain on profits.  Of course, we are now very familiar with ‘business case’ arguments for equality but it still feels unconscionable to think that equal pay for women should ever be reduced to a cost-benefit analysis. Pay equality on the basis of sex is a human right but still we have thousands of women fighting equal pay cases and a national gender pay gap of 15.5%, much the same as the Ford Dagenham women had in their now famous dispute in 1968.  We might, therefore, ask just how far the social progress dial has moved in 51 years.

Unpacking the history of equal pay has undoubtedly confirmed that governments and employers will go to extraordinary lengths to limit the financial impact of anything approaching women’s pay equality. Trade unions have held a more ambivalent position, at times championing equal pay and at others being part of the problem rather than the solution.  Looking in detail at the job evaluation scheme that relegated the Ford Dagenham women to 85% of the unskilled male rate is a classic example of how women were repeatedly hoodwinked and, quite frankly, bullied into accepting a lower rate for their work than they knew they were worth.  At the start of their dispute the Ford women were angered by the grade they had been given following the job evaluation and may not have immediately recognised their sense of injustice as an equal pay dispute.  At that time only middle-class women working in the civil service and teaching had nominally been granted equal pay, so why would women factory workers think, in 1968, that they should have equal pay with men when government, trade unions and employers alike told them that they were the bottom of the pile when it came to a share of the immense profits being made by the Ford Motor Company. Having said that, one of the trade unions involved, although it must be said rather instrumentally, raised the idea that the disparity was one of equal pay rather than simply a grading dispute.  Regardless of arguments about whether the Ford women had class or feminist consciousness, the historical data point to the dispute being as much about equal pay as fair pay.

The next phase of our research will take us into the years following the implementation of the Equal Pay Act in 1975 when many of the overt cases of gendered pay discrimination had either been resolved or obscured to make it less evident, hiding in the crevices of inadequate legislation.  The number of equal pay disputes began to decline in this period, not only as a result of the Equal Pay legislation but also because labour law during the Thatcher period and beyond made it increasingly difficult to take industrial action of any sort.  Our early findings tentatively suggest that this may have had a particular impact on women’s collective disputes for equal pay and may have been one of a number of factors in the growing use of the equal pay legislation and case law from the mid-1980s onwards that has come to characterise women’s struggle for equal pay in the UK.

Back to top

Follow this blog

Get every new post delivered right to your inbox.