August EWJ 24 - Flipbook - Page 48
Post your DEI promotion, what was your turnover
rate of X candidates compared to other candidates?
(This is another killer. If people are pushed into jobs
that they are not capable of handling, they are likely to
bail. It will not help them individually).
What I am interested in are the published – and
unpublished statistics – numbers, gradings and pay.
Recruitment, promotion, regular pay increases and
bonuses, and dismissals – any of these will tell a story.
Expect to have to explain changes between pre and
post DEI implementation.
Finally – promotions. How did your DEI policy
change who got promoted?
The killer question. If you say it didn’t, you immediately get the question as to why you introduced it.
On the other hand, had you championed professional diversity, you might have made the following
statement…
Note, if you once say – “We practiced positive action,
not positive discrimination” – you will get a frosty
“That is for the Tribunal to decide”.
Our organisation, (Name), is focussed on merit. We
define merit as the combination of ability and application. We will employ, promote, reward and (sometimes, unfortunately) release staff based on merit
alone. We strongly believe that merit is evenly distributed over all people, including those with one or
more Protected Characteristics under the Equality Act
2010 (see below). We will not countenance quotas in
any areas, but will seek to recruit staff based on the
widest possible area practical, and commit to facilitating the alleviation of the weaknesses of those whose
strengths we value.
Note that all of the above questions took me about
THREE MINUTES to ask. Allowing a generous
amount of time for responses – say three times that
amount - will take up, in all, about 12 minutes. You
may be examined for 20 minutes, half an hour – or
more…. One examination in a recent ET was 4 ½
hours…
To support the allegations, you may have been
required to disclose enough information to the
Claimant – eg – from an actual ET case:
Where would you rather be?
Disclosure of Candidate Material to
the Claimant and Orders to Protect
Confidentiality
Want to contribute?
Subject to the orders below, by 1 July 2023 the First
Respondent is ordered by consent to disclose the
following to the Claimant:
Please send your paper or article
to, admin@expertwitness.co.uk
(i) the application forms
(ii) the forms completed by the candidate’s independent assessors
is an
independent firm of actuarial consultants
with considerable expertise in derivatives
and pensions. Our excellent actuarial and
consultancy is complemented by our
cutting-edge software and technical
support.
Windsor Actuarial Consultants
(iii) the forms completed by the relevant sift panel
members, namely xxx and yyy and any notes they
may have made in respect of the 20 candidates who
were assessed by the sift panel
We are an owner-managed business.
In relation to the 66 candidates who were assessed by
the sift panel made up of xxx and yyy, the First Respondent is ordered by consent to provide the following information on an anonymised basis, providing it
is possible to ascertain it from their application forms
and /or referee forms:
Our consultants are both major stakeholders in the firm and qualified actuaries.
They can provide the advice our clients
need and they also have a vested interest
in ensuring that they get the best service
possible.
The level of personal commitment from us
could not be higher.
(i) whether the candidate was a barrister or solicitor;
Our clients include interest rate swap
victims of all sizes, trustees and sponsors
of pension schemes, financial advisers,
solicitors and individuals.
(ii) whether the candidate was a QC at the time of their
application;
(iii) whether the candidate was a partner in a magic
circle law firm;
(iv) whether the candidate had previous judicial
experience and what this was;
Suite 46, Albert Buildings
49 Queen Victoria Street
(v) in the case of any solicitors, whether their application reveals experience of advocacy.
London
EC4 4SA
Work undertaken worldwide
Details can be provided on request.
Tel: 020 7653 1908
Where you promote an undefined concept as a benefit in an employment scenario expect trouble – DIE
appears to be an example of collective cognitive dissonance – it has neve been reified, but its advocates do
not let that stop the “hard sell”.
EXPERT WITNESS JOURNAL
DX 98948 CHEAPSIDE 2
Fax: 0207 681 2778
mail@windsorac.com
www.windsorac.com
46
Peter Crowley, established Windsor
Actuarial Consultants in 2005, combines
a wide experience of financial products
and pensions with a speciality for
explaining the concepts in plain English.
Peter also advises solicitors and other
professionals on the individual aspects of
pensions in divorce, compensation on
the loss of pension rights, pensions
mis-selling and reversions. He has
produced a substantial number of reports
on this subject,involving cases of varying
complexity, and including overseas
pensions
Windsor Actuarial Consultants are
sponsors of Chessboxing Nation
www.chessboxingnation.com
AUGUST 2024
