Do you believe that a workplace culture rooted in dignity and respect is the cornerstone of organisational success? In today's rapidly evolving world, nurturing an environment that fosters dignity and respect has never been more crucial. It not only empowers employees but also drives productivity, engagement, and innovation.

Julie Holmes, Knowledge Partner at Legal Island and Caroline Reidy, MD of The HR Suite explore the transformative power of fostering a positive and inclusive work environment and how you can create a culture that uplifts employees, empowers teams, and fosters a sense of belonging.

Here are some key points explored:

• What strategies promote fairness, empathy, and equality across all levels of your organisation?
• How does respect foster collaboration, building strong relationships, and enhance productivity?
• What are the best practices for attracting, retaining, and developing a diverse talent pool?

Gain actionable insights on how to establish a respectful workplace culture that inspires individuals to reach their full potential.

An organisation built on dignity and respect is not just a workplace; it's a community where individuals thrive and organisations flourish. Together, let's redefine workplace culture!

Recording:

Transcript:

Julie:  Good morning, everyone. Welcome to our webinar, "Dignity, Equality, and Why? Key Points for Organisations to Consider". My name is Julie Holmes and I work in the Knowledge Team at Legal-Island. And today's guest, we have Caroline Reidy, managing director of the HR Suite. Morning, Caroline.

Caroline:  Morning, Julie. Delighted to be with you all this morning.

Julie:  That's great. Thank you. And thanks as well to everyone for deciding to spend some time with us. Thanks as well to MCS Group, who sponsor all of Legal-Island's webinars and podcasts. MCS help people find careers that match their skill sets perfectly. They also help support employers to build high-performing businesses by connecting them with the most talented candidates in the marketplace. And if you're interested in finding out more about how MCS can help you, then head to www.mcsgroup.jobs.

So, I'm going to tell you a little bit about Caroline, if this is your first time attending. Caroline is a past member of the Low Pay Commission and also an adjudicator in the Workplace Relations Commission. She is CIPD-accredited, as well as being a trained mediator. And she has worked across various areas of HR for over 20 years prior to setting up The HR Suite in 2009.

So, Caroline, you're also speaking at our Annual Review of Employment Law in Dublin on 29 November, and we're delighted to have you speaking for us at that.

Caroline:  Really looking forward to it, Julie. And I think you've picked a really good topic for me as well because it's an area that we're finding is coming up an awful lot for clients, the area of domestic violence and what they can do proactively in their organisations to support people and maybe raise awareness, etc.

Julie:  Thank you. It is a very important topic and, again, about how you sensitively deal with it. Caroline, you're just the woman to talk about it for us, so thank you very much for that.

So, if you are interested in finding out a little bit more about the conference, then you can visit our website and look at our Events page and you'll get some more details.

So, that's way in November. What we're going to do today is talk about dignity, equality, and why, and key points that you should consider.

In today's rapidly evolving world, we need to ensure that we have a nurturing environment that fosters dignity and respect, and that's more crucial than ever. It not only empowers employees, but also drives productivity, engagement, and innovation.

So, just to let you know, there are no slides for Caroline's presentation, but we'll have the recording available for you shortly.

If you have any questions for Caroline, please pop them into the question box and we'll do our best to answer as many as we can at the end of the session.

So, thanks very much, and I'm going to hand over to Caroline now.

Caroline:  Thanks, Julie. And good morning, everybody. Delighted to see so many of you join us live. Obviously, for those of you that couldn't make it, you have an opportunity to listen back later, which is great.

The topic today is "Dignity, Equality and Why?" I'm going to start, I suppose, with the why, and then I'm going to talk to you about the different strategies clients of ours and other clients have been working on to really make themselves really walk the talk in this area.

I suppose as an organisation, the why for me is organisations join because of the employer brand, but then we have a big responsibility as organisations to live up to the brand people think they're joining.

And for a lot of organisations, that's proving to be a huge challenge because getting all our employees to really buy into and make sure that they walk the talk around the area of dignity and equality is something that we're finding more and more media and case law reflecting poor practices that I suppose we're calling out.

And today is very much about taking the learnings from those organisations and identifying a strategy for ourselves to say, "What are the key priorities that we need to focus on and make sure that the organisation is in a very proactive place around the area of dignity and equality?"

We've specifically chosen dignity and equality, but they're quite broad areas, as you know. And for most, inclusivity is another add-on to that strategy. But maybe let's go back to the very basics of the why.

So, firstly, we have a legal obligation, and that's the key starting point always. So, under the dignity and respect, which normally covers bullying, harassment, and sexual harassment to start with, we have an obligation to ensure we provide a safe place of work for all our employees that's free from bullying, harassment, and sexual harassment.

I suppose the starting point for me is to make sure that we have a policy that everybody knows about and everybody is aware of. And it's a layman's easy-to-understand policy that clearly calls out what is acceptable and what is unacceptable behaviour so there is no ambiguity.

Time and time again, people come to us and an allegation has been made against them. They were at a work barbecue, for example, during the summer or a Christmas party and something inappropriate happens at the event. And time and time again, the employees come and say, "I didn't realise that something that happened outside of work would impact me in work".

So, again, for me, that policy and that complementary training . . . which for me is a must. It's not an optional extra. And I really think it's important for organisations to consider tailoring the training to suit their specific requirements and their specific scenarios.

We've just completed a global programme with Primark where we did a rollout for all of the key global leaders in Primark globally and again in their management team in Ireland to ensure that everybody is clear in relation to their obligations and the consistency of approach.

And I thought it was a really great best practice example by them to show that they've not just selected their Irish leaders because they know that the global leaders engage with the Irish leaders and the standards we have of European employment law and standards of best practice are really high.

I was doing training yesterday as well for an Irish organisation that has a global and American presence. They, again, had the American leaders join the training. And when I was doing the takeaways at the end, one of the most senior American leaders said, "Oh my goodness, there's such a difference between your standard in Ireland and what America expects".

So, again, I suppose it's that proactive approach to make sure that we're setting a really high standard for all the stakeholders. And for me, we need to make sure that we set out our stall from the start, that everybody is clear on what it is that is acceptable, what is not acceptable, and there's no ambiguity.

And that's why, for me, the policy is a great starting point, but the complementary training for me is the most. Remember, in line with the Health and Safety and Welfare at Work Act is that vicarious liability. Vicarious liability means we need to show we've done all we can to prevent.

In a lot of organisations, when an allegation is raised . . . And we recently had a client issue where somebody was using bad language and somebody raised an issue. The first thing was when did the manager spot the person saying bad language first and was it not addressed as part of that?

And it was a case of, "Well, look, that person, that's just the way they are". Obviously, we know that's not an organisational defence. We need to set the standard through our policy and through our training, but then our managers need to enforce, and our staff and team and colleagues need to all ensure that the standard of behaviour is what is acceptable.

So, the standard we set is the standard we get. And we need to make sure that that culture police, in a very healthy, positive way, calls out or speaks up and feels they can very early and nips issues in the bud if something is inappropriate. We can't underestimate that speak-up.

I would be remiss not to mention the McDonald's allegations that are in our media at the moment. Obviously, there's been a big investigation done by BBC in Northern Ireland and in the UK where a lot of allegations of bullying, harassment, and sexual harassment have come to light.

And in Ireland, we had the very serious case where an employee at a Christmas event was raped and the person involved got a seven-year sentence last week.

So, again, we heard the CEO speak out to say they're going to not alone investigate, even though it was 10 years ago when that incident occurred, because the person, in this case, said that when she returned to work the next day and for weeks afterwards, she was ridiculed and there were jokes about her rape and everybody knew that it had happened.

So, again, the key learning for us in that, I suppose, misfortunate situation is to make sure that culture of speak-up and that culture of understanding of what's okay, what's not okay, and also making sure that the colleagues in that regard, their behaviour . . . Obviously, what happened in the incident is apparent, but what happened thereafter really, from a cultural point of view, is hugely disappointing.

So, again, we are very much taking the learnings of good policy, making sure we've got really good training, training for our managers, and training for our team, and making sure you consider the full wider team.

As I say, ideally that's tailored to suit your organisation, because by doing so, you can give specific examples, you can call out your values, etc., which means that it's a more easily remembered training course for employees.

It goes without saying it should be part of our induction, but for me, it should also be a refresher training that should be done annually with your team, again, to meet that vicarious liability that's a very high bar.

I suppose the next key why, for me, is in organisations now, we know that we have a diverse talent pool and we know that that makes the magic in terms of talent and capability and making sure we've got diversity of thinking, etc. But in an organisation where that's not respected or that's not appreciated, etc., then in turn, those people will go and look for a job elsewhere.

We've also seen an awful lot of case law where inappropriate jokes and inappropriate comments have been made and have been resulting in cases to the WRC and to the Labour Court. So, again, from a branding point of view for any organisation, the last thing they want is for that type of behaviour.

We saw very high-profile cases, one being the Red Cow Hotel, where a manager called a fellow employee "Chico" after a few days being there and the employee asked him to stop and he said, "I call everybody that". And again, obviously not an acceptable defence.

We also had the very, again, high-profile case where a person ordered a coffee. The employee couldn't understand her name and spell it. So, instead, he drew a picture with slanty eyes. And again, very unacceptable behaviour. But again, making sure the employee is aware of the consequence of that. I think that's the key starting point for us in all of this.

The other key element is we've just celebrated Pride Month. We've seen how much organisations have backed and got behind celebrating the fact that everybody needs to be their own self at work. And now we're branching into celebrating neurodiversity, and doing a lot more around other elements of diversity and inclusion to really, I suppose, ensure the organisation is fit for purpose.

And if we think about neurodiversity or we think about any of the equality elements, we need to start and do an audit of our HR processes from when we advertise a job all the way through to when somebody is working in the organisation and how we support them to identify what additional things we can do to facilitate people to maximise their potential right throughout the HR processes.

And again, a very worthwhile exercise as we're working with organisations identifying what they need to prioritise in their dignity, respect, diversity, and inclusion strategy, we always start by saying, "Do an HR audit of your HR processes to start identify areas for opportunity".

So, for example, for some people, the way they work, they work better with earphones. For example, they find that it takes away the background noise. And again, that's something that a lot of organisations wouldn't have allowed previously, but can see now the huge benefit to the person who's trying to concentrate and in turn increasing their productivity.

So, I think it's having that open-door approach so that employees can come with suggestions as to how we can maximise their potential and support them, but also doing a really good audit of our HR practices, as I say, starting from when the job is advertised to the recruitment process somebody goes through all the way through.

I was talking to a client yesterday in relation to the screening process that they use. And they were concerned that by using the screening tools that they use currently, maybe it was over-screening. And as a result, a lot of good talent was being missed.

Again, making sure that whatever tools you use . . . And there are lots of aids now around artificial intelligence and systems, etc., that will help, but again, it's making sure that they're conducive to celebrating diversity and inclusion, and also making sure that it meets your requirements all the way through.

Same applies with recruitment, same applies with ability tests, etc. Some people will be better at presentations than others potentially. However, that should only be one ingredient of the assessment process. If the person needs to present, obviously, it'll have more weight. But if they don't, that might be something you need to think about again.

So, again, lots of opportunity for how we manage that whole area to make sure that the objective bias and that whole . . . I suppose making sure it's as best practice as we can is a great opportunity for organisations.

The next key point I want to focus on is if somebody raises an issue, how will we handle it? And one key thing is we should have trained contact persons in place within the organisation, as has been suggested in line with our best practice advice and the codes of practice that have been published.

These contact persons are trained contact persons. We provide training in relation to training people in that regard so that they know if somebody comes to them, what to do. And that contact person is not from HR or is not necessarily from senior management.

But what it means is if somebody experiences an issue in relation to any or all of the areas around dignity, quality, diversity, inclusion, respect, etc., that they can go to somebody and their role is to signpost them and untangle them and help them understand what are the options available to them.

A really good trained contact person who has the art of asking the right questions, because that's key to their role, is going to successfully signpost the person and give them the options available to them and facilitate them to make the decision in terms of what they want to do next.

And again, I mentioned we had a client who had somebody who came to us, and basically the employee said, "But you surely knew what happened", and the manager said, "I had no idea". And she said, "Well, I went to somebody else and surely they told you". Again, it's that confidentiality and stressing to the person how confidentiality would be maintained, which they didn't think it would be. But in fairness to the person, it was, absolutely.

So, again, confidentiality and clarity of communication is really important. And always follow up with the person afterwards in email to make sure that they're clear about what you've discussed and what you've agreed.

Obviously, there's going to be no mentioning of somebody's name when it's at allegation stage to ensure that we are maintaining that confidentiality. But you're making it clear that if, for example, the person says, "I don't want you to do anything about it", we're recording that to make sure that they don't come back at a later stage to say, "Well, Caroline, I thought you would have done something about it because I told you", but they clearly said they didn't want anything done. And always leave the door open for them to come back to at a later stage.

So, the contact person is another key, a really important area. And again, it's no good giving the person the job of contact person or indeed a manager a job of trying to enforce in this area without giving them the appropriate skills and without upskilling them.

For many people, when I do the training, they don't even necessarily understand the difference between bullying, harassment, and sexual harassment, and what the definition and the difference is in law. And ultimately, it's hugely important for somebody to be able to signpost somebody.

Again, we've had lots of scenarios where a manager will say, "Well, look, I brought the two parties in to try and see if I could remedy the situation between them". And unfortunately, it ends up going pear-shaped, and then one of the parties says, "But you shouldn't have put me in that situation".

Then we go back and we unpeel the onion and we identify the policy didn't facilitate for that, and also the manager mightn't have been trained or experienced enough to do something like that.

Again, our job always, remember, is to make things better and not make things worse, not to do more harm. And with emotional relationships, when there are any of these issues at play, the professionalism and making sure that whoever you are getting to guide the parties or advise or facilitate or mediate, etc., they need to be trained people.

And with the new code of practice, remember, you will have updated your policies, I'm sure all of you, at this stage. But again, please let us know if you need assistance in that regard.

Since the new codes of practice have come into play, there are new levels of, I suppose, safeguarding in relation to allegations of bullying. So, what it means is if somebody raises an allegation of bullying, if they want it formally investigated, it first must go through a preliminary screening stage to ensure it meets the definition of bullying.

And the reason for that being introduced is to avoid a very serious allegation of bullying being made against somebody when in effect it didn't meet the definition.

Remember, bullying is repeated inappropriate behaviour. And the bar is quite high because it must be repeated and it must be, from a reasonable person's perspective, undermining somebody's dignity and respect.

And remember, the codes of practice should always be considered in line with the Ruffley case and the key learnings we got from that, which are hugely important for anybody who was involved in either preliminary screening or in relation to conducting an investigation.

My next key piece of advice . . . And again, this is all we do all day, every day. So I appreciate that for many of you, this will come up once in a blue moon, and hopefully, you're listening to me saying, "I hope it doesn't come up in my organisation at all". But if it does, just make sure that whatever investigator you appoint is trained and professional.

You will all have seen many cases in the WRC, and one specific one springs to mind where the organisation didn't appoint a professional investigator and the WRC said that that was a key obligation to ensure the person got justice.

And ultimately, I suppose, make sure that you have somebody who's competent, who's trained, and who will do it in a timely manner, that is fully objective, and also understands the definition.

In the area of HR and in most elements of employment law, we've got very strong case law and very strong legislative guidance in relation to making a decision. But that decision, as I say, using the example of bullying, should be made in line with the Code of Practice, in line with your policy, which should reflect that Code of Practice, and in line with the Ruffley case.

So, again, it's making sure that that's a robust investigation because the outcome and the appeal, should it go to that stage . . . Obviously, if it's a flawed investigation, you're starting your house of cards with a flawed starting foundation.

That is the most difficult, without doubt, and the most challenging part in any investigation. Hence why we'd always suggest that if you're appointing an internal person and they haven't done an investigation in a while or not at all before, that you would give them refresher training. And again, we have that available should anybody desire to do it.

So, again, making sure from a best practice perspective that your dignity, your respect, your equality, and your inclusion is, I suppose, a "walk we talk". Not alone an opportunity for having policies and the boxes ticked, but making sure that's in place.

For me, a few key things assist with that and then I'll come to your questions.

So, a few key things to raise awareness is refresher training. Also, the key leaders in the organisation, the most senior people, for them, in a lot of cases, they've opened the training we've delivered, or they've done a recording that we've incorporated into the training to emphasise for them how important that is.

And if you have, in the organisation, unacceptable behaviour that somebody calls out and says, "Well, look, this behaviour was accepted", we do a drawing the line in the sand conversation to say, "Look, from heretofore, this might have been acceptable, but from this day forward, it's not acceptable anymore".

We call it out and we make sure that we address it in that regard because, ultimately, that's what's going to make most difference to our culture and to fostering that culture.

And the other key thing for me is to identify which areas of dignity, respect, equality, and diversity you want to hero and work on. And there are two elements of that. One is the HR team choosing areas that they want to work on.

So, for example, we've seen a lot of discussion in the last number of days with the introduction of fertility treatment. And again, organisations considering is that something that they want to identify as an area they want to support colleagues on?

Menopause is another one. We see compassionate leave and that whole area around grief, that life journey. Also, we see a lot more organisations having project teams in place for the area of neurodiversity, for the area of equality in general.

Age is another area. So, again, you'll have heard mention of grandternity, for example.

Again, identify areas that you can support your colleagues with. Remember the nine grounds of equality are very broad, and we could do a topic alone on one of these sessions on each of those individual areas and how we can support colleagues more in that regard.

So, I think spotlighting them, having the opportunity of both the HR team working on the HR processes and how we can support, and then also colleagues from a cross-functional team identifying areas that we can do better. And I think it's having that, I suppose, collaborative approach and having a strategy around our dignity, respect, equality, and inclusion.

My last key thing, and then, as I said, I'll come to Julie. Three minutes left, Julie, so I'm doing good. But my last thing would be if it's been a while since you reviewed your values and your behaviours, those core values, it's a really good exercise to think about revisiting.

And again, we've done a lot of work with organisations to identify, "Okay, are they still fit for purpose? Or actually, is the organisation we have now needing a refresh around our values and our behaviours? And what does that look like? And how is it best to go about that?"

Our values and our behaviours form our guiding principles and, again, provide a really great Northern Star for us from a HR perspective and from a behaviours perspective in organisations.

So, hopefully, those top tips were of assistance to you this morning. As I said, it's such a broad area. We could cover so much more, but I've tried to pick the key pain points for our clients and, hopefully, that's been a help. So, Julie, over to you.

Julie:  Thanks, Caroline. Thank you. That was a great overview. And I always love the way that you include those real-life examples from your experience because it's great to read about different policies. It's great to know what you should do. And then sometimes when the situation happens, as you say, if it's not something that comes up very often, the nerves do kick in and you start questioning and second-guessing yourself about what you should do.

So, it was very interesting that you started off by talking about organisations really need to walk the walk. So, someone had sent in a question about lots of well-known organisations have solid DEI and Dignity at Work policies, but these don't match their actual practices. And you talked all about reputational damage as well. How can we increase self-awareness?

Caroline:  I suppose, for me, I've covered some of those key points, Julie, but it's a super question because, ultimately, for me, the policy is such a starting point only, but the policy, though, needs to be meaningful to that organisation. It really does. And the more people you involve, the better it is in making sure that you bring it to life.

But then for me, it's making sure we do the training, making sure that it's leader-driven. In most organisations that want to do this type of training . . . I used the Primark example that we've recently done, but they got their global leaders to do this training. And they've done it lots of times before, but they really wanted practical training to reinforce with practical examples and really bring it to life for people.

What that does is it facilitates discussion, and that's very much part of this type of training where somebody can say, "What do you mean sending a WhatsApp in a WhatsApp group that's outside of work could be considered harassment if it's an inappropriate comment?" for example.

And that's the stuff people remember. If you read a policy, I find myself . . . you're speed-reading it and you won't necessarily remember the key takeaways as clearly as you will if it's part of an interactive discussion.

No different to our session here today. The huge advantage is the interaction and the engagement, etc., and the real-life examples.

So, for me, there are two key things. And for me, the other thing is to train managers to help them have the confidence to call it out. We always give praise in public and constructive feedback in private, but how do they manage that?

We've lots of scenarios now where people are on big Teams meetings, loads of people on the screen, and somebody says something inappropriate. The person wants to call it out, but doesn't know how to professionally do that. So, again, it's giving people a toolkit of how to and how not to.

I always feel sorry for managers, because we expect so much of managers, yet often they've never received the training. They take years to train to be an accountant, for example, and then we give them no people management training, and all of a sudden they're spending most of their time managing people, the more senior that they get particularly.

So, I do think if we really are serious about this, the level of engagement we need to reassess, I think, is hugely important.

And then after we've done the basics around the broad level of dignity, respect, diversity, and inclusion, for me, then it's identifying which key areas we're going to focus on. Are we going to go down and focus on neurodiversity? Are we going to focus on age? Are we going to focus on disability? And start doing work in those areas.

You might decide, "We want to do a little bit on each, or we might actually want to do a deep dive into some". And then start the process. As I say, HR parallel to a functional cross-working group, in my experience, is best.

And I really like the idea of the values as well. We've seen organisations have brilliant success about revisiting their values and, again, using that as a drawing-the-line-in-the-sand to say, "What we've done in the past has been great, but we actually want to even do better again".

Julie:  Thank you. So I think, as you've said, some of those practical and real-life scenarios really help people. And then that whole aspect as you said . . . I'm thinking about Christmas parties because that's always . . . and I think you alluded to that as well. Outside social events where people think that those principles don't really apply still whereas we know that they do.

Okay. So, any inventive ways of including EDI as part of your onboarding process? So, you've mentioned that a little bit in relation to actually making sure that leaders are involved in that, that managers are involved. Maybe something wider. What about a culture of allyship as well, and having almost bystanders or colleagues, everyone feeling that they should be promoting diversity and inclusion as well?

Caroline:  Yeah, I suppose I love the idea of the contact persons, first of all. When you're new, they're one of the highest risk groups that may feel, for whatever reason, that they've been excluded or inappropriately treated, but they actually don't have the confidence to go talk to somebody and they don't know who to go to.

So, for me, I think having trained contact persons and helping that new person know that that's their job, and then having allies as well. I think it's really great.

And for me, the buddy and the mentor system, they're two very different things, the buddy and the mentor, but I think especially in the world of hybrid, they've never been required more.

We know that if you're new and you're starting out in an organisation, not having somebody that you can say, "Well, look, I actually don't know how to save a file onto this system. It's so complicated", which seems like such a basic thing, but if you've got the buddy, you'll feel much more comfortable in asking.

And I suppose the role of a mentor . . . Again, many organisations are training employees on how to be a good mentee, and training managers on how to be a good mentor, because, again, it's something that requires effort and requires skill, but if you do it well, it's really going to maximise the potential of the employee. And also, as a manager, it's a great opportunity to hone your skills in that area as well.

So, I think we're definitely getting better, Julie, at if we assign roles to people, we need to actually upskill them to do the role well. And that's the same as we're encouraging people to volunteer. Would they like to be an ally? Would they like to be a contact person? Would they like to be a mentor? But then when we do it, we give them the complementary training so that we're giving them the best chance of success in the role.

I think the worst thing you can do to somebody is give them the title, but don't give them the skills that go with it, because they could end up . . . As I said, our aim is to do no harm, don't make the situation worse, but if it was an untrained person, they could start saying things like, "Oh my God, that's terrible that that happened. If I was you, I would do . . ." Yet, it's an allegation, we don't know the detail, and we're not them. So, again, we need trained people to be in those types of roles.

But I think the audience person who spotted the onboarding as an opportunity is a very wise one, because it's definitely the riskiest time for somebody. So, having those types of support in place, I think, is really, really helpful.

And for me, also, it's asking open questions in the probation at the very early stages. "Is there anything more we can do to help? Anything you want to raise?" etc., because somebody might be struggling, for example, and the reason they're struggling . . .

I mentioned the earphones. That has come up so much for us where people have returned back to the office and they have found that when they've returned back to the office, many offices are now open plan because it's hot-desking rather than offices. And they've found that they can't concentrate with all of the noise and activity, so a lot of people have requested to wear earphones at work.

Many organisations initially were saying, "No. That's the idea. You're in the office. You need to be not wearing your earphones". But then I started this simple thing of, "But ask them why. Why do they want to?" And it turned out it was to suit neurodiversity needs, and it meant that their potential was maximised by being able to use them.

So, again, I think we're thinking differently and we're a lot more open. And it's providing that safe space, that psychological safety for somebody to feel that they can say, "Look, actually, I need the earphones to concentrate". And that's a big thing, isn't it?

Julie:  I think that is, and I think that's a good point to raise about the psychological safety in that. That actually helps and it impacts on people's productivity, their morale. And again, that goes through to your wider strategies of attraction of staff and retention and, again, just about the whole culture of the organisation as well.

So, the other thing I was going to ask you . . . Would you talk a little bit about onboarding process and making sure that we introduce EDI at an early stage? And to know that we've already emphasised that that should be from leaders throughout the organisation as well. How often do you think that that should be repeated? It's no good to almost do it and then have somebody say six years later, "There's a problem", and you find out from training records that there's nothing been done.

Caroline:  Yeah. For me, I think it's an annual requirement because it's such an evolving area. So, I do think it's something that we should be spotlighting on an annual basis.

I think it's one that if we don't, poor behaviour filters through. We know from, again, all the sectorial research that has been done . . . For example, the Bar Association or the Law Society are two sectors that obviously have done a big deep dive into dignity and respect, etc. And the findings when they did it were shocking. Organisations in both of those professions have now really proactively got behind doing proactive training, and it has made a huge difference.

During the training, and we've delivered a lot of it, people would openly say, "Oh my God, when I was training, that was just the standard norm". And it's something that as a manager, if that was your standard norm when you were being trained, you think it's the standard norm that's still okay until you're told different. So, again, it's back to that setting a new standard.

And again, I'm generalising in those two professions because the research was so significant and so overwhelming that it did flag sectorial issues. And we obviously saw the #MeToo movement also in the film and screen industry.

So, again, the research is hugely powerful in helping us say, "Okay, there's actually a real issue here and we really need to do something proactive about it".

But we would be very, I suppose, unwise if we know that that is an issue and we kind of say, "Ah, but sure, we're grand. We're probably grand", instead of just saying, "Actually, you know what? Proactively, we really should get behind this and make sure that we are fine". The only way we do that is that psychological safety and those open conversations.

And I do think, Julie, having a number of different people that people can go to . . . Obviously, it's brilliant for them to have HR, but for a lot of people, they feel, "Oh, if I go to HR, it's really, really serious then". So, that's why having allies and having contact persons, both trained, that somebody can go, "Look, Julie, I just want a quiet word. This happened and I'm just not quite comfortable that it did. I'd like to talk it through with you".

Having a trained person to talk through it is just so brilliant in an organisation, because, again, we're nipping it in the bud rather than letting it fester.

Julie:  I think that's great and I think that's a great point to raise as well. Just moving on then, we were talking a little bit . . . And you mentioned this in your talk about neurodiversity as well. So, one of the common questions that comes up, and which somebody has posted is, "We're interviewing a person with autism who's asked for the interview, basically the questions, to take in advance. Do we need to supply them to all candidates?" So, it's almost about this idea of equality versus equity, and what does it mean for a reasonable adjustment?

Caroline:  Yeah, a really interesting one, Julie. I was doing an interview with Stefanie Preissner a couple of years ago. And during the interview, Stefanie asked me this question, and she said . . . She herself has autism and she said, "Would I not be entitled to get the interview questions in advance because I find it very hard to think on my feet?" And I thought it was a brilliant question, first of all. No different to your listener asking it today.

And I suppose, for me, I think if somebody has flagged a genuine concern like that, it's up to the organisation then to say, "Do we just accept that or do we feel that we need backup to reflect that?" That's a decision for the organisation.

But when they flagged that they need a reasonable accommodation like that, to me, I would give the reasonable accommodation to that candidate only, because if you give it to all of the candidates, that additional advantage is no longer.

The idea of reasonable accommodation is you give an advantage to the person who needs it to make them equal to the rest of the population. So, if you give it to all the candidates, you're defeating that advantage, I suppose, in my mind.

This is one for organisations to consider as the need arises. But if it was me, I'd probably give them the questions maybe 20 minutes in advance because then it gives them that opportunity to have read them and make them comfortable with it. And then I would not give them to anybody else, because, to me, that would be a fair, reasonable accommodation.

But again, I would discuss that with the candidate to say, "Look, we need to be fair in giving you that. We can't give it to you, for example, the day before". Obviously, they could consult with whoever they want to get advice on what's the best way to answer the question.

So, to me, that would be my logical kind of scenario as to what I think might be, but I'd happily have that discussion with the candidate and see what they feel is fair as well.

I think your obligation always is to do your best to facilitate equity and what does that look like. So, a very good question there. Very good three questions there. So, thanks for that.

Julie:  Well, we have a few more as well. So, we've also been asked about mediation. So, is it okay to offer mediation before invoking a formal route of investigation?

Caroline:  One hundred per cent. I'm a huge fan of mediation. And for me, I would be offering it at all or any stages of the process because I find mediation is brilliant, especially if you get a good mediator. They go into their bubble, they try and . . .

Our aim as a mediator is to ensure they have a future without the problems of the past. And if you can get a professional good mediator who gets a really good opportunity to do that, it's powerful. So, yeah, I'm a huge fan. I definitely would be encouraging it.

I find when it goes to investigation, somebody's right and somebody is wrong. And for the parties to maintain a professional relationship thereafter, we need to do mediation anyway to facilitate them to work together, but a lot of damage could potentially be done at that stage.

Julie:  Okay. Great. And then last question is really about how do you use diversity and inclusion data to give meaningful action or to drive meaningful action and measure progress towards the overall strategic HR piece really?

Caroline:  Yeah. I think it's so important and I think it's really great to have the data to show what we should focus on and how the progress is being tracked.

I gave you two examples there where two sectors have really led the way in their sector. And it's never easy when you're basically facing into it knowing that the results are not going to tell you positive news, but it's hugely advantageous to identify, "Okay, what do we need to focus on as a priority then?" So, I would strongly encourage organisations to build that data.

And there are so many elements to the data that you could be involved in developing, but I do think it's hugely advantageous. And also the importance of giving employees the opportunity to have a voice, because we know that from employee surveys, that opportunity to be heard is hugely important.

Julie:  All right. Great. Thank you. I think that we've got one more question. Somebody is asking, "Should you train all employees in D&R?"

Caroline:  A hundred per cent. I suppose, for me, you're starting with your most senior leaders, then you're training your team, and then you're incorporating it into your induction. And once a year, you're doing your refresher training.

Like we've seen in all the case law, from a vicarious liability point of view, if the organisation can show they've done all they can, they've done the policy, they've done the training, and an incident still happens, and we've lots of case law examples in the WRC, if it's investigated properly, then the organisation . . . Even though bullying or harassment or sexual harassment may still have occurred, the organisation did all it could to prevent.

Still, things may happen notwithstanding all of that. But if we do all we can, then it's huge to your defence, but it's also huge to your culture because everybody says, "Well, look, that behaviour was called out at the time. It was addressed at the time", and I think that's what we want in organisations.

Julie:  Okay. Great. And I guess that sets the scene as well going back to that psychological safety that you mentioned as well, because you're saying right from the start, "This is our expectation and this is what will happen if you don't meet those standards as well".

So, thank you very much, everybody, for your questions. And thanks very much, Caroline, for answering all of those questions and also giving us a fantastic talk as well.

As Caroline mentioned, she is from The HR Suite, and you can see all of their details there. So, if you'd like to get in touch, you can do that.

And then if we just go on to the next slide. Thanks, Maria.

So, this recording will be available to you quite soon and you can also listen to it as a podcast on Spotify and Amazon Music as well.

And then we're just going to . . . We've been talking a lot about training today. We have a special offer so that you can help put diversity and inclusion right at the heart of your culture. So, we have a special offer. If you've attended the webinar today, you get 50% off.

And again, like with all of our other eLearning packages, you can go on, take a look at the different titles that we have, and sign up for a free demonstration as well.

So, for the webinar attendee offer, that's where basically if you're looking at training all your staff. And as Caroline's mentioned, it's important for that refresher training as well. So, get everybody up to speed to make sure you've got your records.

In addition to the diversity and inclusion training, we're also doing that 50% off for all staff training for workplace bullying as well. So, you can get in touch with Glen at Legal-Island, and he can work with you a little bit more on that.

So, thanks very much, everyone. Thanks very much, Caroline, as always for spending . . .

Caroline:  Pleasure.

Julie:  . . . that time with us. It's great, and it's always well spent. And thanks, Maria, for the tech support too.

Thank you, everybody, for listening and for submitting your questions as well, and we'll see you next time.

Caroline:  Thanks, everybody.

Sponsored by: