Lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans equalities in Hastings, Rother and East Sussex. Mapping exercise - initial findings
McGlynn, N. and Browne, K. (2011) Lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans equalities in Hastings, Rother and East Sussex. Mapping exercise - initial findings University of Brighton.
Official URL: http://eprints.brighton.ac.uk/9587/1/LGBT_Equaliti...
This report maps lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT) equalities policies in the Hastings, Rother, ealden and East Sussex public sector. It examines trends in LGBT equality policies and equalities work in the public sector, and highlights areas for development. 10 public sector organisations took part. The results are reported under 3 broad headings: Policy Requirements: The research found that while in general there is a good coverage of LGBT equalities from a policy perspective, key areas of concern included engagement with Public Sector Equality Duty C (the duty to foster good relations between LGBT people and non-LGBT people), levels of monitoring of LGBT service users, and appropriately using the data collected about both LGBT service users and staff members. Policy Implementation: Staff training about LGBT equalities is widespread, but few organisations said that they had specific training about LGBT equalities. 4 of the public sector organisations said that they had networks or groups for LGBT staff, and those these tended to be well-supported by their parent organisations; however the absence of these should not be taken as an example of a lack of commitment to LGBT equalities. 5 organisations designated ‘staff champions’ for LGBT equality, who tended to occupy high-level positions in their respective organisations. While trans identities were dealt with specifically at the policy level, there was little evidence of policy engagement with specific sexual identities, such as lesbian, gay male and bi/bisexual. 7 of the public sector organisations did not address dual discrimination/multiple marginalisation and 2 noted specific problems in tackling this – however, there may also have been some confusion regarding terminology. 8 public sector organisations were producing LGBT-positive promotional materials targeted specifically at LGBT people, but only 4 were including LGBT-positive images or signage in their ‘mainstream’ promotional materials. Looking to the Future: No public sector services who responded to the research said that the public sector financial cuts would definitely affect LGBT equalities work, and 7 saying that they definitely would not. The main means for ensuring this was Equality Impact Assessments, though a variety of other methods were also posited. All of the responding public sector organisations demonstrated that they would welcome assistance in improving LGBT equality. The most commonly-requested or desired types of assistance were partnership work with the LGBT community, and better LGBT training for staff.
Repository Staff Only: item control page