5: Managing Difference

“Rhetoric needs to be converted into reality.”
Introductory Booklet on the Diversity Excellence Model

Chapter Summary

This chapter deals with:

Recognising the importance of managing difference
Managing difference
The MPS’ approach to managing difference
The views of MPS officers and staff
How the MPS manages difference in the workplace
The Diversity Excellence Model
Disproportionality in managing conduct
Disproportionality in complaints and discipline

Recognising the importance of managing difference

5.1 Before we comment on the approach of the MPS to managing difference, we consider it helpful to examine the reasons why the MPS and other public and private organisations should place much emphasis on issues of diversity.

5.2 ‘Diversity’ can be a valuable organisational tool which allows the organisation to state its values and deliver its message and mission. It demonstrates that the organisation sees people as individuals with a set of individual characteristics which should be understood, respected and valued.

5.3 It goes without saying that there is a strong moral case for an organisation to respond to individual needs but there is also a strong business case, which includes:

“Widening the pool of potential recruits, improving service delivery to diverse groups by increasing the diversity of staff and meeting the requirements of legislation.”
(Directions in Diversity, the Audit Commission)

5.4 However, managing difference is not just about having a policy. A policy cannot be a substitute for action. Process, however important, is in reality a means not an end and must never eclipse outcomes. Achieving outcomes requires leadership and commitment at all levels of the organisation.

5.5 Any organisation which is not focused on managing difference will risk failing to meet its legal obligations and, most importantly, non-delivery of high quality services.

5.6 For the MPS, the consequences are even more serious. Without the right approach, it will not achieve its aspiration of becoming the employer of choice in London but, even worse, there is a danger of the real advances it has made in policing the capital being thrust into reverse.

Managing difference

5.7 When we use the term ‘managing difference’ we are not simply referring to managing people. The concept is much wider and also refers to strategic management, as well as managing resources, reputation, risk, communications and, of course, service delivery.

5.8 We endorse the Audit Commission’s view that:

“Action on diversity and equality must be managed effectively. This means:

addressing the agenda at strategic and policy levels;
active top level management support: ‘walking the talk’, not just lip service;
middle management buy in; building diversity issues into management as well as strategic objectives;
mainstreaming diversity into organisational strategies, planning and performance, objectives and targets;
a co-ordinated and varied package of procedures within employment and retention, training and other HR areas;
training to include not just awareness, but understanding to achieve ‘cultural competence’;
recognition of the needs of the different groups or people who are in receipt of goods, facilities and services and having procedures in place to meet those needs;
monitoring the implementation and outcomes of diversity initiatives to measure and evaluate effectiveness;
involving service users and consulting them and diverse staff groups when changing practice; and
perhaps, above all, determined and passionate leadership.”

(Directions in Diversity, Audit Commission, 2002.)

The MPS’ approach to managing difference

5.9 The MPS has made great strides since the Macpherson Report into the death of Stephen Lawrence. It has provided a significant response to its statutory duties under the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000, as a public authority, to eliminate unlawful racial discrimination, to promote equality of opportunity and to promote good relations between persons of different racial groups.

5.10 No witness from whom we have heard has criticised the way in which the MPS now approaches diversity issues in relation to operational policing and this is undoubtedly due to the personal commitment of both the Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner, together with the work of many individuals throughout the organisation and the major training and awareness raising programmes developed over recent years.

5.11 We accept that, to quote Lord Harris: “The MPS leads the field in policing in many aspects of diversity, following the McPherson [sic] Report. It has developed effective models for managing critical incidents, improved family liaison and victim support practices very well. Much of this does not get the public recognition that it deserves.”

5.12 However, it is five years since Lord Macpherson delivered his report, and this Inquiry provides a valuable opportunity to assess the progress of the MPS in implementing the diversity agenda internally against the background of its achievement in operational policing.

5.13 We have heard much about the MPS’ approach to diversity. Indeed, it has dominated the evidence we have received. We appreciate that extensive work has been undertaken both in developing the MPS’ policies in this area and in trying to implement them across the organisation. We do not doubt the sincerity or the commitment of those involved; indeed, we commend it.

5.14 However, in relation to managing difference in the workplace, the evidence we have heard has left us with a number of concerns:

we consider that the focus on a multitude of initiatives, however well intentioned, has led to the message becoming diluted rather than the management paradigm we see as essential;
whilst the policy has been driven hard from the top of the organisation, commitment at lower levels is not universal;
the evidence we have received indicates there is no common understanding of diversity within the MPS, the lack of which leads to confusion;
we consider that the confusion we have detected about what the MPS means by diversity could result in the concept being devalued, leading to some of the efforts of the MPS to promote its message becoming counter-productive;
managers are fearful of issues of diversity and lack confidence in managing situations where difference is an issue. This is partly due to the fact that when they get it wrong they are not challenged or coached through the process; and
we have detected what we think are the beginnings of a backlash. We are concerned at the fact that a number of white officers have lodged Employment Tribunal claims in recent years claiming discrimination on grounds of race.

5.15 The concerns to which we have drawn attention may have detracted from the significant advances the MPS has made since the Macpherson Report. The MPS now needs to refresh and renew its approach to managing difference.

5.16 It is not appropriate for this Inquiry, or any other third party, to tell officers and staff in the MPS how to address the problems we have identified. Through the evidence offered to us we are able to identify some of the issues to be addressed and we have made appropriate recommendations, but, in the end, the MPS needs to manage the process and own the solutions.

5.17 Whilst we completely accept the value of diversity as an organisational tool, we are concerned that, improperly applied, it can be a liability rather than an asset and allow managers who are reluctant to manage to evade their responsibilities.

The views of MPS officers and staff

5.18 We have already referred to the major training programmes that the MPS has run over recent years to raise awareness of diversity issues. However, the evidence we have received indicates that some officers and staff may not have a real understanding of issues relating to difference.

5.19 On one hand, the findings of our survey indicate that the vast majority (83%) of those who responded agree that they have a good understanding of what is meant by diversity, and 81% say that they understand why diversity is important to the MPS. However, other responses in this area are less positive.

5.20 The analysis of this data was greatly assisted by the fact that the Work Foundation, who devised and analysed our survey, have a database of benchmark scores which reflect the results of all the various public and private sector organisations for which they have conducted similar surveys. For example:

54% agree that the MPS treats people equally regardless of their gender. (This gives a ‘mean’ or ‘average’ score of 0.25 which compares with a benchmark score of 0.72);
49% agree that the MPS treats people equally regardless of their ethnicity. (The mean score here is 0.14 compared with a benchmark of 0.78);
46% agree that the MPS treats people equally regardless of disability. (This is a mean score of 0.34 compared with a benchmark of 0.79);
51% agree that the MPS treats people equally regardless of their age. (This is a mean score of 0.34 compared with a benchmark of 0.68); and
53% agree that the MPS treats people equally regardless of their sexual orientation. (A mean score of 0.41 compared with a benchmark of 0.83).

As these figures show, the mean scores fall well below the benchmark scores for responses to similar questions for other public and private sector organisations.

5.21 The MPS has suggested to us that there “could well have been some confusion over what these questions meant”. We do not share that view.

5.22 However, 56% agree that the organisation demonstrates that it values the diversity of its workforce. This score exceeds the benchmark (0.55 compared with 0.43) but nonetheless indicates that only just over half of those who responded agree that the MPS values the diversity of its staff.

5.23 The Inquiry notes, with interest, the difference between the evidence on the generality of understanding when compared with responses on the specifics of treatment.

5.24 We are also concerned that the evidence we have received suggests that, for many in the MPS, diversity equals race, rather than respect for difference of every kind.

“I think a lot of people, when you say ‘diversity’, will immediately think ‘people of colour’, that is the first thing they think of, and they forget that you have got – you know, the broad spectrum of the populace of London in particular, being everything.”
(Evidence of Franco Iannelli, Police Anglo-Italian Association.)

5.25 The MPS seems keen to take all opportunities to draw attention to its commitment to race-equality:

“A friend of mine who is a black officer has had pressure to join the BPA. He just wants to do his job. He gets pushed to the front in photos or if there is a visit. He finds it annoying and offensive.”
(Speaker during a London Police Station visit.)

5.26 Our survey also demonstrated that officers and staff think race has eclipsed other aspects of difference. Only 32% agree (and 38% disagree) that the MPS is placing equal emphasis on all aspects of diversity not just focusing on ethnicity issues. (Benchmark scores are not available for this question.) But non-white respondents are more likely than the white majority to think that the balance is right.

5.27 Responses differ amongst officers and staff of the different religions but responses are negative regardless of sexual orientation. Respondents with disabilities are significantly less likely than the average to agree that the MPS has got the emphasis right.

5.28 In addition, it now seems to be generally accepted that issues of gender have been somewhat neglected in recent years:

“There is a widely held perception that gender has not featured sufficiently in diversity training thus far. This may, in part, be responsible for an apparent willingness in parts of the MPS to condone, or at the very least, ignore sexist banter and language.”
(Submission from the MPS Association of Senior Women Officers.)

5.29 However, we note that, since we began work, and presumably in response to some of the evidence we have received and the discussions at our hearings, the MPS has begun to redress the balance and renew efforts to address issues which are relevant to its women officers and employees.

“We have been having a large number of women officers and police staff officers coming to sessions where – I have been shocked, I will tell you. There is a woman officer… who was at the Yard and then went back to a station in [redacted] London.

“… I have been absolutely shocked as to some of the language that is being used down at this particular station, the chauvinist attitude, which I think has pushed us back to the time when I first worked in Northumbria, for instance, and we will not put up with it.

“I can tell you now we will get to grips with this, because, for the right reasons, I think we have been focusing on race, for the right reasons, no one can criticise that, and I have to say I think we have taken the eye off the ball in relation to the way women officers and women staff are treated in this organisation, and it will stop. I am determined to stop it. You cannot treat people in the way that I have been hearing about for the last five months. Outrageous behaviour; outrageous comments; scandalous. And it will stop, because if not, any issue would be like corruption, they are out, as far as I am concerned.”
(Evidence of the Commissioner, Sir John Stevens.)

“I have recently invited Carole Howlett to set up a commission on the experience of women as employees of the MPS, work which is only just beginning. This indicates, I hope, the way in which the MPS is continually striving to make changes in the way in which a modern organisation can be expected to do.”
(Submission from the Deputy Commissioner, Sir Ian Blair.)

5.30 We have also received evidence that would indicate that other aspects of difference may have been as, or perhaps even more, neglected. Indeed, we received evidence from representatives of the various staff support associations who expressed concern about the MPS’ insensitivity to their beliefs, needs, contribution and even their existence.

“The lack of understanding – I do not mean to sound like mindless whining, but even to the point of, say, food. If you do not eat certain types of food and you are dealing with a riot, or you have been asked to do aid, and in that box is food that you cannot eat, and you have gone along and you have had your feeding and there is food there that you cannot eat at the feeding, except for maybe a banana, then you are going 12 hours without eating.”
(Evidence of Josephine Poole, Jewish Police Association.)

“… an example is there is a disability fair being held at Scotland Yard, across the road, today, where a number of disabled charities have been invited to come along, and staff can come in and meet them. The Disabled Staff Association have not been invited to it, or offered to set up any stands or anything, and that would have been an excellent opportunity for us to work in partnership with disabled charities, and also for our staff to see that they have an association, but we have just been ignored … the organisation has not bothered.”
(Evidence of Mr PP.)

“We had more complaints coming into the Gay Police Association, because officers were being told, for example, ‘When you stand up in class and give this pen portrait of yourself’, which some people find very, very difficult – one example was, ‘Excuse me, love’, and this is from one of the instructors, ‘You have not said, married, single, what is going on?’ And she said, ‘I am single’. She was most unhappy about that, because when she then phoned the GPA, she said, ‘Well, that is my first lie in the police, because I am not single, I happen to have a same sex partner, but I was not able or prepared or willing to divulge that in those circumstances’, and so forth.”
(Evidence of Kevin Boyle, Gay Police Association (GPA).)

“It is not uncommon for a committed Christian member of staff to be ostracised or treated with suspicion if they mention their faith to their colleagues. There are examples of staff being bullied and prevented from promotion. This applies to all ranks and grades across the M.P.S. and across the Police service in general. Many because of fear will remain silent and their full talents within their role are not fulfilled. Blasphemous comments and jokes about religion (that also offend Muslim and Jewish staff) are littered in everyday job speak.”
(Submission from the Christian Police Association (CPA).)

5.31 We understand, given the recent history of the MPS, why race may have commanded such a high priority and we recognise the efforts that have been made to implement the findings of the Macpherson Report. However, we believe that it is now timely for the MPS to move forward with this agenda and to manage all areas of difference effectively. To quote Mr Hogan-Howe in his evidence to us:

“I think probably we have come to a point where we need to make clear what diversity means for us and whether we say specifically it is not just race, or whether we say these are the other things, that it also means disability, gender. You must consider this as a really important issue. I think it is in the message that it is time to move on.”

5.32 The eclipse of other issues of difference by race may be a national failing.

“It is our view that the issue of ‘diversity’ in Forces has been progressed on a reactive, piecemeal basis at senior level. Each ‘issue’ appears to be treated in turn and in isolation. There appears to be no appreciation at senior level of the benefits of mainstreaming fairness and equality throughout the Service. Rather there has been a ‘tick-box’ mentality to the delivery of equality and diversity targets. It does not run as a golden thread through all policies and practices. There is a focus on systems management rather than people management.”
(Submission from the National Police Federation.)

5.33 We also consider that, in certain respects, the emphasis the MPS has placed on diversity in recent years has led to a culture of ‘ticking boxes’; that is, allowing people to act in a way which goes through the motions and implies a commitment to valuing difference but which lacks any real substance.

5.34 An example that was drawn to our attention was the establishment of the Disabled Staff Association. The MPS encouraged staff to form such an association and facilitated its recognition as an official group but we were told by one of those involved that:

“I feel very much that we are like a tick box, that they have felt that we need to have a disabled association set up, and now it has been set up, we will not support it, we will not help it or empower it in any way, it is just there, and we have our token disabled people that we can now wheel out to the press any time we like. That is how I perceive it.”
(Evidence of Mr PP.)

5.35 The danger of diversity becoming a tick box exercise appears to have been recognised at a senior level within the MPS: “I think there have been some ticked boxes.” (Evidence of the Deputy Commissioner, Sir Ian Blair.)

5.36 We have received evidence that things are changing, but it is clear that much change is needed and at a much faster pace to permeate through the MPS.

“We understand it takes a while to bring that change about, and with [the Association of Muslim Police’s] help and our help and with the Sikh Association’s help, there have been changes. And there is a learning curve, they are learning, they are opening their doors and learning, but it is not filtering down, it is not – yes, here, at New Scotland Yard, they understand it now, but it is not going sideways.”
(Evidence of Josephine Poole, Jewish Police Association.)

5.37 On the other hand, we have also received evidence that the needs of the white majority may have been neglected in recent years:

“The Job’s got to be seen to be reflective of the community. But it needs to slow down a bit and look at white officers, they are forgotten about.”
(Speaker during a London Police Station visit.)

How the MPS manages difference in the workplace

5.38 A number of people have commented on the difficulty within the MPS of managing situations where difference is an issue.

“I suspect that part of the difficulty is the way in which the Met responds when there are issues of race, or indeed other diversity issues, involved in particular cases. There is a sense that, you know, the rabbit is frozen in the headlamps, and as a result there is an overcompensation, ‘We must review this really thoroughly, we must do more’, rather than, again, managing things at the earliest possible stage in the way any good manager would try and resolve issues and deal with them appropriately.”
(Evidence of Lord Harris, former Chair of the MPA.)

5.39 Lord Harris was speaking about the way the MPS handles conduct issues in particular but this ‘rabbits in the headlights’ analogy clearly struck a chord with others.

“People freeze every time they hear the word race.”
(Speaker during a London Police Station visit.)

“The perception is that if someone is not good at their job, if they are VEM or a woman, managers won’t manage.”
(Speaker during a London Police Station visit.)

5.40 We have received compelling evidence that many in the organisation are not yet confident with, or do not fully understand, the principles of managing difference. Indeed, many are fearful and anxious when faced with issues of difference, particularly at more junior level. This means that in parts of the MPS there is now a culture of ‘management by retreat’.

“… if senior management and very senior management support and are open-minded and want to learn about different backgrounds and effects, that is wonderful, but you still cannot get rid of the fear factor in the lower ranks; and they fear change, they fear difference. They would fear me because I am a woman, they feared me because I was 40 when I joined the police service, and they feared me because I was Jewish. So I had the three fears.”
(Evidence of Josephine Poole, Jewish Police Association.)

“Unfortunately, people are afraid to manage. They want to tick boxes when it suits them. Suddenly diversity is a buzz word when promotion time comes around. The number of enquiries we get, ‘Oh, Mahommed, can you tell us a bit about diversity? I have got my promotion interview tomorrow’. That is not what diversity is about.”
(Evidence of Mahommed Mahroof, Association of Muslim Police.)

“The organisation can’t deal with difference. Most officers are white upper working class by background. They have no experience of different groups. Their first experience of different groups will be negative – arresting someone.”
(Speaker during a London Police Station visit.)

5.41 Some management inaction could be interpreted as indifference to the issues rather than fear.

“I was diagnosed with Osteoarthritis of the hips, and in August that same year, I went on sick leave. I returned to work in December, and was posted to permanent control room duties at [redacted], which was my OCU at that time. In June 2002, I was then transferred to [redacted] to take up the post of OCU armourer. I remained there until [redacted]. 1 was very content in this post, as it involved light office-based work, as recommended by the CMO (Chief medical officer) at that time, [redacted]. Whilst at a CMO appointment last year, I had occasion to raise a matter of concern with him. I mentioned that travelling to work on public transport was now becoming a health issue. The reason for this was that I had to stand on trains and the underground system for my entire journey, which is 23 miles. He made a recommendation to [redacted], that a suitable transfer to a division nearer home would cut down my travelling time and distance, and therefore reduce the amount of daily pain and discomfort I was suffering. To date, that recommendation has gone no further. As far as I’m aware, enquiries were made at several boroughs, and the problem, (so I was told) was either down to my bad sick record, or budget. That means I will still have to make the daily journey as before, still suffering from the same disability problems … I am then informed that I was being transferred to [redacted] based in [redacted] for 3 months, to assist them with Operation [redacted], which began on [redacted]. 1 asked if I had an option on this matter, and you can guess what the answer was. Management insisted that I was the only ‘sick’ officer available, even although there were other officers placed on light duties. I was then faced with the dilemma of having to travel even further to work, and as you can gather, this did my disabilities no favours whatsoever. What ever happened to going to a division nearer home … I was sent further away! As it turned out, I enjoyed the attachment, and managed to secure a further 3-month extension. But that does not get away from the fact that management did absolutely nothing to aid my disabilities.”
(Submission from IND 50.)

“‘S’ [redacted] had a CPA poster next to his desk which was set on fire, local management declined to do any action. Again such inaction by managers on this occasion perpetuates the belief that they do not care. It is not an uncommon experience for Christian literature to be defaced or removed from notice boards.”
(Submission from the CPA.)

5.42 We have even received evidence of what appears to be direct discrimination. This is predominantly in the area of complaints and discipline which we will deal with in more detail later in this chapter. However, there is other worrying evidence:

“‘E’ was informed not to bother applying for a post because Christians were not welcome.”
(Submission from the CPA.)

5.43 The results of our survey are also interesting in this area. 71% of respondents say that they personally feel confident in dealing with diversity issues but only 31% agree that managers are confident in dealing with diversity issues. Furthermore, only 34% are confident that managers are following the right process and procedures when dealing with diversity issues. (No benchmark scores are available for these questions.)

5.44 Whilst it is encouraging that such a high percentage of individuals say they are confident in dealing with diversity issues, it is less encouraging that only a third are confident that managers are following the right processes and procedures and agree that managers are confident in this area.

5.45 The apparent difficulty of some officers and staff to feel at ease and to be confident with colleagues who are different, whether because of some personal attribute or characteristic, or even simply because they are a member of police staff and not an officer, can lead to a disproportionate response when management issues arise.

5.46 We have received evidence that officers dealing with difficult cases involving issues of difference have not been supported by senior officers.

Case Study – High Profile Case (HPC) 3

A man received homophobic threats and intimidating telephone calls, letters, and blackmail. A Detective Sergeant was appointed as the Investigating Officer because his manager considered that he, as a gay man, would be able to build a rapport with the victim and offer support.

A close friend of the man then received threatening telephone calls and a homophobic fax. The man himself also received a further threatening letter. The Detective Sergeant identified two suspects. Following interviews and a review of the evidence, they were both served with anti-harassment notices and released without charge.

Shortly afterwards, the Commissioner received a complaint about the arrest. The letter asked for a written apology to the individuals. This letter was passed to a senior officer within the MPS, who decided to meet with the individuals concerned instead of treating the letter as a formal complaint. At the meeting he agreed to write a letter of apology to Mr A and Mrs B despite the fact that the complaint had not been investigated.

When he found out about the apology, the Detective Sergeant formally raised his concerns. Ultimately, the senior officer apologised to him, acknowledging that his investigation was of a high professional standard and that his integrity had never been in doubt.

5.47 It appears to us that this unfair treatment of the Detective Sergeant concerned was due in part to the apparent desire of the senior officer to appease influential members of the community. Instead of dealing with the complaint fairly and carrying out an investigation, the officers involved seem to have panicked in the face of a homosexual officer dealing with a homosexual victim and rushed to apologise for conduct which was in fact entirely professional.

5.48 We have already referred to one example of box ticking in relation to managing difference. Mr Mahroof, of the Association of Muslim Police, does not appear to be alone in being sought out at certain times:

“… in my last job, at [redacted], I had a colleague who was gay and very into diversity and very knowledgeable, and whenever they wanted to know about diversity, they used to come and communicate with him, and after that, they did not communicate with him, so just to give you an idea. He found that very amusing.”
(Evidence of Josephine Poole, Jewish Police Association.)

5.49 If dealing with difference can be reduced to a box that has to be ticked when a promotion board is on the horizon or at other significant times, it is not truly embedded in the organisation and managers in the MPS are not likely to understand how to get the best from the people they manage.

5.50 The Deputy Commissioner has made clear where the MPS wishes to be.

“… diversity is the only agenda possible for the future. It is just as straightforward as that. And when I say that, I really want to make clear this point: this is not just a moral issue, although it is a moral issue: it is actually a purely brutal business case. The Met is the largest single employer in London. If we do not make ourselves the employer of choice within our financial ranges for Londoners, we will not get the people we need. And I am utterly determined that the service should be welcoming to everybody. If it is not welcoming to everybody we will just not get the best people.”
(Evidence of the Deputy Commissioner, Sir Ian Blair.)

5.51 We support the aspiration of the MPS to become the “employer of choice” and agree that realising this ambition is key to delivering excellent policing to the people of London. We are nevertheless concerned that at present the overall approach of the MPS is not managing difference in a way which will enable it to achieve its goal.

5.52 The paradigm of managing difference must be turned into concrete action and be the golden thread which runs through all areas of MPS activity. We are concerned that this is not the reality at present, and unless the organisation’s approach to managing difference is reviewed, diversity will remain poorly understood and remain a tick box exercise for a significant part of the organisation.

5.53 In reaching this conclusion, we wish again to recognise the genuine commitment and efforts of many officers and staff in the MPS over the past few years. The policy is right; it is the approach which needs to be reviewed.

5.54 An approach needs to be devised which engages all within the workforce of the MPS community which would overcome the cynicism and resistance we have seen. This approach would emphasise that diversity encompasses all aspects of difference, including gender, faith, disability, sexual orientation and transgender issues, as well as race. It is as applicable to the majority group as to minorities.

5.55 Officers and staff must become more confident with discussing issues of difference on a daily basis as part of their normal interactions with colleagues in the workplace.

We recommend that the MPS gives adequate priority to all aspects of diversity, particularly in light of the Framework Equal Treatment Directive 2000.

We recommend that the MPS refreshes and revitalises its work in managing difference and devises a way of truly engaging all officers and staff on this important issue.

The Diversity Excellence Model

5.56 One tool that has been suggested to us is the Diversity Excellence Model (DEM). Devised by the civil service, the DEM provides a framework to assess the integration of diversity in an organisation’s business processes and to evaluate its effectiveness.

5.57 The assessment tool is a detailed questionnaire which enables assessors to find out what their organisation is and is not doing in respect of equality and diversity and whether they are at the stage of moving towards best practice or excellence.

“Rhetoric needs to be converted into reality.”
(Introductory Booklet on the Diversity Excellence Model, Centre for Management and Policy Studies.)

5.58 HMIC has recommended the use of the DEM. Members of the MBPA executive have been able to introduce the DEM in their respective OCUs. The MBPA argues that these pilot sites “have shown the merits of having a ‘diversity lead’ in each of the MPS business groups who will feed directly into the Diversity Directorate, carrying out numerous internal and external benchmarking exercises to ensure the exchange of good practice and the raising of standards; thus developing the lateral golden thread of diversity among the business groups.”

5.59 We understand that the DEM is now operating in the Child Protection Team, the Information directorate, Special Operations and Westminster BOCU.

5.60 We welcome the progress that appears to have resulted from the use of the DEM and the work of the ‘diversity leads’. The model seems to be an effective tool. However, we believe that the ‘golden thread’ will only be when all officers and staff in the MPS see managing difference as part of their individual responsibility, rather than the work of designated champions.

We also recommend that consideration is given to extending the Diversity Excellence Model to other Operational Command Units and directorates. However, we would recommend that its implementation be kept under review to guard against it becoming another ‘tick box’ exercise.

Disproportionality in managing conduct

5.61 The lack of confidence in managing issues of difference which we have identified has resulted in a culture where managers are not able to manage issues of conduct and discipline consistently.

5.62 Several senior officers in the MPS have told us that the organisation has difficulties managing conduct and discipline matters in relation to black and minority ethnic officers:

“… front line managers are very nervous about giving robust leadership and management when dealing with ethnic minority officers. There is a fear of allegations of racism and, in consequence, when faced with minor misbehaviour by an ethnic minority officer, they will either retreat into the formal disciplinary process, with all the protections that the rules provide, or will turn a blind eye to the minor matters and only intervene at some later stage where more serious misbehaviour has occurred and formal investigation is the only possible course. Thus, we either let down our minority officers by failing to administer ‘tough love’ or we retreat into the safety of formal processes.”
(Submission from DAC Stephen Roberts, MPS.)

“I do perceive a drawing back by some supervisors and managers from addressing staff issues, whether of a performance nature or related to conduct, because of fears of being accused of discrimination, especially racial, or fears of a Fairness at Work procedure being generated. There is a great sensitivity about race and fairness of treatment in the organisation and I am not suggesting this is a bad thing. However, this sensitivity appears to be manifesting itself in supervisors and managers being reluctant to overtly tackle performance and conduct issues.”
(Submission from AC Bernard Hogan-Howe, MPS.)

5.63 It is not just senior managers in the MPS who take this view, as a variety of witnesses have repeated it in different ways:

“You are right. That’s what happens as soon as there is any suggestion of a racial context. They do everything by the book instead of risking resolving it informally.”
(Speaker during a London Police Station visit.)

“Lots of things are dealt with early but the organisation and lower management are scared to deal with issues when race is involved. They push it upstairs. People will not be more honest under the PDR [Performance Development Review] scheme. I know black people who have been not performing and they have not been dealt with.”
(Speaker (minority ethnic manager) during a London Police Station visit.)

“The organisation tries to deal with people fairly but is disproportionate to women and visible ethnic minorities. Race can be used differently. If I was in trouble, I would be treated differently. They have to go further to prove there is a case for discipline.”
(Speaker (minority ethnic officer) during a London Police Station visit.)

“I absolutely agree with the people before – I have read all the transcripts previously. There is what I would say now institutionalised cowardice within the Metropolitan Police Service and the issues we have now is that everybody is in fear. Yes, some people obviously are still willing to stand up and be counted but generally speaking there is a fear of dealing with things in case of publicity: what is going to happen? Are you going to be considered a racist or a sexist or whatever else, a homophobic, if you deal with something properly and effectively?”
(Evidence of Chief Inspector Julia Pendry (High Profile Case).)

5.64 We are extremely concerned about the general acceptance that black and minority ethnic officers are treated differently when it comes to managing their conduct. What seems to have been admitted by senior officers in the MPS is that they are treated differently in two important respects.

5.65 Firstly, managers are reluctant to exercise managerial authority in respect of minority ethnic officers on minor matters and so take no action; if the officer was white he or she would have been reprimanded. This effectively deprives minority ethnic officers of the opportunity to learn and to develop in response to constructive criticism and support, which will ultimately damage career progression.

5.66 Secondly, managers seem to resort to formal processes more frequently instead of applying the informal option. The result is that conduct goes uncorrected and reaches the stage where formal action is inevitable. Instituting formal processes then results in the individual’s career being put on hold until the matter is resolved.

5.67 This clear failure of management leads to black and minority ethnic officers receiving detrimental treatment on the grounds of their race. They are either subjected to formal processes where white officers would not be so subject or they are deprived of the management support necessary to develop as a police officer.

5.68 We appreciate that often this failure results from managers’ fear of being accused of racism. That is why we are recommending that the organisation needs to become more confident in managing a diverse workforce.

5.69 We agree with Lord Harris when he said in his evidence to us: “You must always be able to demonstrate that management is acting in a way which is fair and reasonable, but you must at the same time manage issues rather than simply falling back to very bureaucratic processes and procedures, which inevitably have the effect of spinning things out for a very long period.”

We recommend that the MPS takes immediate action to engage black, minority ethnic and white officers and staff at all levels in the important practical steps required to ensure that black and minority ethnic officers and staff are not discriminated against on grounds of race.

Disproportionality in complaints and discipline

5.70 The statistics show disproportionality in the number of internal conduct investigations brought in respect of officers from minority ethnic backgrounds as opposed to those who are white:

“At the very heart of the representations made over the years by the Met BPA has been the belief that a disproportionate number of black and minority ethnic personnel have been subject to investigation by the Department of Professional Standards (DPS) and, once that investigative process had been commenced, that the DPS would pursue black and ethnic minority staff by means of an excessive and disproportionate use of resources within an over rigorous and highly subjective processes of investigation.”
(Submission from the MBPA.)

5.71 In addition, the MBPA refers extensively in its submission to a statistical review carried out by the Internal Consultancy Group (ICG), Statistical Analysis of Complaints in Relation to Ethnicity (November 2003). This review was instigated by DPS and concluded that:

a higher number of complaints were recorded against black officers than would be expected if the numbers were the result of chance;
a higher number of internal investigations were recorded of black and Asian officers than would be expected if the numbers were a result of chance; and
a higher number of written warnings recorded were for black, Asian and other ethnic officers than would be expected if the numbers were a result of chance.

Figure 6: Public Complaints, Internal Investigations, Suspensions and Sanctions by Ethnicity for the Period 1999–2004
	1999/ 2000	2000/ 2001	2001/ 2002	2002/ 2003	2003/ 2004
Black
No. of Black officers (and as % of total no. of officers)	513 (2.0%)	516 (2.0%)	552 (2.1%)	637 (2.2%)	761 (2.5%)
Public Complaints (Recorded) against Black officers (and as % of total no. of Black officers)	180 (35.1%)	154 (29.8%)	140 (25.4%)	132 (20.7%)	102 (13.4%)
Internal Investigations (Recorded) of Black officers (and as % of total no. of Black officers)	23 (4.5%)	24 (4.7%)	21 (3.8%)	29 (4.6%)	40 (5.3%)
No. of Black officers suspended (and as % of total no. of Black officers)	4 (0.8%)	4 (0.8%)	2 (0.4%)	1 (0.2%)	5 (0.7%)
Dismissals or Required to Resign Sanctions as a result of Misconduct/Discipline Hearing arising from Internal Investigations of Black officers (and as % of total no. of Black officers who were subject to Internal Investigation)	1 (4.3%)	1 (4.2%)	2 (9.5%)	2 (6.9%)	1 (2.5%)
Asian
No. of Asian officers (and as % of total no. of officers)	295 (1.1%)	320 (1.3%)	441 (1.6%)	570 (2.0%)	781 (2.6%)
Public Complaints (Recorded) against Asian officers (and as % of total no. of Asian officers)	109 (36.9%)	127 (39.7%)	96 (21.8%)	100 (17.5%)	113 (14.5%)
Internal Investigations (Recorded) of Asian officers (and as % of total no. of Asian officers)	17 (5.8%)	12 (3.8%)	14 (3.2%)	24 (4.2%)	54 (6.9%)
No. of Asian officers suspended (and as % of total no. of Asian officers)	2 (0.7%)	3 (0.9%)	2 (0.5%)	1 (0.2%)	5 (0.6%)
Dismissals or Required to Resign Sanctions as a result of Misconduct/Discipline Hearing arising from Internal Investigations of Asian officers (and as % of total no. of Asian officers who were subject to Internal Investigation)	2 (11.8%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	1 (4.2%)	0 (0.0%)
White
No. of White officers (and as % of total no. of officers)	24,985 (96.1%)	24,375 (95.9%)	25,480 (95.2%)	26,902 (94.5%)	28,284 (95.9%)
Public Complaints (Recorded) against White officers (and as % of total no. of White officers)	7,773 (31.1%)	6,498 (26.7%)	5,528 (21.7%)	4,186 (15.6%)	4,047 (14.3%)
Internal Investigations (Recorded) of White officers (and as % of total no. of White officers)	610 (2.4%)	590 (2.4%)	562 (2.2%)	571 (2.1%)	699 (2.5%)
No. of White officers suspended (and as % of total no. of White officers)	77 (0.3%)	72 (0.3%)	32 (0.1%)	26 (0.1%)	52 (0.2%)
Dismissals or Required to Resign Sanctions as a result of Misconduct/Discipline Hearing arising from Internal Investigations of White officers (and as % of total no. of White officers who were subject to Internal Investigation)	41 (6.7%)	25 (4.2%)	30 (5.3%)	26 (4.6%)	17 (2.4%)
Other
No. of Other officers (and as % of total no. of officers)	208 (0.8%)	219 (0.9%)	296 (1.1%)	368 (1.3%)	439 (1.5%)
Public Complaints (Recorded) against Other officers (and as % of total no. of Other officers)	56 (26.9%)	56 (25.6%)	58 (19.6%)	52 (14.1%)	83 (18.9%)
Internal Investigations (Recorded) of Other officers (and as % of total no. of Other officers)	3 (1.4%)	5 (2.3%)	9 (3.0%)	10 (2.7%)	22 (5.0%)
No. of Other officers suspended (and as % of total no. of Other officers)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	1 (0.2%)
Dismissals or Required to Resign Sanctions as a result of Misconduct/Discipline Hearing arising from Internal Investigations of Other officers (and as % of total no. of Other officers who were subject to Internal Investigation)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)
Source: MPS

5.72 Indeed, in each and every category examined by the ICG, the statistical analysis showed that black and Asian officers had recorded internal and external complaint profiles in excess of those expected. Correspondingly, majority white officers had profiles below those expected in each significant category examined.

5.73 The MBPA regards this survey as persuasive evidence in support of the conclusion that black and other minority ethnic officers are subject to disproportionality in relation to the handling of complaints and investigations within the MPS.

Photo of police officers at computers 5.74 It is clear that there is disproportionality in relation to the number of investigations and it is important to establish the reasons for this so that the problem can be addressed. We understand that DPS has commissioned further research. However, the MPS also points to the statistics in relation to outcomes.

“There is disproportionality. You can see there is disproportionality. But the disproportionality then does not appear in terms of discipline boards or sanctions; it drops out. And so in fact, I think, that means we must be managerially competent to stop it.”
(Evidence of the Deputy Commissioner, Sir Ian Blair.)

“The MPS understands the importance of perceptions and the fact that this perception may exist amongst BME officers or some of their representatives is of grave concern. However, the available statistical information does not support the belief: in fact, it could be argued that the statistics suggest the opposite … the research carried out by the Internal Consultancy Group, which is cited by the Met BPA does confirm that black and Asian officers are more likely to be subject to internal investigation than their white colleagues. This is a matter of concern and is the subject of ongoing research. However, by the stage that the DPS investigation process is concluded, there is no disparity of treatment as between officers from one ethnic group or another: officers under investigation are not more likely to face a misconduct board on the basis of their ethnicity. This suggests that the objectivity and thoroughness of the DPS investigation actually proves it weeds out any disproportionality in relation to BME officers.”
(Submission from Commander Ian Carter, MPS.)

5.75 Like Commander Carter, we too are gravely concerned that any disproportionality should exist between the number of officers from ethnic minorities who are investigated for misconduct and the number of white officers investigated. Whatever the result of these investigations, it is clear that disproportionality exists.

5.76 We are not persuaded that the rigour of the process of the investigation removes the disparity and regard this statement as compounding the complacency about this issue within the MPS.

We recommend that the MPS takes urgent steps to eliminate the discriminatory management practice which has led to a disproportionate number of investigations of black and minority ethnic officers.

5.77 To express our deep concern about this matter, we will be drawing this aspect of our report to the attention of the Commission for Racial Equality and the Independent Police Complaints Commission, and we will request them to continue to monitor trends in this area in order to ensure that the necessary improvements are made.