§ Mr. McDonnellTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what studies of appraisal systems have been carried out in his Department and the former Departments of Transport and Environment in the past five years. [64921]
171W
§ Mr. MealeThe following studies have been carried out in the past five years
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions-an Investigation of the 1997/98 Appraisal System, Pearn Kandola, December 1998.Evaluation of the New Staff Appraisal Systems in the former Departments of Environment and Transport, Institute of Employment Studies, October 1997.Staff Appraisal: Report of the Working Group—part of the internal review of the Department of the Environment, 1995.Evaluation of Staff Reporting Bias in the Department of Transport, Civil Service College, October 1995.
§ Mr. McDonnellTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what is the basis for the 4/5ths equality rule used by personnel management in his Department. [64923]
§ Mr. MealeThe 4/5ths rule is used as a preliminary "rule of thumb" indicator to check for statistically significant variations between groups.
§ Mr. McDonnellTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what internal specialist advice was used to help(a) draw up the specification and (b) evaluate the tenders for the study into the differential performance markings in DETR (C). [64916]
§ Mr. MealeThe specification was cleared with the Department's procurement policy advisers. A copy of the draft specification was also sent to the Trade Union Side prior to issue for comment. Tenders were evaluated by Personnel Management against the criteria set out in the specification.
§ Mr. McDonnellTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if DETR (c) operates, formally or informally, a system of quotas for staff performance markings. [64918]
§ Mr. MealeNo. As part of the standard setting procedure to promote consistent standards of marking across DETR(C), we published an indicative set of marks based on the previous year's results as a guideline for standard setting officers in the 1998 appraisal round. These indicative marks are intended as a guide rather than a "quota" to be achieved and contribute to a process of "norming" designed to ensure that the system is fair. The final decision on individual performance marks rests with reporting officers applying the criteria in the appraisal guidance.
§ Mr. McDonnellTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions how many DETR (c) staff are in post in each DETR (c) building, excluding the Government Offices, broken down by(a) grade, (b) gender, (c) ethnicity, (d) part/full time working and (e) disability. [64805]
§ Mr. MealeDETR(C) staff are based in approximately 50 buildings. Detailed breakdowns for each building cannot be provided without incurring disproportionate costs.
§ Mr. McDonnellTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions how many standard-setting meetings took place as part of the 1998 appraisal round in DETR (C); what records are kept of172W the outcomes of such meetings; and if individual civil servants' performance markings are discussed in such meetings. [64917]
§ Mr. MealeAbout 160 Standard Setting Meetings took place at the end of the reporting year. Records of the outcomes were kept to make comparisons between the performance marks agreed at the meeting and those eventually recorded. The purpose of the standard setting process it to promote fair and consistent standards across DETR(C) and a fundamental part of meeting this purpose requires the discussion of individual performance.
§ Mr. McDonnellTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (1) what were the appraisal performance markings awarded to civil servants in 1998 in(a) each agency associated with his Department and (b) each traffic area office broken down by (i) grade, (ii) gender, (iii) ethnicity, (iv) part/full time working and (v) disability; [64803]
(2) if the Cabinet Office's 4/5s rule used to check for potential adverse impact has been applied to civil servants' performance markings in the 1998 report round in each of his Department's agencies (a) MCA, (b) DVLA, (c) VI, (d) QEII, (e) PINS, (f) DSA, (g) VCA and (h) HA. [64825]
§ Mr. MealeStaff in Traffic Area Offices are part of DETR(C) and are therefore included in the DETR(C) data already provided. With regard to executive agencies, I have asked Agency Chief Executives to reply separately for their respective agencies.
Letter from Avil Beynon to Mr. John McDonnell, dated 12 January 1999:
173W1. DVLA's Chief Executive has asked me to respond to your request for a breakdown of 1998 staff appraisal marks in the Agency. I attach tables listing the following information:
- Gender/Working Pattern/Disability: Table A
- Gender/Working Pattern/Ethnicity: Table B
- Gender/Grade/Working Pattern: Table C
2. In accordance with Cabinet Office guidance, where the numbers in any category falls below 5, the data has not been disclosed to protect the privacy of individual members of staff. Table A and Table B do not therefore provide a breakdown of performance by grade for disabled and ethnic staff. To do so would reveal individual performance marks. In Table C, where the spread of representation is below 5, the data is referred to as X.3. 1998 Annual Staff Reports (ASRs) have yet to be completed for Administrative Officers, Administrative Assistants and equivalent grades and so the figures supplied are for 1997 ASR markings for these grades. Excluded from the figures is a large number of permanent, fixed term and casual staff recruited in the period December 1997 to December 1998 who have yet received a formal appraisal report.4. Although the four-fifths rule has not been used as a guideline to check for any potential adverse impact, the Agency is in the process of harmonising the annual performance reporting systems. In future, this will help produce better analyses of the system and identify any potential Equality Proofing difficulties associated with performance appraisal.
ASR analysis—disabled staff—DVLA 1997/98 Table A Male box markings Full time Part time All grades 1 2 3+ 3 3- 4 5 1 2 3+ 3 3- 4 5 Totals — 7 — 32 — — — — — — — — — —
ASR analysis—disabled staff—DVLA 1997/98 Table A Female box markings Full time Part time All grades 1 2 3+ 3 3- 4 5 1 2 3+ 3 3- 4 5 Totals — 19 — 34 — — 2 — 6 — 7 — — —
ASR analysis—Ethnic origin—DVLA 1997/98 Table B Male Full time Part time All grades 1 2 3+ 3 3- 4 5 1 2 3+ 3 3- 4 5 Totals — 6 1 23 — — — — — — 1 — — —
ASR analysis—Ethnic origin—DVLA 1997/98 Table B Female Full time Part time All grades 1 2 3+ 3 3- 4 5 1 2 3+ 3 3- 4 5 Totals — 12 — 30 — — — — 3 — 10 — — —
ASR analysis—by staff numbers—DVLA 1997/98 Table C Male box markings Full time Part time Grade 1 2 3+ 3 3- 4 5 1 2 3+ 3 3- 4 5 AA 2 90 — 169 — 1 1 — 2 — 33 — — — SGB2 — 6 — 45 — 2 — — — — — — — — TYP — — — — — — — — — — — — — — AO 4 141 — 267 — 1 — X X — X — X X PERSEC — — — — — — — — — — — — — — SGBI — 8 — 6 — — — — — — — — — — SM3 X X — X — X X — — — — — — — SOGD X X — X — X X — — — — — — — EO — 60 — 67 — — — X X — X — — — SPS — — — — — — — — — — — — — — ALIB — — — — — — — — — — — — — — SM2 X X — X — X X — — — — — — — CO4 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — SOGC X X — X — X X — — — — — — — PTO X X — X — X X — — — — — — — HEO — 48 — 40 — — — — — — — — — — SOGB X X — X — X X — — — — — — — SE0 1 17 9 6 — — — — — — — — — — SPTO X X — X — X X — — — — — — — GRD7 — 8 4 4 — — — X X X X X X X GRD6 X X X X X X X — — — — — — — MED X X X X X X X — — — — — — — Totals 9 396 15 606 0 4 1 0 3 1 36 0 1 0
174W175W
ASR analysis—by staff numbers—DVLA 1997/98 Table C Female box markings Full time Part time Grade 1 2 3+ 3 3- 4 5 1 2 3+ 3 3- 4 5 AA 2 276 — 361 — 2 3 — 90 — 223 — 2 — SGB2 X X — X — X X — — — — — — — TYP — 15 — 6 — — — — 6 — 10 — — — AO 17 408 — 462 — 1 — 1 65 — 190 — 1 —
ASR analysis—by staff numbers—DVLA 1997/98 Table C Female box markings Full time Part time Grade 1 2 3+ 3 3- 4 5 1 2 3+ 3 3- 4 5 PERSEC — 12 — 1 — — — X X — X — X X SGB1 X X — X — X X — — — — — — — SM3 — 6 — 1 — — — — — — — — — — SOGD — — — — — — — — — — — — — — EO 2 122 — 91 x2014; — — — 17 — 18 — 1 — SPS X X — X — X X — — — — — — — ALIB X X — X — X X — — — — — — — SM2 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — CO4 X X — X — X X — — — — — — — SOGC — — — — — — — — — — — — — — PTO — — — — — — — — — — — — — — HEO 1 43 — 32 — — — X X — X — X X SOGB — — — — — — — — — — — — — — SEO — 6 2 1 — — — — — — — — — — SPTO — — — — — — — — — — — — — — GRD7 X X X X X X X — — — — — — — GRD6 X X X X X X X — — — — — — — MED X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Totals 22 896 4 957 0 3 3 1 181 0 442 0 4 0 Letter from Maurice Storey to Mr. John McDonnell, dated 12 January 1999:
I have been asked by the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions to reply to your questions about staff report marks in the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA).The enclosed schedule provides annual staff report mark details broken down by grade and gender for the report round ending 30 June 1998. Grade breakdowns by ethnicity, part/full time
MCA summary of all grades Box 1 Box 2 Box 3 Box 4 Pay band/grade male female male female male female male female Pay Band A AA/CWA/TYP/SGB2 0 0 16 41 79 95 1 0 Pay Band B PS/AO/WO/SM3 0 6 52 39 120 36 0 0 Pay Band C AIO/AD01/ADO(WM)(SM)/SO/SWO 0 1 117 10 85 17 0 0 Pay Band D IO/HEO/DO/HPTO/MS2 2 1 27 11 32 5 0 0 Pay Band E SIO/SE0/IC/SPTO/MS1/SSO 2 1 48 0 49 3 0 0 Pay Band F PPTO/G7/PI 2 1 31 2 17 3 0 0 Pay Band G Grade 6 1 0 5 0 6 0 0 0 Total 7 10 296 103 388 159 1 0 Ethnic minorities (all grades) 0 0 7 2 4 2 0 0 Part/full time workers (all grades) 0 1 3 27 9 38 0 0
Box 1 Box 2 Box 3 Box 4 Disabled (all grades-no gender) 0 3 3 0 Letter from Maurice Newey to Mr. John McDonnell, dated 12 January 1999:
Further to Mr. Meale's Written Answer on this, I am pleased to provide the information requested for Civil Servants in the Vehicle Inspectorate. 707 reports have been received so far.Table 1 shows these broken down into the various categories used in our Equal Opportunities monitoring process. Table 2–5 show the markings given by Vehicle Inspectorate Pay Band (explained in the Notes to the Tables) for the different categories of staff.176Wworking and disability have not been provided where individuals might be identified as this would be contrary to Cabinet Office guidance on the confidentiality of staff records.An analysis of the Agency's performance markings did not reveal any material adverse impact on MCA staff and it was not necessary therefore to apply the Cabinet Office's 4/5ths rule.Performance marking standards continue to be monitored by the Agency's personnel branch to detect any potential adverse impact on staff.In accordance with Cabinet Office guidance, we have not given information in 2 categories, where numbers total less than 5 and where individuals might be identified.The Vehicle Inspectorate does not apply the Cabinet Office 4/5ths rule of thumb to its performance appraisal markings. For declared ethnic minority and disabled staff, the numbers are just too small to enable us to make any meaningful or reliable comparisons with other groups—though we are trying to improve the reliability of our 177W employee database to support our very robust Equal Opportunities policies in these areas. These are already particularly effective in our employment of women, who now make up well over 30% of our workforce and who increasingly are reaching middle and senior level management positions in the Inspectorate. Generally speaking,
Table 1 Equal opportunities breakdown of reports returned in 1998 reporting year Band Total Male Female Disabled White Non-participant Ethnic minorities Part-time Full-time 1 98 68 30 1 62 36 0 30 68 2 235 119 116 6 179 53 3 36 199 3 212 190 22 6 182 24 6 2 210 4 117 98 19 0 107 10 0 7 110 5 32 29 3 0 31 1 0 0 32 6 10 8 2 0 10 0 0 0 10 7 3 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 3
Table 2 Performance markings by pay band and ethnic origin White Non-participant Band Total 1 2 3 1 2 3 4/5 1 98 1 31 30 1 16 17 2 2 235 10 120 49 4 34 15 0 3 212 15 113 54 3 12 9 0 4 117 8 66 33 1 5 4 0 5 32 3 21 7 0 1 0 0 6 10 1 6 3 0 0 0 0 Note:
In line with Cabinet Office Guidelines on confidentiality, it is not possible to provide performance markings for other Ethnic Minority categories, as numbers are less than 5.
Table 3 Performance markings by pay band and gender Male Female Band Total 1 2 3 4/5 1 2 3 1 98 2 29 35 2 0 18 12 2 235 5 71 43 0 9 85 22 3 212 15 116 59 0 3 11 8 4 117 7 60 31 0 2 11 6 5 32 2 20 7 0 * * 0 6 10 * * * * * * * Note:
*Denotes category totalling less than 5, disregarded under Cabinet Office guidelines for safeguarding the identities of individuals.
Table 4 Box markings by pay band and working hours Part time Full time Band Total 1 2 3 1 2 3 4/5 1 98 0 18 12 2 29 35 2 2 235 2 25 9 12 131 56 0 3 212 0 1 0 18 126 67 0 4 117 1 4 2 8 67 35 0 5 32 0 0 0 3 22 7 0 6 10 0 0 0 1 6 3 0
Table 5 Total—all bands Disabled staff Total 1 2 3 13 0 10 3 Note 1 Vehicle Inspectorate Pay Bands
178W
- Band 1 Tester, Administrative Assistant, Handyperson, Typists
- Band 2 Administrative Officer, Assistant Vehicle Examiner, Personal Secretaries
- Band 3 Executive Officer, Traffic Examiner, Professional and Technical Officer (PTO), Senior Personal Secretaries
from reports received so far, a higher proportion of women employees are currently gaining Box 1 and 2 performance markings than their male counterparts.Please do not hesitate to let me know if you need any further information.
- Band 4 Higher Executive Officer, Higher PTO, Senior Traffic Examiner
- Band 5 Senior Executive Officer, Senior PTO
- Band 6 Principal/Unified Grade 7
- Band 7 Grade 6/Director
Note 2 Key to VI Performance Marking Scale179W
- Box 1 Outstanding
- Box 2 Significantly above normal requirements
- Box 3 Meets normal requirements
- Box 4 Some improvement necessary
- Box 5 Unsatisfactory
Letter from Marcus C. Buck to Mr. John McDonnell, dated 12 January 1999:
I have been asked by the Secretary of State for the Department of Environment and Transport and the Regions, to provide information regarding the Staff Appraisal Markings for the Centre.The enclosed schedule details the combined Staff Appraisal Markings for the Centre. It was not possible, (if we are to compile with the Cabinet Office's ruling regarding confidentiality of individuals personal details) to show the information broken down by grade or ethnicity.The centre does not use the "Four Fifth's Rule". Appraisal forms are audited by the Human Resources Department to ensure fairness and the non-use of discriminatory comments or implications of.
All grades/job bands combined Box 1 Box 2 Box 3 Male Female Male Female Male Female All staff — 2 14 16 7 7 Note:
Unrecorded (did not qualify for an Appraisal marking for 98) Male 4, Female 3
Letter from Derek Harvey to Mr. John McDonnell, dated 12 January 1999:
I attach a table of data for the Vehicle Certification Agency in response to your Parliamentary questions concerning the above.It has not been possible to provide a gender or ethnicity breakdown in paybands 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7 because, in line with Cabinet Office guidelines, data relating to staff's personal details, when the numbers in any category fall below five, may not be disclosed in order to protect the privacy of individual members of staff.I can confirm that the four-fifths rule has not been used to check for potential adverse impact.You will also wish to note that there were no disabled or part-time staff in VCA at the time of the 1998 ASR round, hence no separate columns in the table.
Analysis of pay system Gender Ethnicity Box Mark m f w o Pay band 1 Box 1 — — — — Box 2 1 — — — — Box 3 10 5 5 — — Total 11 — — — — Pay band 2 Box 1 1 — — — — Box 2 10 6 4 — — Box 3 12 7 5 12 — Total 23 — — — —
180W
Grade: All staff combined. Period 1 January 1997 to 31 December 1997 Box 1 Box 2 Box 3 Box 4 Ethnic origin male female male female male female male female White 2 3 574 74 431 69 2 2 Ethnic minorities 1 — 3 2 10 14 — — Unrecorded non-participant — 1 23 18 92 57 4 — Total 3 4 600 94 533 140 6 2 Part-time — — 1 8 8 21 — — Disabled — — 6 — 3 1 — —
Analysis of pay system Gender Ethnicity Box Mark m f w o Pay band 3 Box 1 — — — — Box 2 6 — — — — Box 3 1 — — — — Total 7 — — — — Pay band 4 Box 1 1 — — — — Box 2 14 — — — — Box 3 13 13 — 13 — Total 28 — — — — Pay band 5 Box 1 — — — — Box 2 10 10 — 10 — Box 3 3 3 — 3 — Total 13 — — — — Pay band 6 Box 1 — — — — Box 2 2 2 — 2 — Box 3 3 3 — 3 — Total 5 — — — — Pay band 7 Box 1 — — — — Box 2 — — — — Box 3 — — — — Total 1 — — — — Total 88 — — — — Note:
1. w/o = White/Other
Letter from Bernard Herdan to Mr. John McDonnell, dated 12 January 1999:
181WAs Alan Meale promised in his written reply of December 1998, I am now responding to your Parliamentary Question about the 1998 appraisal performance markings for staff in this Agency.As part of the 1998 Pay Agreement with the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) it was agreed that the settlement date of the annual pay negotiations would change in 1999 to 1 August rather than 1 April. It was also agreed that the annual performance reporting cycle would be brought into line with the new settlement date.A revised annual report timetable has been agreed with PCS which means that all 1998 reports on DSA staff have been delayed until the first half of 1999. I am therefore unable to provide you with the information you requested for 1998 but I have attached details of appraisal performance markings for all DSA staff relating to the 1997 cycle.Letter from Bernard Herdan to Mr. John McDonnell, dated 12 January 1999:
As Alan Meale promised in his written reply of December 1998, I am now responding to your Parliamentary Question about the application of the Cabinet Office's 4/5ths rule to 1998 performance marking for staff in this Agency to check for potential adverse impact.The 4/5th rule has not been applied in respect of staff in DSA. As you may know the rule is a guideline only, and is not a statistical test. It does not give an assurance that any differences are statistically sound nor prove discrimination one way or the other. However as part of the 1998 Pay Agreement with the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS), we have agreed that a full equality proofing exercise will be carried out, jointly between DSA and PCS, on all staff performance reports completed on DSA staff in 1999. Meetings with PCS are scheduled for January 1999 for the equality proofing exercise to commence. The exact method of analysis, which might well include the 4/5th rule as a benchmark, will be agreed between both sides in normal negotiations.
Planning Inspectorate Grade AA/DS/SGBI&2 Ethnicity Disability Part time Performance mark Male Female m f m f m f 1 1 1 * * * * * * 2A 6 8 * * * * * * 2B 8 22 * * * * * * 3 14 11 * * * * * * 4 — — * * * * * * 5 — — * * * * * * Total in Grade 29 42 1— 1— 1— 1— 1— 1—
Grade AO/PS Ethnicity Disability Part time Performance mark Male Female m f m f m f 1 2 4 * * * * * * 2A 13 24 * * * * * * 2B 28 44 * * * * * 10 3 20 30 * * * * * 5 4 1 — * * * * * * 5 — — * * * * * * Total in Grade 64 102 1— 1— 1— 1— 1— 1—
Grade EO/TM/SPS/Planning assistants Ethnicity Disability Part time Performance mark Male Female m f m f m f 1 — 4 * * * * * * 2A 11 8 * * * * * * 2B 24 27 * * * * * 5 3 22 6 * * * * * * 4 — — * * * * * * 5 — — * * * * * * Total in Grade 57 45 1— 1— 1— 1— 1— 1— 1included within grade totals Note:
*=less than 5 people in group
182W
Grade HEO Ethnicity Disability Part time Performance mark Male Female m f m f m f 1 — 1 * * * * * * 2A 6 6 * * * * * * 2B 10 5 * * * * * * 3 7 3 * * * * * * Letter from C. J. Shepley to Mr. John McDonnell, dated 12 January 1999:
183WThe Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions has asked me to reply to your Questions in which you asked:
- 1. whether, in the 1998 report round, we applied the Cabinet Office's "4/5ths rule" to the performance markings of Inspectorate staff; and
- 2. what were the appraisal performance markings awarded to Inspectorate staff broken down by (i) grade, (ii) gender, (iii) ethnicity, (iv) part time/full time working and (v) disability.
The answer to your first question is "no".In answer to your second question I attach a table showing a breakdown of the 1998 performance markings for Inspectorate staff. Where there are fewer than 5 people in the ethnic minority, disability or part-time categories we have suppressed the information in order to maintain the confidentiality of personal information.
Grade HEO Ethnicity Disability Part time Performance mark Male Female m f m f m f 4 — — * * * * * * 5 — — * * * * * * Total in Grade 23 15 1— 1— 1— 1— 1— 1—
Grade SEO Ethnicity Disability Part time Performance mark Male Female m f m f m f 1 1 — * * * * * * 2A 2 — * * * * * * 2B 9 1 * * * * * * 3 5 1 * * * * * * 4 — — * * * * * * 5 — — * * * * * * Total in Grade 17 2 1— 1— 1— 1— 1— 1—
Grade G6/7 (grades combined to preserve anonymity) Ethnicity Disability Part time Performance mark Male Female m f m f m f l — — * * * * * * 2A 3 — * * * * * * 2B 3 — * * * * * * 3 2 — * * * * * * 4 — — * * * * * * 5 — — * * * * * * Total in Grade 7 — 1— 1— 1— 1— 1— 1— 1Included within grade totals
Grade: Housing and planning inspector Ethnicity Disability Part time Performance mark Male Female m f m f m f 1 — — * * * * * * 2 17 2 * * * * * * 3 20 4 * * * * * * 4 — — * * * * * * 5 — — * * * * * * Total in Grade 37 6 1— 1— 1— 1— 1— 1—
Grade: Senior housing and planning inspector Ethnicity Disability Part time Performance mark Male Female m f m f m f 1 2 — * * * * * * 2 99 7 * * 5 * 8 * 3 24 5 * * * * * * 4 1 — * * * * * * 5 — — * * * * * * Total in Grade 126 12 1— 1— 1— 1— 1— 1—
184W185W
Grade: Principal housing and planning inspector Ethnicity Disability Part time Performance mark Male Female m f m f m f 1 3 1 * * * * * * 2 30 2 * * * * * * 3 1 — * * * * * * 4 — — * * * * * * 5 — — * * * * * * Total in Grade 34 3 1— 1— 1— 1— 1— 1— 1Included within grade totals Letter from Lawrie Haynes to Mr. John McDonnell, dated 12 January 1999:
I refer to your written Parliamentary Questions, Nos 64803 and 64825, which were tabled for answer by the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions. I have been asked to reply to you with regard to information relating to the Highways Agency.In reply to PQ 64803 we are in the process of completing the Agency's annual exercise which monitors the way in which appraisal and performance marks have been awarded. We expect to have this work completed by the end of January and I hope you will agree that it would be best that I should write to you again when the information is available.In reply to PQ 64825 we use our own formula to determine whether there is any potential adverse impact on a particular group. This involves comparing the mean average performance mark for each group which we round up or down to the nearest whole number. If a particular group has a lower whole number than another group, this would merit further investigation.
§ Mr. McDonnellTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions how many civil servants in each grade in DETR (C), broken down by(a) gender, (b) ethnicity, (c) part/full time working and (d) disability, will be paid performance-related pay if it is agreed to make a second-stage payment based on performance markings arising from the 1998 appraisal round. [64924]
§ Mr. MealeIf it is decided that the 1998 Settlement is to be differentiated according to performance then all staff with a C marking will get at least 2.8 per cent. whilst all those with a B2 will get 3.4 per cent.; all those with a B1 will get 4.0 per cent. and all those with an A will get 4.6 per cent., subject to an increase of at least 3.5 per cent. inclusive of any element for restructuring, which also formed part of this year's settlement.
§ Mr. McDonnellTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (1) what the performance markings for civil servants in DETR (C) in each grade were in 1998, broken down by(a) gender, (b) ethnicity, (c) part/full time working and (d) disability; [64926]
(2) what were in each grade the promotability markings awarded in the 1998 appraisal round for civil servants in DETR (C), broken down by gender, race and disability.[64920]
§ Mr. MealeThe performance and promotion data from the 1997–98 appraisal round analysed by my Department have been placed in the Library. In some areas it has not been possible to produce detailed breakdowns by grade without potentially revealing the identity of individual members of staff. In these cases data fields have been marked 'X' to maintain the confidentiality of individual staff records.
§ Mr. McDonnellTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what equal opportunity training civil servants in DETR(C) received before the introduction of the present appraisal system. [64919]
§ Mr. MealeAwareness of equal opportunities issues and avoiding discrimination and bias forms an integral part of the Department's training courses. Both former Departments' appraisal systems were introduced with186W training programmes covering equal opportunities issues, as did the refresher training for all staff in the new DETR(C) appraisal system.
§ Mr. McDonnellTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions where were in each of the last five years the performance markings of civil servants in the predecessor bodies to DETR(C), broken down by(a) grade, (b) gender, (c) ethnicity, (d) part/full time working and (e) disability. [64925]
§ Mr. MealeThis information, relating to appraisal systems which have now been superseded, cannot be provided in the format requested without incurring disproportionate costs.