Home > Workplace diversity > Conclusions

CONCLUSIONS

Trends in diversity and in the representation of different EEO groups in 2003—04 have been largely consistent with movements in recent years. The satisfaction of APS employees with flexible arrangements that allow them to maintain an effective work-life balance remains high, and these arrangements appear to be allowing employees to deal with continuing long working hours in some areas. The performance of the APS in the employment of women has also been particularly strong: not only has the overall representation of women among ongoing employees continued to rise, but more importantly, the proportion of women employed at senior levels is continuing to increase steadily, with encouraging signs that this improvement is likely to continue. The slight rise in the employment of NESB1 employees this year is also encouraging, although in effect the employment of this group has been relatively stable for the last five years, after falling from 3.9% in 1995 to 3.3% in 1999.

Of major concern is the employment of Indigenous Australians and people with a disability. Indigenous employees were the only EEO group whose representation fell in both absolute and proportional terms in 2003—04. Last year’s report highlighted that growth in Indigenous employment has stalled, and that there was serious risk of a decline. The evidence this year is that a longer term trend of declining representation may indeed be beginning to emerge with the proportion of Indigenous employees in the APS declining from 2.7% in 1999 to 2.3% in 2004, after gains in the period leading up to 1999. General trends to decreasing engagement rates and increasing separation rates for Indigenous employees indicate that this situation could deteriorate further unless the APS takes concerted action. Changes to ATSIC and ATSIS also represent a serious short-term risk that must be carefully managed.

The agency survey results indicate that there is considerable potential for agencies to adopt more targeted measures aimed at recruiting and retaining Indigenous employees. The APS Commission has identified this area as a priority and, through its Indigenous Employment Strategy, is continuing to work with agencies to redress the declining representation of Indigenous Australians in the APS. Priority areas for 2004—05 include supporting the transition of Indigenous employees from ATSIS to APS line agencies, and developing training approaches to support the new Indigenous Coordination Centres which have replaced existing ATSIS regional offices. The impact of these changed administrative arrangements on Indigenous employment will be monitored closely in future State of the Service reports.

The representation of people with a disability in the APS was stable in 2003—04, but it is too early to suggest that there has been any change in the trend to declining representation for this group since 1995. While agencies are more likely to identify specific measures for the recruitment of people with a disability than for the recruitment of Indigenous employees, these measures are not being reflected in outcomes. In addition, the continuing high dissatisfaction rates of people with a disability, and to a lesser extent Indigenous employees, remain of concern.

The employee survey results on the proportion of employees who have experienced discrimination, bullying or harassment are consistent with those from last year and, despite some improvements in relation to satisfaction with agency support structures, suggest that agencies need to pay more attention to this issue. The main problem appears to be poor management. Our findings suggest that agencies could benefit by a greater concentration on developing managers’ skills in such areas as performance appraisal and feedback, developing effective review mechanisms, and communicating expected standards of workplace behaviour.

To make the most of a diverse workforce, to address issues associated with the ageing of the APS workforce, and to ensure that employment disadvantage is eliminated for relevant groups, agencies need to engage in systematic diversity planning that is integrated with their broader workforce planning. Data from the employee survey on differing job satisfaction factors that are important for different groups of employees, and on those that are important for almost all groups (that is, good working relationships and flexible working arrangements) can help to inform this planning. However, agency WDPs need to be based on a thorough understanding of their own workforce demographics.

The Commission’s examination of a sample of written WDPs in 2003—04 indicates that considerable work has already been done in the area of workforce diversity planning, and also indicates that effective WDPs can have a substantial impact on the credibility of agencies’ approaches to workplace diversity. It is important, however, that agencies do not lose sight of the need for specific measures targeted at groups likely to suffer employment disadvantage, particularly Indigenous Australians and people with a disability, who may otherwise find it difficult to secure and retain employment in an increasingly highly-skilled APS.

With the exception of women, the provision of data for EEO groups remains less systematic than could be wished. The agency survey provides information about why this may be so, and particularly indicates the potential for agencies to implement more systematic and regular approaches to reviewing and updating diversity data for their employees. This data is not only relevant to the maintenance of the Commission’s APSED database and reporting on service-wide trends, but is essential for agencies themselves to underpin effective workplace diversity programs and workforce plans.