Corporate report
(CSV) Promotion – DWP equality information 2013 (data)
Updated 12 July 2013
Download CSV 3.4 KB
| 20. Promotion | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Not set | |||||
| Data source | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Resource Management. | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Time period and availability | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Latest data covers the period from 1 April 2012 to 31 March 2013. | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| What does this tell us? | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| The data presented here show employees promoted against their status in relation to each of the following protected characteristics: age; disability; ethnicity; and gender. | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| The percentage of promotions for ethnic minority employees and females are close to the corresponding headcounts, suggesting similar behaviour. The percentage of promotions for disabled employees are distorted by the declaration rate and the associated volumes which mean the results must be treated with caution. | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Compared with the 2012 report, promotion percentages have increased overall and in all age groups. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| How will an improvement be shown? | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Broadly, an increase in the percentage of group promoted will constitute an improvement. However, other factors will need to be considered such as: staff volumes; declaration rates; and organisational changes. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Table 20.1: Percentage of employees promoted by age1,2 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Age | % of promotions by age group3,6 | % of age group promoted4 | Not set | Not set | % of total headcount by age group5,6 |
| Not set | 2013 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2013 |
| 16-24 | 3 | 0.7 | 1.2 | 3.1 | 1.7 |
| 25-29 | 16.6 | 0.8 | 1.2 | 5.4 | 5.4 |
| 30-34 | 19.3 | 0.6 | 1.3 | 3.9 | 8.6 |
| 35-39 | 14.5 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 2.6 | 9.9 |
| 40-44 | 15.2 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 1.9 | 14.2 |
| 45-49 | 15.7 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 1.4 | 19.5 |
| 50-54 | 10.1 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 19 |
| 55-59 | 4.2 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 13.8 |
| 60-64 | 1.1 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 6.3 |
| 65+ | * | 0 | 0 | * | 1.5 |
| Total | 100 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 1.8 | 100 |
| Not set | |||||
| Table 20.2: Percentage of employees promoted by indicated disability 1,2 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Disability | % of promotions by indicated disability group3,6 | % of indicated disability group promoted4 | Not set | Not set | % of total headcount by indicated disability group5,6 |
| Not set | 2013 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2013 |
| Disabled | 4.3 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 1 | 6.5 |
| Non-disabled | 95.7 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 1.5 | 93.5 |
| Total | 100 | - | - | - | 100 |
| Not set | |||||
| Table 20.3: Percentage of employees promoted by indicated ethnicity 1,2 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Ethnicity | % of promotions by indicated ethnic group3,6 | % of indicated ethnic group promoted4 | Not set | Not set | % of total headcount by indicated ethnic group5,6 |
| Not set | 2013 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2013 |
| Ethnic minority | 10.9 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 1.7 | 11.2 |
| White | 89.1 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 1.7 | 88.8 |
| Total | 100 | - | - | - | 100 |
| Not set | |||||
| Table 20.4: Percentage of employees promoted by gender1,2 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Gender | % of promotions by gender3,6 | % of gender classification promoted4 | Not set | Not set | % of total headcount by gender5,6 |
| Not set | 2013 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2013 |
| Female | 63.9 | 0.3 | 0.6 | 1.6 | 68.3 |
| Male | 36.1 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 2 | 31.7 |
| Total | 100 | - | - | - | 100 |
| Not set | |||||
| Data Source: Resource Management | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Notes: | |||||
| 1. Data period 1 April 2012 to 31 March 2013. The equivalent period is covered where previous years are given. | |||||
| 2. * - Level of data too low for publication and percentages are rounded to 1 decimal place, given this totals may not sum due to rounding. | |||||
| 3. Percentages shown are the number of employees working part time by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees working part time who have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. | |||||
| 4. Percentages shown are the number of employees working part time by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees that have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. | |||||
| 5. Percentages shown are the number of employees by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees who have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. | |||||
| 6. Data for previous years is not available |