Equality Impact Assessment

Lead officer(s)

Craig Young

Date relevance assessment conducted

23 Feb 2024

Which groups of people do you think will be, or potentially could be, impacted (positively or negatively) upon by the implementation of this policy?

People with disabilities : No

People from black and minority ethnic communities and different racial backgrounds : No

Women and men (boys and girls) : Yes

Older people : No

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people : No

People from different religions or beliefs and people with no belief : No

Women who are pregnant or on maternity leave : No

People who are married or in a civil partnership : No

Children and young people : No

Do you have evidence or reason to believe that this policy/function/review will, or may potentially impact on Children's Rights 4?

N/A

Do you have evidence or reason to believe that this policy/function/review will, or may potentially impact on Human Rights 8?

N/A

Do you have evidence or reason to believe that this policy/function/review will, or may potentially:

Eliminate discrimination faced by particular groups : low

Impact upon the promotion of equality of opportunity between particular groups : low

Impact upon good relations between particular groups : low

Does it have overall relevance to equality? low

Impact on communities, including communities of interest: low

Reduce inequalities of outcome caused by socio-economic disadvantage:

Equality impact assessment required?

No

Rationale for decision

Whilst the current postholder is a woman, the policy decision to reduce her permanent hours is considered proportionate to achieve a legitimate aim. It reflects the current, and ongoing, position regarding the paralegal`s working hours and is therefore proportionate. It also achieves the legitimate aim of meeting service efficiency targets for 24/25 whilst continuing to maintain appropriate service levels.