HSJ today carries a report that the Central Manchester University Foundation NHS Trust has been found guilty of institutional racism with the award of £1m to a former manager. The trade union that represented the manager calls for an independent enquiry into the trust’s disciplinary policies following the discovery that whilst 2 per cent of the workforce are black they form 25 per cent of those subject to disciplinary action.
The trust strongly disputes that institutional racism is a feature of the organisation. This comes a week after the convictions in the Stephen Lawrence trial and the subsequent Macpherson enquiry into the police investigation which first gave us the term “institutional racism”. It is clear that some organisations do not understand what institutional racism is or simply refuse to accept it exists.
Stephen Lawrence was attacked because he was black. Eighteen years after his murder two of his killers have been sentenced to life in prison. His death and the inquiry that followed not only highlighted the level of hatred some white people directed towards black people but that police, intentionally or not, treated black people differently.
They were treated with suspicion and assumed to be more likely the perpetrators of crime rather than the victims. Black youths were stereotyped as violent gang members, drug dealers and drug users. The Macpherson enquiry gave a name to this unthinking prejudice based on ignorance and negative stereotypes, and said it could be found throughout our society. The point was emphatically made that racism was not just about the extreme behaviour of a few wicked people nor was it limited to unprovoked assaults, abuse shouted in the streets or outright discrimination.
As a result public sector organisations reviewed their recruitment practises and set targets to employ more black people. They provided staff with training to make them more aware of the experience of black people, the need to address their under representation in the workforce and the opportunity to examine negative stereotypes. But most of all to make it clear to staff that they should not use language that was offensive to black people, they should not make so called jokes about skin colour or race, and they should not discriminate against black people as colleagues or service users.
It is worth reminding ourselves of this because it is clear that some people have never understood the concept of institutional racism or have steadfastly refused to accept that it exists. “This organisation is not racist” they say. “I am not racist nor are any of my colleagues” they say. “Just because there aren’t any black senior managers doesn’t mean it is because of racism. We don’t care what colour someone is, we treat everyone the same.”
There have been changes over the last eighteen years: the casual racism in which people would refer to the “Paki” shop on the corner or made offensive jokes linking race and intelligence have become socially unacceptable. However black employees are still under represented in senior posts, a male black manager is still likely to be described as aggressive when the same behaviour from a colleague is called assertive, black staff are more likely to describe their manager as unsupportive, in many organisations black staff are disproportionately subject to disciplinary action. Perhaps as a consequence black members of staff have less faith in the organisation’s disciplinary and grievance procedures.
After the energy, enthusiasm and commitment to change following the Macpherson report there is a general feeling that the reality for black staff does match the rhetoric. There is also a feeling that senior managers have moved on, that austerity has brought a new set of challenges and priorities and that whilst individual’s personal commitment remains, their time and energy is directed elsewhere.
Can you make a racist remark and not be racist?
Last October, an incident took place that rocked English football, in which Liverpool football player Luis Suarez was alleged to have racially abused Manchester United’s Patrice Evra. According to Evra’s statements, you can make a racist remark and not be a racist.
Was he just saying that the opponent who he accused of repeatedly racially abusing him was not racist to appease his fellow professionals? Did he mean: “look this guy is not a wicked person just ignorant and insensitive”? I can understand the reluctance to call someone a racist, it is after all one of the worst things you can say about someone in our society. Presumably that is why no one ever admits to being a racist even those who use racist language and hold racist views. Being a racist is without dispute a very bad thing.
If a racist is not someone who uses racially abusive language, however, what does a racist do that makes them so? To be a racist do you have not only to abuse someone because of the colour of their skin but hold views that some people are inferior due to that reason and therefore do not deserve to be treated the same as the rest of us? So if you only meet part of this criteria does that mean you are not racist? If you call someone “black so and so”, that is useing racist language, but if you claim at the same time to believe in treating everyone fairly and not discriminating on the grounds of colour does that mean you are not a racist?
I know it sounds like we are just playing with words but what people say and how they say it is important, as is what we assume when they use this type of language. I belive that most people I have come across through work or socially are not racist but I have heard racist language used at work and in social gatherings. I explain this by the fact that people are often ignorant of other people’s culture, circumstances and feelings. That people are constantly fed negative stereotypes about Muslims, Asians or black people and so they often speak without thinking or realising the impact their words will have. But if an individual repeatedly makes these remarks despite being told it is offensive, hurtful and racist then clearly this is not ignorance but a true reflection of the way they think.
But does this view that using racist language, especially due to ignorance or insensitivity, does not make the individual a racist then result in people claiming that there is no racism in football or in this office - and lead to the concerning implication that nothing needs to be done?
No comments yet