serving Britain's armed forces
|
|
serving Britain's armed forces |
|
| informing, supporting and sustaining the men and women of Britain's Armed Forces who are unashamedly proud2serve | |
| home :: sitemap :: news :: key
documents :: civil
partnership :: contact :: forum ::
chat :: links :: shopping :: finance :: search ::
guestbook |
|
20070204-U-JtLGBTConferenceRAFbreakOutNotes 4 Feb 07 RAF E&D Policy Staff JAN 07 ARMED FORCES LESBIAN AND GAY CONFERENCE - RAF BREAK-OUT SESSION INTRODUCTION 1. Purpose of Paper. During the Jan 07 Armed Forces LGB Conference’s Saturday morning session, delegates were split out into single service groups for approx 60 minutes of discussion time, and were asked to consider a number of matters. The RAF group’s discussion is summarised in the paper below, largely under these headings. 2. Group Composition. There were 11 personnel in the RAF break out discussion group on Sat morning of whom 2 were from the RAF Equality and Diversity Staff (SO2 and WO) and one was from the Stonewall Diversity Champions Programme. The remainder were RAF serving personnel, and lesbian and gay representation from across the rank structure was present. 3. Caveat. The salient points, as précised below, are based on the recollection of Flt Lt Johnston who facilitated the discussion. TAKING THINGS FORWARD - RAF WORKING GROUP (WG) 4. WG as a Conduit. The group was asked how the RAF should take forward the positive engagement and interaction generated at the conference. There was overall support for the idea of a working group / focal group which would represent the views of the community to the RAF E&D staff, acting as an ‘intelligent filter’. It was felt to be important that the group also represented LGB&T, all ranks and the variety of specialisations within the RAF in recognition of the difference workplace pressures experienced. 5. WG Composition. The suggestion was also made that the Working Group should include representation of the straight serving community. This would reinforce the view that integration, not segregation, should be the key driver behind any workplace initiatives. Suitable guarantees of confidentiality should safeguard any concerns on disclosure of sexual orientation outside the WG. 6. Challenges of Communication. It was also pointed out that many people who were not out at work would be unlikely to communicate with the WG through official channels or at their workplace, however anonymous that communication would remain. Interaction through informal community channels, such as proud2serve.net, would likely not generate a larger degree of engagement. SUPPORT FROM RAF E&D 7. Format. The E&D Staff asked the RAF service personnel how the equal rights and zero tolerance message could best be delivered. It was felt that information on homosexuality in the Armed Forces should be seen to be provided as part of the overall E&D package within the RAF rather than as a standalone initiative. This would make any information and resources more accessible to those who were not out in their workplace would have the added advantage of making it appear less confrontational to those militant voices amongst the 94 %. 8. Target Audience. There were felt to be two key target audiences on which information campaigns should focus, i.e. recruits on initial entry to the RAF and the senior commissioned officer/SNCO cadre. a. Recruit Training at RAF Halton, Honington and Cosford was a natural place to educate those new to the Service and this would fit well as an initiative in the Padre Hours. However it was also acknowledged that most information delivered via presentations and PowerPoint in the first weeks was not retained due to ‘shock of capture’. An excellent alternative to this would be provide a handout or ‘E&D Case Study Booklet’ similar to the ‘Leadership’ publication for recruits which would feature ‘my life’ stories from personnel from the various E&D workstrands, focussing on junior ranks in a variety of Trade Groups. b. Senior Officer/SNCO Cadre. Recognising that today’s young entrants are more likely to reflect the liberal attitudes of contemporary society there may be equal value in targeting those in command who might benefit more from initiatives targeting workplace behaviour. 9. The Senior Chain of Command. A visible commitment from members of the Air Force Board would be welcomed. Now that the RAF has followed the RN lead in signing up for Stonewall’s Diversity Champions, there is perceived to be plenty of scope for the Air Ranks to demonstrate leadership in embracing what for some will be a cultural change, rather than the current prevailing perception that the RAF is just going through the motions as directed. 10. Station EDA Personalities. It was felt that Stn Equality & Diversity Advisers (EDA) should be drawn from across the ranks. These appointments should also be highlighted in SROs and in an E&D slide presented during Station Arrivals, where appropriate. The group was encouraged that RAF E&D have negotiated that personnel from the rank of Cpl and above will now be eligible to attend courses at the Joint Equality and Diversity Training Centre (JEDTC) to become EDAs, previously the reserve of more senior ranks. It was viewed that this will greatly improve the delivery of E&D advice as the more junior ranks may be perceived as more approachable; it will also mitigate against JOs being minimally involved in just another secondary duty and encourage a robust 8-strong EDA team on each Stn. 11. Communication. Whilst the RAF E&D Newsletter and similar publications were admirable, the group were all familiar with ‘coffee table syndrome’ whereby the myriad glossies produced simply pile up on crew room tables without reaching the target audience. To support the first year of Diversity Champions, a suitably-endorsed, high-level corporate communication should be issued to explain the requirement for initiatives in this E&D workstrand. A suitably high-profile vehicle such as uNeed2Know, in combination with RAF News, would be apt. 12. Helpline. Helpline numbers were not thought to be sufficiently visibly profiled around Stns. It was suggested these could be included in repeat orders and any E&D handbook or notes issued to recruits. NEXT FORCES’ CONFERENCE ON LGBT MATTERS 13. RAF as Lead Service. There was a willingness by personnel to see the RAF act as lead Service for the next ‘Joint Service Conference on LGBT Matters’ and this should be held in the Autumn of 2007. The RAF’s E&D staff should not be expected to prepare and manage the conference on its own and the community would be happy to take the lead on this, through whichever finalised WG concept, but our E&D staff must be fully engaged and provide the necessary links and join-ups It would be good to see the conference opened by an RAF Air Rank Officer, as per the example of the Naval Secretary, RAdm Richard Ibbotson, who officially opened and participated in the first day of the Jan 07 conference. 14. Timing. The best time of year to hold the next Conference would be during early Oct or Nov 07, to avoid Remembrance commemorations and the December party season. This would maintain the momentum being generated, would avoid the post-Christmas effect of holding the Conference in the New Year. It would hopefully encourage a stronger representation from the junior ranks by being held early in the month. Aside from publicity, the impact of January and taking place late in the month were key factors limiting wider RAF participation. In the current ops tempo, it would also be important to make a decision before the end of March 07 in order to allow time for the Conference to be placed squarely on a formal footing (RAF or Jt Svce) and have the DIN sanctioned and issued early enough for personnel to be released to attend. 15. Venue. The were three variables which needed to be considered and should feature in any discussion leading to a decision on venue and timing: a. Service Venue – Public Venue. It was acknowledged that the Union Jack Club was an ideal facility and location as London was central in the transportation network, there were plenty of affordable private accommodation options within reach, and the social aspect of the conference was at its most dynamic in London. Moving the Conference to Lincolnshire for the RAF would be most difficult for any sister service involvement. Whilst holding the Conference on base would send an extremely strong signal, it was also deemed that it would strongly discourage those not out and those who might be concerned about arriving at a unit to attend, and it being obvious why they were there. It would also mitigate against the number of drop-ins which this Conference experienced, from those personnel too concerned for their own privacy at work to pre-notify their attendance. With a view to the future acceptance and credibility of the confidence, it was roundly agreed that the UJC or similar venue was the ideal for the present, with the aspiration to move on-base at some point in the future. b. Mid Week – Weekend. There are effectively 3 options for when to hold a conference during the week and they all have pros and cons. A few which were highlighted are included. A Fri/Sat event carries the risk of appearing to be a jolly although it is more manageable for personnel who might need to take leave to attend. A Sat/Sun event ought to encourage more personnel to attend who are not out and therefore unable to ask for the time away from their workplace. However, a wholly weekend-based event may discourage some JRs from coming along as it was in their, rather than the Service’s time. Other forces’ conferences were held mid-week and this would be viewed to be an aspiration for when the climate in the RAF is more accepting of such initiatives. c. Degrees of Outness. It would have to be decided whether it was the key purpose of the Conference to discuss LGBT matters and engage with policy and decision makers or whether it should be viewed as an informal support occasion for personnel who were least at ease with their sexuality in the workplace. How the views and concerns of the group of personnel who felt unable to attend was to be represented should also be addressed. 16. Purpose. It would be important to provide a balance between the two key functions of the Conference, i.e. peer support and communication with E&D staffs. It should also be seen to have key outputs by providing a tangible input into policy making, and delivering actions to selected delegates which could be monitored during the period between Conferences or WG meetings. 17. Station Focal Points. To capture more of those who were not out to their chains of command, allowing the lead EDA on each stn/establishment to act as focal point for Conference returns, authorising absences and approving any budget-holder sanctioned claims for T&S. The E&D staff agreed to investigate how T&S and absence requests could be managed through EDAs or Admin staffs. 18. Publicity. Although this year’s Conference had achieved a strong turnout using informal networks and proud2serve.net, it was felt that much more should be done to publicise future conferences in a timely and robust fashion. This should be achieved via a compulsory announcement in SROs, an RAF E&D 1* approved article in RAF News and an announcement on the RAF Intranet. COMMUNICATION WITH THE FRONT LINE 19. That proud2serve.net had by now matured to become the de facto communications channel for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transsexual was widely acknowledged. However, the website was still not universally known amongst the serving population and should not be viewed as the only communications channel to be used. Participants looked forward to the RAF E&D webpages being available at the front-line on their dii/RLI desktops alongside the other RAF and Defence Intranet webpages. Better use of RAF News could be made to promote general awareness of policy initiatives, helplines, the role of the EDA, and to highlight the existence of informal community-based support groups such as proud2serve.net and the regional social events. LESBIAN PARTICIPATION 20. Number of Serving Lesbians. Two of the 9 service personnel in the RAF group were female. The group was asked to consider why there appeared to be a lower take-up amongst lesbians in participating in the Conference and how we might ensure that the ‘L’ voice in LGB was appropriately integrated. As with gay men, there are no reliable figures as to the proportion of women who are lesbian. However, official MOD statistics show that 12% of RAF personnel are women, with minor differences in proportion between commissioned and non-commissioned ranks. We should therefore expect to see a commensurate lower number of lesbians participating in formal and informal networks, if external factors are excluded. 21. Parallel Networks. It was noted that serving lesbians had historically been more successful at networking amongst themselves, even before the lifting of the ban, and faced being in a double minority in the RAF (ie female and gay) and that this particular circumstance meant they had their own separate networks to gay men. Lesbian JRs had very good established contacts with each other, as did gay male JRs, but these networks ran in isolation in parallel. Also, many lesbians did not particularly want to have any more to do with men than was necessary. Nevertheless a representation would remain an essential and integral part to any workplace LGBT initiatives. 22. Conference Agenda Item. It was agreed that lesbian participation at Conference would be strongly encouraged if any DIN, agendas or calling notices highlighted a separate agenda item to discuss matters of particular concern to lesbian personnel. MONITORING 23. 12% of the Stonewall Diversity Champions organisations conduct some form of monitoring of their employees’ sexual orientation. Although the group did not discuss monitoring in depth there was no strong opposition to an orientation being included on JPA, subject to suitable safeguards over access to the information. Whilst the results would inevitably be skewed, their development might be take as a proxy for how successfully E&D policies were addressing the workplace climate. PRIDE EVENTS 24. Participation. The E&D Staff were keen to know what the group felt about participating in Pride events, particularly the key question as to marching in uniform. It was acknowledged that there was a breadth of opinion in the gay service community with respect to Pride or any other public event. Some felt that it was their right to march in uniform, whilst others were more concerned that an overly high-profile march could damage the cause of integration unless covered by appropriate ‘lines to take’. The experience of the RN at Pride 2006 was not to be underestimated and this might serve as a basis for an RAF participation alongside the RN in 2007. 25. Funding and Authority. It was explained that the E&D budget, across all workstrands, was taught. A mooted solution to the funding and authority dilemma was to run the Pride participation as an official recruiting event, managed by the Directorate of Recruitment and to use the goodwill of gay service volunteers to march and to man a static recruiting stand alongside trained recruiters. The participation would therefore be seen to serve the best interests of the Service. 26. Single Service Approach. If there were to be a repeat of 2006’s differing inter-service approach this should be articulated in advance and with clear reference to any differing interpretation of Ministerial guidance, military law and regulations governing the wearing of uniform in public. 27. Media Message. The importance of selling participation to the other 94% of the force was considered to be equally important, alongside celebrating diversity at its finest and acting as a recruitment vehicle for the RAF. This would require a joined-up approach between RAF E&D, Corporate Comms and Directorate of Recruiting to be sponsored at the highest level. you can contact the author of this report via the proud2serve.net public forum as lincoln_edge you can discuss this report in the proud2serve.net public forum in the RAF area. the Army's write-up is posted to the Army section of the site for details of previous meetings which discussed matters of interest to the LGBT community within the RAF, go to the RAF community consultation page. discuss this subject in the proud2serve.net public forum
page: Royal Air Force ::
Home |
|||
|
|||
Proud2Serve.net - serving Britain's armed forces |
|||
