by Simon Nelson
President | Disabled Police Association

Welcome to the first of my one page blogs this year which I have been publishing every two months, in the hope they will stimulate thoughts and discussion without taking up too much of your busy time. Please feel free to contribute, challenge and share any comments and ideas about the points raised.

I suppose it would be helpful to first explain what first prompted me to become involved in my local disability staff network around seven years ago, and I suspect my circumstances and motivations will mirror those of others. Like many, I had not considered myself to be ‘disabled’ because that label appeared to ignore everything else I was able to do and on the whole I was able to manage the more challenging days myself – much easier to do I might add for those in more senior positions who have greater flexibility around how we work. That said, being open about my challenges and seeking some reasonable support was liberating and I was keen to work with others with similar lived experiences, to dispel misconceptions and improve equality and inclusion for disabled colleagues, as disability had been historically side-lined as a characteristic. I was lucky to lead our network within a supportive and progressive police force and proud that it has now grown to include in excess of 1,000 members.

There is occasionally some confusion regarding the role of staff networks compared to the Police Federation, Police Superintendents Association and the unions representing police staff. The statutory associations perform important official functions on behalf of their members including providing legal representation, and it is indeed a sad statistic that around 45% of the recent employment tribunals at which the Police Federation have supported police officers relate to claims of disability discrimination. Our diverse staff networks are made up of volunteers with lived experience of having protected characteristics and a source of invaluable and informed information to support the retention, recruitment and development of the diverse workforce our service needs.

Unfortunately there is no consistent funding or support for these volunteers meaning the time they are afforded to do this important work and the resources available to them depends on what is negotiable within 43 different police forces. If I had not been granted half of each week by my Force to support me as a national lead it would have been impossible for me to do it. Unfortunately there are also real inconsistencies in terms of how much support with time and funds is offered to some national protected groups, compared with others and whilst recognising the financial pressures on policing remain consistently high, valuing difference is also consistently referred to as a priority? It is interesting that some Governments have decided to fund their national police association positions, understanding the value those who are also members of their communities could have in informing how those communities are served by their police.

There are occasions when I believe some leaders perceive staff networks to be a barrier, yet in my experience they are usually keen to be part of the solution. Only this week a Force taking part in a national programme chose not to accept a local offer of advice and support, before going on to include incorrect information on a slide which caused avoidable offence. I would argue that one of the reasons some previous diversity strategies did not result in real change was due to insufficient engagement with our diverse networks, to ensure informed delivery plans delivered tangible improvements. As a police service we are fully invested in Independent Advisory Groups to shape how we serve our communities and yet we often choose not to adequately support or invest in the diverse knowledge within our service. This needs to change as the pressures on network volunteers has become intolerable in recent years and particularly some of those with disabilities who are becoming increasingly exhausted and having to step down in the face of multiple, conflicting pressures.

The Diversity Equality and Inclusion in Policing Survey Report, published last August by Durham University revealed some shocking findings. These included 41.8% of officers having been subjected to derogatory comments from colleagues regarding their disability, and 29.6% having experienced jokes about their disability. We need the senior leaders of all 43 forces and Police Chiefs Council to stand with us, agree that is wrong and share our determination to make things better by providing suitable and consistent support to the staff groups representing the statutory protected identities – we are neither antagonistic nor apologetic, we simply want to be part of the change we wish to see in our service. ∎

by Simon Nelson
President | Disabled Police Association

Welcome to the third of my bi-monthly one page blogs this year and thank you for the support you offer, even if that is simply a desire to know more. The timing for this could not be better as we are now into Disability History Month which runs between the 18^th November and 18^th December.

This is the time for the pride enjoyed by other groups during their own history months, when they celebrate their identity, difference, rich heritage, and some of the freedoms they have finally secured. Disability should be celebrated and championed with equal fanfare, as those I know who live with those conditions tend to be incredible problem-solvers and resilient achievers in so many ways due to their coping routines and ‘work arounds’. Our routines typically include tough days (over and above someone’s typical) and better days, bouncing back on each occasion to crack on with what needs to be done. This demonstrates why, if a disabled colleague requests support from you, they really need it! We also need to recognise why the term ‘disabled’ is not an easy one to shout out with enthusiasm as it focuses on what we are unable to do rather than all that we are able to do. Terms such as ‘diversability’ and ‘differentability’ truly reflect what those with disabilities or live with neurodiversity have to offer our society and our service. Unfortunately, the Equality Act, which replaced the Disability Discrimination Act, will always bring us back to that familiar term.

It is incredible that it is only 25 years since the Disability Discrimination Act was enacted – let’s pause and reflect on that – only 25 years since it became illegal to discriminate based upon an individual’s long-term, life affecting difference. Unfortunately I believe there are many occasions when ‘disability’ disproportionately evokes stereotypes of the ill or old; and for those of working age, work-avoidance or absence – this influences how policies are written; support offered; and opportunities for inclusion and progression provided. Only the other day I heard a news journalist refer to a disabled person living with a ‘disease’ when they were simply endeavouring to have the best possible life, living with a condition that was part of who they were since birth. ‘Suffers with’ is another regular association – they rarely do, but they often do suffer from intolerance and exclusion. Imperfections are not inadequacies – ‘normal’ is nonsense and on that note the film industry needs to stop associating non-typical physical features as a source of fear.

The theme for Disability History Month this year is Access, which is likely to prompt thoughts of wheelchairs, an image typically associated with disability and although around half of disabled persons have mobility challenges, the access issues are far wider in terms of opportunity. I believe the police service has reached one of the most important points in its history when we need to consider how much we value disability within the service, particularly disabled officers. Only around 17% of disabled persons are born with their disability, so with a new normal retirement age of 60 we can expect an increase in the total number of those who experience a life-changing illness or injury. Our service can chose to ‘exit’ those individuals along with the abilities and experience they have amassed, or support them as representatives of a community we serve. Other protected groups are campaigning for better advancement, representation, and equality – we desperately strive for retention. Of course the service needs some fully-operational number of officers to ‘chase and restrain’ or fulfil other mobilisation commitments, but how many roles genuinely, routinely and typically require that? We also need to understand that disabled candidates should be encouraged to apply to join, to increase difference within the service, if they meet the entry requirements which includes the fitness test.

History is filled with disabled achievers (oxymoron?), including Albert Einstein whose condition prevented him from speaking until he was 3 years old; and Horatio Nelson – my shorter and more famous namesake! We sometimes forget that we continue to write history, so let’s fill it with fairness and inclusion – we can support and unlock diversability talent as well as all of the discretionary effort that comes with that. ∎

by Simon Nelson
President | Disabled Police Association

Welcome to the second of my one page blogs I am publishing every two months, in the hope they will stimulate thoughts and discussion without taking up too much of your busy time. Please feel free to contribute, challenge and share any comments and ideas about the points raised – I do not profess to be an expert and every day is a school day for me!

On this occasion I am going to share some thoughts about language and categorisation and the impact on individuals. Even the term ‘disabled’ feels like a millstone around the neck due to the intimation we are defined in some way as deactivated or largely incapable, when in fact those with disabilities usually have a multitude of other skills, talent and experience as well as incredible resilience as a result of the conditions, fatigue or pain they have to manage on a daily basis. This, as well as the fear of being treated differently or excluded, is why many with those conditions that have a long-term substantial effect on their daily living (Equality Act definition), feel reluctant to discuss this identity with others. Other terms such as ‘neurodiverse‘ or ‘impairment’ go some way to avoiding the stigma of disability – nevertheless the Act affords essential protection, particularly for the only protected group whose members have to prove their identity before they are allowed to belong.

The clustering of diverse groups occurs in an attempt to better manage and understand the characteristics and needs of protected communities in general terms. Disability for example covers a broad ranges of conditions, but then the impact of a permanent injury or condition on each individual often varies greatly. Other groups face similar clustering, such as ‘BAME’ which does little to reflect the vast range of cultures, colours, religions and heritage within those communities; or ‘LGBT+’ for which the powerful rainbow image coveys so much in terms of many different sexual orientations. The same spectrum of identities is true for other groups and we must never lose sight of the individuals behind the labels who deserve our support and protection. This week there was another helpful and interesting debate on Twitter about intersectionality, facilitated by @WeCops which I recommend you read – valuing difference has to mean valuing individual difference for it to offer true value.

Does this mean that diversity, equality and inclusion for individuals is too complex and intractable to support? Not at all: if we recognise that ‘normal’ is entirely subjective and it takes genuine curiosity and interest to allow meaningful support and empathy towards those different to us. Strategies are important but must rely on those with lived experience to inform plans that are more likely to result in lasting improvements. Moreover they have to be confident that those plans will be implemented consistently, without being stymied by politics and regardless of where they work or live. Staff networks offer that lived experience and free advice – the members may be outspoken at times and sceptical following many years of outrage and frustration, but they are highly committed to supporting change for the better and those who genuinely seek it (we know and value many of them).

We all have a common need in that we wish to be recognised as individuals whilst being given every opportunity to belong. This includes those who are not considered to be part of a ‘minority group’, and real risks arise from using derogatory language such as ‘just white middle-aged men’ or ‘male, stale and pale’ (I could add ‘agile’ but I won’t!) They need to know they are valued and we need their support whilst informing them of real examples of discrimination, exclusion and inequality others suffer because of their difference. We also need to recognise it is easy to make assumptions as not all differences are obvious; and the most pressing needs may not relate to someone’s visible difference. I believe an overwhelming majority of individuals at all levels want to do the right thing and should not be swayed by the risk of being labelled ‘politically correct’, ‘Virtue Signaller’ or ‘Woke’ in the negative sense. We must work closer than ever to be the change we want to see and be, the ‘wholehearted people‘ Brené Brown once described: with the courage to be imperfect; the compassion to be kind to ourselves and others; and connecting though authenticity, to be who we really are and enable others to confidently and safely say ‘I am enough’. ∎