Latest news with #CommitteeForAcademicFreedom
Telegraph
a day ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
Cambridge University ‘discriminates' against white job seekers
The University of Cambridge has been accused of discriminating against white job seekers. Guidance issued at the world-leading university advises departments to 'try to ensure' that at least one candidate from 'underrepresented groups' is invited for every interview. The 'diverse recruitment framework' further encourages recruiters to readvertise positions if the longlist of candidates 'is not diverse', is all white or male. The guidance, currently in use at the university, also says interview panels should be 'diverse both in gender and race' and composed of individuals who have taken training courses in equality, diversity, inclusion (EDI) and unconscious bias. Edward Skidelsky, the lecturer in philosophy at the University of Exeter and director of the Committee for Academic Freedom, said the policies were 'tantamount to discrimination against white applicants'. 'This is one of the worst cases we have come across of EDI interference in what should be a purely academic process,' he said. 'Favouritism towards women and non-whites demeans them, and encourages the very prejudices it is intended to overcome.' Documents seen by The Telegraph show the guidance, first issued in 2019, is copied word for word in 'hiring instructions' sent to academics involved in recruitment processes at the university. The framework advises academics that recruitment panels should not be made up entirely of 'white males' or 'people with a particular career track record'. It reads: 'Conduct the shortlisting with more than one person on the panel, ideally forming the panel that is diverse both in gender and race if possible. 'Research shows that when the final applicant pool has only one minority candidate, they are unlikely to be offered the position: try to ensure that more than one candidate from under-represented groups is invited to [the] interview stage. 'If the longlist is not diverse, you do not have to appoint someone immediately, consider readvertising the position to encourage a more diverse shortlist.' Elsewhere, it says all members of recruitment panels 'must have completed the online University modules on E&D [equality and diversity] and Understanding Unconscious Bias'. Those involved in hiring decisions are also told to 'reflect' on the university's EDI commitments, 'their own biases' and the potential for 'implicit bias' before interviews and after selecting a favoured candidate. A source familiar with the workings of Cambridge's EDI committee said members were told 'don't worry about it' when they raised questions about the policies' legality. The source said: 'I joined the committee, wanting to see what was actually going on and maybe prevent things from going off the rails. 'When I got there, I discovered it was already off the rails.' The source added: 'If you criticise it, you're just seen as a bad person.' They went on to claim they had witnessed colleagues from non-underrepresented backgrounds – such as white people and men – being actively discouraged from applying to positions because of their race or sex. A spokesman for Cambridge denied that applicants were told this, saying it was 'not a view held by the university, relevant committees or senior management and is directly prohibited in law and our own policies'. Prof David Abulafia, the professor emeritus of Mediterranean history at the University of Cambridge, said the guidance was 'arrant nonsense'. He said: 'The sheer fanaticism of the bureaucracy at Cambridge and the craven submission of academics to their arrant nonsense spells the end of a once great university.' Prof John Marenbon, the philosopher and fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, added: 'Academic appointments should be made solely on the basis of academic merit. Academics who do otherwise betray their calling.' The university's EDI 'plan for action' includes a target to increase ethnic minority applications to 'academic and research posts to 8 per cent or higher' and 'for professional services roles to 30 per cent'. A spokesman for the University of Cambridge said: 'Every candidate is recruited based on merit. We have no quotas for staff recruitment and strongly refute claims of discriminating against white and male job applicants 'Our 'diverse recruitment framework' is a guidance document aimed at ensuring that all suitably qualified candidates are encouraged to apply for roles at Cambridge – not to dictate the outcome of recruitment. 'Use of this guidance, including training recommendations, is not mandated in our recruitment policy.'
Telegraph
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Oxford University ‘demands candidates back diversity policies'
Oxford University has been accused of failing to protect free speech by requiring all job applicants to support diversity measures. The university is one of several top educational institutions that have been warned that their hiring policies cbreach their legal obligation to protect free speech. A report by the campaign group Alumni for Free Speech (AFFS) claims that candidates and employees who do not agree with the way that diversity employment policies are implemented face discrimination and are discouraged from expressing their views. AFFS's report states: 'In recent years, free speech campaigners have encountered numerous examples of universities requiring applicants for jobs to provide evidence of their support for employment, diversity and inclusion (or get marked down on selection), or imposing duties on employees to promote or support EDI. ''EDI' has become a broad, amorphous concept that includes contested viewpoints and agendas which are not required to be enforced by the Equality Act or other laws.' The report claims that Oxford University, King's College London and Leeds University are among the 'worst offenders'. 'Discrimination baked into the system' It said Leeds 'appeared to have discrimination against candidates with the 'wrong views' baked into the system', while Oxford had failed to take action over previous warnings about its diversity hiring policies. AFFS, with help from the Committee for Academic Freedom and other free speech organisations, conducted research into the 21 English and Welsh members of the Russell Group to establish the extent of what it said was a problem blighting British university education. It found that eight of the Russell Group universities required candidates to provide evidence of their commitment to diversity as part of the recruitment process. Eleven were found to have imposed duties on candidates to support or promote diversity. The report claims that only seven universities appear to be fully compliant with their legal obligation to protect free speech. Risk of non-compliance AFFS also conducted less detailed research into English and Welsh members of Universities UK, which found that out of the total of 108 universities reviewed, over 45 per cent are 'highly likely to be acting non-compliantly'. It said that a further 15 are seriously at risk of non-compliance. The report found that several universities require job applicants to show evidence of their 'commitment' to diversity and mark candidates down who do not demonstrate sufficient levels of support. It said: 'As a result, candidates and employees are discouraged from expressing their viewpoints on often controversial matters. This is highly likely to be legally and regulatorily non-compliant.' AFFS said that all universities needed to ensure that their recruitment and employee policies do not contravene their legal and regulatory duties under the Equality and Education Acts to protect free speech. It comes after claims that diversity policies were at the root of the treatment of Jo Phoenix, a criminology professor, by the Open University. An employment tribunal found in January last year that Prof Phoenix was discriminated against and harassed by her employer, the Open University, because of her gender critical beliefs. After the ruling, Open University said: 'This judgment made for difficult reading for all of us. In several areas we fell very short and for those apologise unreservedly.' Prof Abhishek Saha, who teaches mathematics at Queen Mary University of London told The Telegraph: 'As many legal experts have noted, elements of EDI as currently promoted in universities are highly contested, ideological in nature, and go beyond legal obligations. 'Requiring EDI commitments in recruitment creates an environment where applicants feel pressured to conform to a particular ideological stance in order to have a fair shot at the job. This discourages diversity of thought and has a chilling effect on academic freedom.' Oxford University told The Telegraph that it would not be commenting on the report at this stage. The Russell Group of Universities also said it would not be commenting on the report.
