AGENDA #5a

 

MEMORANDUM

 

TO:                  Mayor and Town Council

 

FROM:            W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager

 

SUBJECT:       Report on Numbers of Minority Supervisors

 

DATE:             December 9, 2002

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

This report is presented as the beginning point for considering a goal set by the Council.

 

At its January 2002 planning session, the Council established a goal to increase the number of minorities in supervisory positions.  Goal #32 from the April 8, 2002 meeting of the Council states:

 

Increase the number of minorities in supervisory positions.

 

April 8, 2002 Status: We will prepare a report for the Council about the make-up of the Town’s workforce over the past several years, including information about the number of minority employees occupying supervisory positions, as the beginning point for addressing this goal. We will provide this report in the second quarter of fiscal 2002-2003.

 

Human Resources staff prepared this report on the number of minority employees occupying supervisory positions.

 

DISCUSSION

 

Report on Numbers of Minorities in Supervisory Positions

 

The materials attached provide information about the Town’s employee group organized by race and gender. The information is based on November 2002 employment and is presented both in summary and for the four largest departments: Fire, Police, Public Works and Transportation.

 

The data on supervisory positions has been gathered with assistance from Department Heads. The definition of supervisor used is: “a position which has a significant level of authority in the hiring, training, evaluation, disciplinary actions and recommending for termination over one or more other regular positions.” This definition is consistent with the commonly understood meaning of the term.

 

Information about the Town’s workforce was compared to the race and gender distribution of the Town’s primary recruitment area. The primary recruitment area includes Orange County and four contiguous counties: Alamance, Chatham, Durham and Wake. This area was selected based on the distribution of the majority of the Town’s current employees and also reflects reasonable commuting distance.  The recruitment area demographics cited are gathered from the State Demographics Unit.

 

Findings

 

The statistics on which the following discussion is based are found in the attachment to this report which contains details and graphs for each element presented below.

 

Race Distribution for the Region

 

In the five-county recruitment area, race demographics vary significantly as shown in the charts attached. The White population ranges from 67% in Durham County to 81% in Orange County. The Black population ranges from 16% in Orange County to 37% in Durham County. The Other category includes, as defined by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian or Pacific Islander, and Hispanic persons) and falls within a 1% to 3% range for the region. The demographics for the five county regions are: White population 74%, Black population 24% and Other population 2%.

 

Race Distribution for All Departments

 

The Town employee group is 58% White, 40% Black and 2 % Other. This demonstrates slightly greater diversity than the region and a Black employee group representing a larger proportion of the employee group than the Black population proportion in the region. When the Town supervisory group is examined, the numbers indicate that 69% are White, 29% are Black and 2% are Other. This is similar to the population demographics of the region.

 

Distribution of Supervisors Within Race Groups of Town Employees

 

The number of Black employees in the Town is 250; of that group, 43 (17 %) are supervisors. The number of white employees in the Town is 354, of that group, 102 (29%) are supervisors. The number of employees of other races in the Town is 15; of that group, 3 (20 %) are supervisors.

 

Race Distribution for Four Largest Departments

 

In the four largest departments in the Town, there are demographic variations, especially in those occupational groups, such as Fire and Police, which traditionally have been male-dominated. Details are presented below with graphic representation of these figures shown on the charts attached.

 

 

 

1.  FIRE DEPARTMENT

 

Race
The Fire Department non supervisory group is 80% White, 18% Black and 2% Other. The supervisory group is 33% of the whole and is 79% White, 17% Black and 4% Other.

 

Gender

The employee group is 95% Male and 5% Female. The supervisor group is 92% Male and 8% Female.

 

2.  POLICE DEPARTMENT

 

Race

The Police Department non supervisory group is 80 % White, 18 % Black and 2 % Other with supervisors making up 19% of the whole. The supervisor group is 71% White, 29% Black, and 0% Other.

 

Gender

The employee group is 77 % Male and 23 % Female. The supervisor group is 75 % Male and 25 % Female.

 

3.  PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

 

Race

The non supervisory group is comprised of 33 % White, 65 % Black and 2 % Other. Supervisory positions represent 16 % of the whole. Of the supervisory group, 61 % are White, 31 % are Black.

 

Gender

The small number of female employees, 5 % of the department, is primarily located in the office and administrative functions of the department. Females represent 4 % of the supervisor group.

 

4.  TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT

 

Race

The non supervisory group is 32 % White, 65 % Black and 3 % Other. The supervisory group represents 18 % of the whole; 44 % of the supervisory group is White and 56 % are Black.

 

Gender

The employee group is 66 % Male and 34 % Female. The supervisory group is 50 % Male and 50% Female.

 

NEXT STEPS

 

Next steps include the following actions:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONCLUSIONS

 

The Town employee group exhibits a greater degree of diversity and racial balance than the working-age population of the five county recruitment area.  There is variation among and within departments in terms of demographics of employee and supervisory groups.

 

The specific reasons for the variations among departments can be attributed to a number of variables including job characteristics, applicant preferences, training and experience requirements for specific positions and other elements. The choices applicants make in terms of job interest, physical demands, preferred work schedules and other working conditions, the turnover rate for each type of work, the volume and types of work required and positions budgeted serve as constraints which may prevent an absolute balance from being either attained or maintained over time.

SUMMARY

 

Our action steps and plans are as follows:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.                  Comparison of Race Distribution of Town Employees and Supervisors to Race Distribution of Population in a Five County Area (p. 6).

2.                  Comparison of Gender Distribution of Town Employees and Supervisors to Gender Distribution of Population in a Five County Area (p. 7).

3.                  Race Distribution of Town Employees (p. 8).

4.                  Gender Distribution of Town Employees (p. 9).

5.                  Distribution of Supervisors by Race in the Fire Department (p. 10).

6.                  Distribution of Supervisors by Gender in the Fire Department (p. 11).

7.                  Distribution of Supervisors by Race in the Police Department (p. 12).

8.                  Distribution of Supervisors by Gender in the Police Department (p. 13).

9.                  Distribution of Supervisors by Race in the Public Works Department (p. 14).

10.              Distribution of Supervisors by Gender in the Public Works Department (p. 15).

11.              Distribution of Supervisors by Race in the Transportation Department (p. 16).

12.              Distribution of Supervisors by Gender in the Transportation Department (p. 17).

13.              Distribution of All Town Employees by Race (p. 18).

14.              Distribution of All Town Employees by Gender (p. 19).