Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to explore four types of equality and diversity actors at both the national and the local level and the extent to which such actors may be seen as either alternative sources of loyalty and as replacements in competition with trade unions or as complementary to existing union structures. Design/methodology/approach -The research method is multi-level and based on national level policy analysis and on two local NHS trust case studies. It relies on 30 interviews with policy advisers and key actors (i.e. officials of trade unions, Black networks, identity groups and community groups) and 66 case study interviews; in sum, a total of 96 participants were involved in the study. The paper also involves documentary analysis of Department of Health strategies on equalities and diversity, BMA reports and advisory documents, and policy and advisory documents of the two hospitals. Findings -Findings indicate that the interrelationship between networks reflects both the complementarity and replacement theses, but recognises different networks may also operate in different spheres leading to little or no interrelationship. Research limitations/implications -This exploratory framework has drawn attention to the importance of equality actors in the field of industrial relations and employment. It is recognised that these findings are situated in a particular geographical and historical moment and that different replacement/complimentarity forms may emerge in different national, sectorial and historical context. Practical implications -Reflecting insights from mobilisation theory, the paper identifies the importance of leaders and issues of injustice as important components of the formation and development of equality and diversity networks at different levels but demonstrates the complexity of the attribution concept. Originality/value -This paper's originality lies in its exploratory framework of the interelationship between different equality actors and the replacement/complementarity debate in industrial relations.

No abstract

134-154Career structures and their associated boundaries both offer and restrict career opportunities and provide the potential to be sites of unfair discrimination. Yet the impact of such structures is rarely explored. This article investigates the impact of a career structure on the employment conditions of a medical career grade in which some three-quarters of the doctors qualified overseas. The comparison of UK and overseas qualified doctors in the Staff and Associate Specialist Group provides an underexplored perspective on a professional career structure with a particular reference to reward, workload, autonomy and morale. The article draws on a quantitative study of 1,715 Staff and Associate Specialist doctors undertaken in 2004. The findings demonstrate a complex comparative picture with overseasqualified doctors earning more, working for longer hours, having less autonomy and a lower morale than their UK-qualified comparators. We conclude by pointing to the potential for certain career structures to structurally and systematically disadvantage some groups. Source: DH (2003) medical and dental workforce census England. SASG = Staff and Associate Specialist Group.Impact of a career structure on the employment conditions of overseas-and UK-qualified doctors HUMAN

This paper explores how formalization of employee selection procedures for the purpose of ensuring equality of opportunity can become so extensive that the intended outcome of fairness is undermined. Drawing on empirical evidence from a large media organization, the analysis reveals the detrimental impact of formalization in relation to the recruitment of ethnic minority staff. While the existing literature describes how, during recruitment of employees, the circumvention of formal equality procedures can occur through managerial neglect and manipulation, the analysis in this paper shows that, paradoxically, circumvention can also occur through compliance with procedures. This new category takes three forms (robotic, defensive and malicious) and appears under conditions of excessive formalization -the term hyper-formalization is coined to describe this. The paper develops new concepts that add to understanding of the limitations of equality and diversity procedures, and brings fresh challenges to some of the liberal assumptions about the efficacy and desirability of formalization for achieving fairness.