What's in a name? Equity vs Equality and why we're Simply Equality

Back after the traditional (or soon to be) August break, Pk and Sarah discuss their thoughts on Equity and Equality, their understandings of the concepts, language and why Simply Equality is called Simply Equality. 

Transcript

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 0:07

Welcome to another episode of this simply a quality Podcast, the podcast that likes to foreground the lived experiences of disabled and LGBTQ plus people might have a different episode to usual. But I think going forward, we're gonna do these occasional ones where we pick a theme or a topic. And instead of hearing from a guest, which we'll still do that we will, we'll discuss a theme or an issue. And so we thought, why not start with whatever called simply equality and not simply equity. Within the world of equality and diversity and inclusion? That's, there's this ongoing discussion about equity versus equality. And we thought, You know what, let's do an episode, where we chat about that. So that's what we're gonna do. I've got somebody with me who I spoke to a couple of podcasts ago, PK, hello, PK, how about you kick us off?

Unknown: 1:15

If you listen to his podcast, and you know, our name is simply equality. And you may well have asked yourself, why not simply equity? There are several ways I guess I look at it. But if we look purely from the perspective of a name, one of the first things you want people to do is to be able to find you. And if you just googled simply equity, I guarantee the first thing you would find are a bunch of financial advisors. And so that wouldn't actually help. And equity does it to me, it sounds very clinical, I think it's a very important concept. And I think it's a core part of creating true equality and probably be helpful for us to define what bothers us too. But I think, yeah, equity is a tool. And I think if we're trying to make it as successful as possible, and get more people invested in this work, then you need to first make it something that people connect with and find. And then you can offer those more advanced understandings and the journey to equalities. When I talk about equality versus equity, the first thing I have to remind myself of is actually where are people in their learning journeys? That's my thoughts on why simply equality versus simply equity work are about breaking down barriers. And that to me is about equality, rather than equity, which, which sounds like I have,

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 2:37

I have to say, so we are, you know, I would say we all we all subject knowledge experts in the world of diversity, equality and inclusion, but we're not financial advisors. We certainly one wouldn't want to get involved in an equity discussions in that regard. I mean, joking aside, then the name simply equality I've, I've, I've had that name for a while, and it came out of my desire, I think we'll be, I think you and I talked about this PK, when I sort of interviewed them last time, because a lot of a lot of things about diversity, equality inclusion, do get very complicated. And I've had this desire for a while that I want to, I want to keep things simple, not simplistic, but simple in terms of PKU, and I, we live and breathe this stuff every day. We listen to other podcasts, we read stuff, we speak to other people. We live in this this world of EDI, di, but not everybody else does everybody else out there's just wanting to live their life. As you said earlier, PK, they're probably on a different stage of their journey. And we want to we want to take people with us and meet people where they're at. And what we don't want is our name to be a barrier. But I'm aware, as I say that I'll be partaking Yeah, but it's about equity. What is the difference between equality and equity? is a great question, to be honest. So this is a great question. So go and then how would you answer it PK?

Unknown: 4:12

So So I guess for me, if you asked me to define a policy and what that would look like, and to break it down for a bite sized minute, it would be equal opportunity and access. And I think that's a core component because often people tend to conflate quality of opportunity with treatment. And that's not when I say equality, what I mean, I mean that you are treating people as individuals with different needs, and therefore they will need different treatment because you cannot have a quality of access or opportunity if you treat everyone equally. And that's why people will talk about in these discussions that image of three people standing in front of a fence of different heights, and everyone says equality is giving everyone regardless of the height the same pole looks. And to me. Sure, that is an interpretation of equality. That is not what I think about when I talk about equality. When I talk about equality, it is looking for those people and using the tool that is equity, which is figuring out what those needs are, and saying, Okay, how do we actually create an environment where everyone wants to go and see this game? And personally, I would just tear down the fence.

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 5:22

I'm with you. I've seen that model before. And I just want to I just want to rip down the fence. But that's not necessarily the solution. But But yeah, so you carry on?

Unknown: 5:32

Oh, no, I think, to be honest, I think that's essentially where the solution needs to end up, is turned down the fence, I think there's kind of at least a sense that I get from us is what we're passionate about being like, for sure you you can until you have the tools to dismantle the fence safely, give people the tools to see over the fence. But fundamentally, the object has to be a fence this world and obviously with the medicals, you can deep dive into it. But at least for me, equality is yeah, you could walk into any workplace or any place in the world in less than the UK because the US, UK, and you wouldn't be worrying about Oh, am I going to get the score, I need to do this job. It will just be the support is already ready to go in the wings. And it doesn't even cross your mind or something. That to me is what quality looks? Because it is fundamentally about access rather than Well, you could come to the party if you want, I know that there are no steps. Is that a problem? What are your thoughts on a policy?

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 6:43

I do find it interesting, because obviously, you know, if you go back sort of 80s 90s, it was all about equal ops, that that was the phrase that was used equality of opportunity. And like I say, PK, I can see where that where that's getting that. But for me, it's more about the equality of outcome. Because, okay, you might have the opportunity. You know, I have the opportunity now if I wanted to, to jump off this podcast, and you know, there's nothing stopping me going out the house going for a walk. However, I'll have the opportunity in order to do that. I actually can't just do that. Because for me as a turkey blind person, I need to think like, Well, where am I going to go? And how will I get there? And all I need to take my cane. And if it's an unfamiliar place, perhaps I need to go with a friend or a colleague. So allow I have the opportunity, do I have the tools and the things I need to empower me to achieve that opportunity now, so that's for me, it's about it's not the opportunity, it's the outcome. And that's where you know, what we're trying to do, where simply equality comes in where the whole work of dai comes in to say, Okay, well, we want you all to have the same opportunity, in this case, to yellow, you know, liver, three, fair, fulfilled life, whatever that means to you. That's the opportunity. And we recognise that not everybody even has that opportunity. So there's a lot of structural change and structural barriers that need to be dismantled, if you like some are fence breaking, catch up sound. So when you sound like vandals, perhaps we are di vandals. So that's the opportunity, but in order to achieve that outcome. That's, that's why we're looking at. Okay, so what are the barriers that stop you doing that in the workplace are the attitudinal or the physical or the structural? And those are the barriers that need to be removed? To give you that equality of outcome?

Unknown: 8:50

I think that's very well said. Although I guess you could also describe us as rather than vandals, restoration or renovation, perhaps

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 9:00

what what a positive, relevant, renovate and restore not, perhaps that's just my innate nature, probably give myself a bad name here. I

Unknown: 9:09

think it's all about perspective swapping, right? And that's, that's kind of what we do, which is you can companies can look at equality and equality of not opportunity so much as outcomes, and really think in a deep thing and be like, oh, yeah, we could look at it as we have to break all of these things. But actually, what if we looked at as those things are already broken, all we're doing is fixing them and making them more suited to the current needs of the world want to be in 10 years time or 15 years time, given that the planet is ostensibly on fire? So I guess that kind of nicely segues into what a what do you think about equity? What is your understanding of it? How does it fit into this whole picture?

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 9:50

Here? What is equity? Yeah, that's a really good point. And we're having this discussion. I'm thinking okay, how do we how do we define raunchier to,

Unknown: 10:01

because I'm not sure. But I think that's a really important thing to acknowledge is that so much of EDI, right, is that whole definitions and being clear. And I think, for me kind of going to any organisation, the people, the people seem to have this consensus that equality isn't inherently ambiguous and slippery concept. So it can be like broad or narrow. And I think I could be wrong because I wear equity as discourse has like stemmed from there seem to be extra views. But people often will refer to Bernie Sanders talking about equity and equality of outcomes, that kind of what you're talking about. The way that I see it used in EDI spaces, equity, is talking about all of the stuff that we've used poor quality, and that is actually looking at the needs of people looking at the barriers and not just applying a blanket rule to everyone and saying, Well, look, we've we've told everyone, you can go to the party now, that doesn't mean we're actually going to let you who aren't going to support you now that you're here or actually helped you get through the front door, we've just said the doors open and equities does seem to be more about, I guess, to me, I always view as a tool equity is that whole thing. If we're ensuring equitable treatment, then we're not necessarily saying we're giving equal treatment in the way that lots of people interpret that as everyone gets the same. Were saying no, equity is about centering people in the work that you do, and acknowledging that that will be different, you could have two totally blind people. And you'll have entirely different needs. And if we just say, well, the other blind person was totally fine, without X, Y, and Zed. So you'll be fine. And that's I think, where equity comes into play. That's just not how the world works. I am an entirely different person, you know, someone who has ADHD will have entirely different needs and strengths and skills, and I will and equity, to me is the tool, it's the way you achieve true equality in terms of what it means to us, which is that quality of outcomes and actually having that inclusive belonging society. So that's my understanding of it. That's how I seem to see it used. I think this is probably why I struggle with it versus equality, because it does seem very semantic. But that doesn't mean to say that semantics are not important. And words are not important. But I also think that quality is a term is a much more intuitive, and at least some people on the staff.

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 12:27

Yeah. And I agree, I think my initial pause about well, what's the difference is because actually, a lot of it does come down to that subtle nuance of linguistic and semantics. Now, again, some of you may not know I did I actually study linguistics as part of my first degree many, many, many years ago. So I do understand the dynamics of language, the power of language, the power of language, for good and for ill. But again, I think if we're looking at the broader audience, which is what they were seeking to do with the work we do, you know, even in some workplaces, where some of these discussions may not be as advanced and not be as developed, if you are the sudden start getting tied up with well, do I mean equality? Do we mean equity? That's important, but I think a lot of people are angry, because I think whilst the word equality is much maligned, and is more of a slippery water term, in some ways, I think that's a good thing. So long as we and this is why I agree that equity is more about the sort of framework, you know, are we achieving that equality through providing creating an equitable framework, so that, as we've said, it's not about everybody treats being treated the same, but it's about having everybody having equitable outcomes. And that means some people may need to be treated differently, and then how you can listen to God, oh, my gosh, you get into the world of positive discrimination. And now now that that is probably another discussion for another podcast, but it's about saying, Look, whether it's a group of disabled people, even with the same disabilities or impairments, or a group of LGBTQ plus people who yes, they may all be gay, or bi or trans, but you can't say well, all trans people need x and all autistic people need x, you can you can have a framework that says right, these are the barriers and the issues that somebody within the group may face. And therefore these are the things you need to be aware of. And therefore, these are the things you could do, whether you whether you talk about the world of workplace adjustments, which is particularly with a disability, but I equally think it can apply to other forms. You know, these are the things you need to do to ensure that people have that equitable outcome. But again, I think we can sometimes get too bogged down with that equality versus equity. Let's face it, you cannot have one without the other. Yeah. And

Unknown: 15:03

I think that that, for me gets frustrating the conversations, which is like, oh, we should just sort of been this word and should only be using equity. And that's, you know, I can understand, especially if you're looking for kind of strategic roles and talking about, Oh, you want like an Equity Diversity and Inclusion manager, but also you believe still achieve the same? Yeah, I guess like, so. I hadn't realised that your degree. So first degree, for the International international listeners, I assume you mean undergraduate, or two that you have more than one degree? Yes. So

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 15:38

for international listeners, my first degree was a degree in Communication Studies at Nottingham Trent University. So that was a broad social science degree that incorporated sociology, linguistics, mass media and plagues, political communication, psychology. And those were the sort of it was all about how we communicate as individuals within society and how society communicates with us through the various forms and channels that that we have my intent at the time and bearing in mind, we're talking here, this was the early 90s, was to go into journalism. And at that time, there weren't many specific journalism degrees. So communication studies, there was only five universities did it in the UK. So I went into it to get that much more broader base of, you know, how we how we work as human beings and how that how we function within the complex set of structures and parameters. That is the society we live in. So that's my first degree. And that's our first degree, because again, this is probably for another podcast, I then actually went off and did a second undergraduate degree, which is in theology. Again, that's another tangent. Other usually in the UK, we said first grade them in undergrad and second degree is post grad. But now I have two undergraduate degrees.

Unknown: 17:07

I just have the one undergraduate degree, which I guess is probably also like a conversation for another podcast, but like I do creative writing, because I can't do something that I'm not interested in. And plenty us and there's a whole liberal arts thing. And I didn't actually want to do English, but that was in do creative writing. And I just enjoy writing enjoy words, no other work, I know. But I think that's also kind of what makes us quite good at the work that we do is you can acknowledge the words are incredibly important, and they hold a huge amount of power. But you can also be, I think, flexible and curious about it. So sometimes if I hadn't come up against like, oh, we should move away from this word and do this thing, I think. And you know, we see this in real time media eating my work is people say, Oh, we should stop using this word and do that and immediately put your backup, even if you're in the space, because like, don't, don't tell me what to do. No one likes it. And so, like, with the whole equity equality thing, I had to really take a step back and be like, Okay, what are my feelings about it? What am I reacting to? And actually, what is what is productive in the space? So there are points where I will correct people, for example, university divergence, and I think both words are very important and should be used for often can be conflated with each other. And sometimes you do need the specificity of are we talking about neuro diversity in terms of the spectrum of like neuro types across the world, which would include neurotypicals? Or are we talking about narrative versions, and accommodations for people who are narrative Asian, because that looks those, that's when that UN's comes into play. And you see the same thing I think the quality versus equity is sometimes you do need to be like, No, we're talking specifically about equitable treatment, and equitable workplaces, et cetera, and grounding it. But I think the first step is to kind of get people in the door zeal, because a lot of people just want to be living their lives and don't always immediately see how this is actually a core part of how it should just be part of what we do a standard part tacked on, I think, more people are starting to see that. But if you've got barely enough space to work out how you're going to feed your kids pay your rent and mortgage, you're unlikely to have enough space to come to grips with something that sounds equity to me sounds clinical. So like sometimes I have to put myself in that if I didn't know anything about any of this work. And I heard people talking about equity and inclusion and diversity that okay, I know, like two of those words of equity sounds like hedge funds. But I don't know if it's for me. Yeah, I think it can be very challenging, balancing and making people feel welcome in those spaces where there is such a huge breadth and depth of knowledge from people with very, very different journeys and quite rightly, very passionate opinions on a side of the country of stretch. But fundamentally, yeah, remove as many barriers as possible and then invite people into that they feel safe enough to have that nuanced discourse. But if we don't even put rate that initial safety to talk about. If someone says, oh, so I'm talking about what better quality and you immediately jump down their throat and say, No, it has to be equity, you need to use equity, then that person probably isn't gonna feel safe actually talking about what they wanted to do. I'm not saying that you can't say oh, hey, actually, like, I'm not saying that we should temporaries people. Absolutely not. What I am saying is we can sit and think about, okay, I understand where you are in your journey, Harrison tools to maybe help you take you further on. I meet people where they are. Absolutely we shouldn't. We don't necessarily Oh, people politeness, especially within certain contexts, but I think, yeah, trying to assume good intent, for the most part goes a long way. I think obviously, as trans people are quite good at recognising when there isn't the good intent. And that's a whole other podcast episode.

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 20:55

That's the harder part I have to say. As he was speaking on, and I totally agree with what you've been speaking. I've been having two thoughts one, I got stuck on your use of the word flexible curiosity.

Unknown: 21:10

And I was thinking, Oh, is that perhaps we

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 21:13

should, like Flexi paucity of Akira Flexity here, I can't help it. This this is my this is my playing with words. Flexi Asti or Cuba Flexity.

Unknown: 21:24

I lecture Flexity. Sounds really fun. It sounds also very queer

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 21:29

as a word that does doesn't cure Flexity.

Unknown: 21:34

Cure affects young Pureflex.

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 21:38

But then I also thought so within the within this discussion about equality, versus but alongside equity, I guess for me, you do see that quite a bit when people bring an app. But what about justice? And, again, I can see where that comes from that health discussion of, you know, social justice, racial justice. And this whole sphere is about recognising that we live in a world which isn't just when it comes to treating marginal groups. Sounds just just just wondering, as I had that thoughts about our thoughts on whether tax perhaps equity is more of a response to Yeah, yeah, but what about justice? When you talk about equality? You're not, you're not foregrounding? That whole concept of justice enough? And I don't know if you have any thoughts on that PK?

Unknown: 22:26

I think that's a really good question. And I think that probably is where a large part of it stems from, you know, that same way that people are adding on belonging as well, right. Because that's kind of the nature of EDI is you're constantly evolving, responding to changes, the real way the world works, and people think of EDI is very light and fluffy and very, you can, you know, fall into a tip off exercise. But often actually, it's so much more complicated and nitty gritty and nuanced and messy, because people are nuanced and messy. And I think we look at that sort of justice and fundamentally acknowledged that we live in just across multiple intersections, then you can't really be tackling equality or fight against systems of oppression without talking about justice. And I guess for me, I will probably specify that I'm not talking specifically to talk about justice as the legal framework of justice. I'm not talking about laws, etc, is more rounded than that, because often, actually, our legal frameworks and systems of Justice are in and of themselves on just just the different ways you can be sentenced the ways buyers can induce jurors, all of that kind of stuff. But yeah, I think, let's let's get started the police. Yeah, the police,

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 23:52

let's not get started about the police. I mean, if you're listening, and you are in a place that, you know, that that that's your choice, that's cool. But hey, let's just all recognise that there are structural issues within the police when it comes to marginalised groups. And that's an understatement.

Unknown: 24:09

Yeah, yeah, there's structural policing as an infrastructure, by by the way it's been created will always have those biases against marginalised groups. And I think it's important to recognise that and respect that and respect different groups opinions. That's not to say, yeah, what moral judgement about people who are policing the work in the course. It's literally in the curious about the systems that you're working with, I think is probably the most productive way of framing that but yeah, absolutely.

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 24:39

And I think, you know, a lot of this justice, equality equity, it is about Q reflects the but it is about asking those questions and challenging assumptions and being willing to say, well, just because we've done it that way, and we think that that means when treating people Finally, actually, are we? Are we really? Are the outcomes changing? Are we seeing better representation and advancement? And if he talked about in the world of work, you know, are we seeing our workforce as being more diverse? Are we seeing more disabled, LGBTQ plus people wanting to work for a sniff to do work for, you know, continuing to work for us and other being either being promoted, or they're just stuck at a certain level? A lot of this is about the questions, isn't it? The questions we ask more than the answers that we come up with.

Unknown: 25:34

And I think that's the thing is fundamentally, equality versus equity, is about asking the right questions and using what you have, and being able to safely ask questions. So in the world of work, if representation is simply about having more disabled people, LGBT plus people, all of the above our organisation, that's fine, but also, does that mean you will get the same outcomes if all of those people are stuck at the lowest levels of your organisation, or even just more fundamentally, if the people at the lowest levels of your organisation you don't actually particularly want to advance high, etc, people who don't want to climb a career ladder, and they should absolutely be allowed to do that. I was very much one of those people who's like, why I don't want more responsibility. I just want enough money to live safely and happily, which is what most people want. And I think if you know what part of the system where you have to advance in order to be able to do very, very basic things like pay for your rent, your mortgage, your child's school, clothes, food, all of that stuff, then we're perpetuating injustice in the workplace, in equitable treatment in workplaces, and unequal workplaces for people to be in because fundamentally your lowest at the lowest level of the organisation people should have to afford to live safely. I don't think that's a big or a very radical, but maybe I'm being No, I

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 27:03

think, no, I think local you and I, we both recognise that, hey, we're not, we're certainly not saints in this. But we've set up simply equality, it is a limited company, but we're going to run it on the on the sort of framework of a social enterprise. PK and I have already agreed that, you know, at least 50% of our profits will be reinvested. And they'll be reinvested into the company to make sure that for the small sphere of influence we have in terms of how we operate, and how we employ other disabled LGBTQ plus people, we will we will be offering things like proper, proper time off or trans related treatment or surgeries or appointments. And I know many companies do that many companies have got great policies on that, but others haven't similar with disability, this whole idea of Disability Leave, just you know, recognising that you may not be sick. But because of your disability or long term health condition, you need some time, time away from where whether that's a short time or a long time, we've also recognised we're going to have a four day week, that's going to be our standard working week. And we're just going to have August and August is going to be a month where when we get going more we're employing other people. And this might sound radical to some, but come August, simply equality will just be closed. So we're well a long way off that yet. But this is our intent. This is how we're trying to operate and provide that equality of outcome.

Unknown: 28:47

And fundamentally, I think as well, in terms of reinvesting profits, both you and I and this isn't about us making a huge amount of money and being Rich's ridiculous people, it is one thing to model and to say, look, we are running our business differently. And it's about the impact that will then have, because this is about, you know, our communities, as it were, it's not just about stability, or GB per se, it is literally about we want to have a social impact and be creating and modelling the kind of behaviour we see in workplaces. We know that that what they're working with, there's so much data and there has been data since the 60s 70s. Now I know is it data or data?

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 29:35

Data I probably say data but again, let's Let's not fall out

Unknown: 29:41

depending on the mood to me on it sometimes it really does and sometimes will be later but yeah, like but yeah, you know, we there's so much information that says actually a four day working week is significantly better not just for your business and your employees but actually your economy because people have money to spend. I know we're going through inflation And apparently we don't want money to be spent in the economy, and we want everyone to be spending money. For some reason I'm not an economist, I do not prevent, profess to be when,

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 30:10

when our economists we're not financial advisors will make that clear again. Yep.

Unknown: 30:15

We just, you know, business owners with a vision of how we want to run our companies and how we think will be better. And that I should also probably say, Will this Yep, workloads, that wouldn't be the only time off? We would have? No, no, no, no, no, obviously. Yeah. And time off is important. And I think, like, people will talk about, Oh, you don't go pay shouldn't be everything to an employer and employee. But fundamentally, we want to pay well, and we want good benefits, we want the full package. And that's why realistically, for us growth will probably be less fast than March traditional run companies, because it's not about growth growth, it is about social impact. It's fair to say, Sir, yeah, no, absolutely. I think.

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 31:07

And again, you know, please, we're not under any illusion, we're not oppressing the operating this as a charity. You know, I think too much in this space of VDI where, because, oh, it's all based on goodwill and good faith. And there's such a variety of salaries for those involved in this, whether you're in the corporate world, or the public sector world. And, again, whilst we've said things like, you know, at least 50% of profits reinvested August staff, there will be other leave. But, you know, we've also decided, and we'll be upfront about this, we're gonna pay ourselves a decent salary, a salary, that means we can, we can live well. Now, that doesn't mean we're both kind of dry, flashy cars. Because I'd rather have a motorbike anyway. But it means there'll be like, Look, we recognise, it's not as easy for disabled people, LGBTQ plus people to just swap careers and take short term contracts and take some of those risks, because there were other factors involved. So and again, this is all a long way off, we're not there yet. But you know, we are going to pay ourselves a decent amount. But we're also going to, we're also going to say that, as directors, we won't be paid any more than 20% more than any of our other employees.

Unknown: 32:29

Yeah. And, you know, part of our commitment and justification for like having extra pay is they, the buck will always stop with us if something has gone wrong, if things hit the proverbial, it's not our employees jobs, to have to clean up our jobs to be there, so that they can actually just do the work they want to do. And we do. And we have all of the legal responsibilities and very boring, very intense, like, if we mess up more brain, you know, that kind of thing. And that's not to say, yeah, it's just about when we won't get rid of ourselves well enough to be secure. But we also fundamentally want our employees and paid to be secure. And we will always be transparent about you know, I don't I think when we hit the target of what we want in terms of salary, instead of us going out, we'll just keep paying ourselves more, that'll be great. It'll be know how many take another person all and grow the team? And how do we actually really ground? How do we work our recruitment process so that we are placing equal value on professional experience kind of thing. And demonstrating that you don't need to crap job ads that say you need at least a university degree, but nine times out of 10, you simply don't need a university degree in any way, shape, or form. And all we're doing is perpetuating class inequality, racial inequality ableism. You see inequality and all of that stuff. And you can actually just think, well, what do I need you to do to do this job? How many people do I need in my company so that the team members have sick, we've got people cross trained, so people can step in too much worry. And we can actually play to people's strengths. And we have people who come in and say, hey, look, I am disabled, I have a wheelchair, I, these are the things I need to work on, we can literally say, pretty cool, we'll review it as like throughout to make sure that you're still getting everything you need. And this is working for everyone involved. Because actually, a lot of the time it is that easy. And obviously, this as an adult, keeps up of money, which we will eventually get to and not like, you know, millionaire status. But well, we've got money in the company to say, brilliant we've already we have our profits are reinvested so that we can always provide reasonable adjustments in a timely fashion, of course, who's to encourage people to go through government schemes or access to work because the more people use them, the more likely it is for that to continue being funded and political. Oh, but equally I think both of us. You know, we've definitely been in situations where you've had to wait A six, seven months and that's too late people. And yeah, yeah, that's the whole point of reinvesting the money is not just that's not reinvesting into our pockets. That's saying, Look, yeah, we want to reinvest into our people in our community. And be very clear. Absolutely,

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 35:21

absolutely. So I think, probably probably the start to sum up because people want everything, because it's all about YouTube, but it's not. I think what we're saying is we want to model what we are then saying to other individuals, and workplaces and companies about, you know, these things can be achieved, look at, look at what we've done to disabled queer people, look at what we're putting into practice, and well, well make mistakes. Oh, indeed, it's guaranteed. And there are probably other companies out there doing what we're doing, and possibly even doing it better. And that's, that's cool. We totally wish them even greater success. You know, we're not saying we have all the answers, and you gotta do it our way or else but we're saying look where we're on this journey. were sticking to demonstrate this, this equality of outcome, how you can achieve, what the steps are, you should perhaps consider but again, not as a not as a blueprint, but as a framework, to the various services that we're offering. And also saying, well, that's held ourselves up as a member. And actually, if we do another podcast in an hour, a year, two years time, they didn't walk cash, what were we thinking will change. But for now, this is what we're focuses on, this is what we will seek to do. This is why we're doing all this extra work, because we believe in this stuff we've both don't we pick a we've both lived this enough to have seen where things work well and don't work so well. And where true equality can be achieved, and where it just is totally absent. So that's what we're doing. So we've put this on record now on this podcast. Now PK where we are held to account now,

Unknown: 37:06

which is good, which is good. And I think that's, that's what we also want by Yeah, I know that I will definitely make mistakes, human, but I think it's about them, because they look, we've made a mistake, absolutely acknowledge that we will learn and do better next time. Because that's, again, it's that modelling of what we want to see. And like you said, you and I both have so much experience of what inequality looks just how much simpler and more simpler not in the sense of, of course, but yet how much this stuff doesn't have to be complicated and convoluted and deeply stressful. And you send your stable person, it's gonna be so much easier to do this, or we're hiring someone from an entirely different culture, or all of that kind of stuff. And actually just if you strip all of that away, and that's not to say you ignore them and doesn't exist, it is to say, if you've stripped the judgement and feelings about someone having to weigh and you actually look at these look at the person, and you see it as an opportunity. I think fundamentally, that's what it is, is a way to get excited about oh, we've been doing things like this for decades, and it's worked well enough. Oh, my God, actually, we did it like that. Maybe it would work better. And sometimes, maybe it won't. But you don't know until you try. And you know, you will never learn through should know. So

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 38:31

that's what we're doing. So bear with us. And if after listen to this podcast, you're thinking, I don't agree, I think of equity and this as equality as that, then honestly get in touch, email us info at simply equality.com. Or find us on our website, simply equality.com Get in touch. Let's let's, let's have a discussion. Because as we've said, we know, these are our thoughts. We base this on our personal and professional experience and knowledge. But hey, this is all about a shared journey, a shared understanding. So I think I think unless you got anything else to add PK,

Unknown: 39:08

I would also probably very cheeky, say, even if you don't have thoughts on equity versus equality, if you have thoughts about actually like I really like when you do these kind of episodes, or I'm really interested to hear your thoughts on X, Y and Zed and you want to talk about that. And also let us know. And totally,

Sarah Stephenson-Hunter: 39:27

totally let us know. Technology President while he probably wouldn't quite allow a sort of phone in time, but if people want to send us questions, we'll have a go at discussing them. We'll give it our best shot. So there we have it, I think for both sign off. I hope you have you enjoyed that discussion. I need to think about and we will be back soon. So take care and Cheers for now.

Unknown: 39:50

Also, don't forget to do all that fun stuff with podcasts. Like Subscribe, share it with your friends down there, listen to on repeat, period advance it and if you're interested in learning more about what we You do what kinds of things we offer and how we might help you and your company around you again get in touch but bye for now