Debate contribution: Assembly Commission Staff: Family- and Carer-friendly Working

Debate contribution by Mr Trevor Clarke on .

MLA
Mr Trevor Clarke
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
24 June 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Oral Answers to Questions
Heading
Assembly Commission Staff: Family- and Carer-friendly Working
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5046928

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I am not sure which question to take. I will go for the first one, on hybrid working. The balance between working in Parliament Buildings and working at home varies depending on the post, business need and the preference of the member of staff. Assembly staff carry out a wide range of varied roles, and staff in some business areas will be required to work up to and including 100% of their contracted hours in the week in Parliament Buildings. For other roles, consideration is given to up to 60% of contracted hours being worked from home. During recess periods, greater flexibility may be considered subject to business need.

109 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.02 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.

This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.

Jev’s structured answers

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.02No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.01No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.01No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.42No
Overall judgement0.02At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject0.97
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.02
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:53 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification