Agenda item

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Corporate Resources which provided an update on the Council’s overall position on sickness absence, as at the end of March 2023 (quarter 4, 2022/23). A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 9‘, is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussion, the following points were made:

i.               Members noted that they had been presented with a long term trend of the year end sickness absence position from 2012/13 to 2022/23 and raised concern that there had been little progress made to the number of Full Time Equivalent (FTE) days lost per year. Members were assured that although sickness absence had not reduced over the long term, various initiatives had been attempted to reduce this, and that managers, alongside Human Resources, had persevered in applying attendance management policies and in supporting staff who were experiencing ill health. Members noted that there could have been a number of reasons why FTE lost per year had gone up over the latest twelve-month period, including the impact of COVID-19, cost of living challenges, and delays experienced within the health sector.

ii.              In response to concern that there had been a progressive increase in sickness absence recorded in Environment and Transport since 2020/21, members were advised that there had been a number of long-term individual cases of absence which had skewed the data. A deep dive exercise had been conducted to identify those individuals and HR Business partners had contacted managers to discuss how these cases could be addressed. HR business partners had also discussed attendance management with the Director of Environment and Transport, who was keen to address the issue.

iii.             A peer review had been conducted in (date) and the outcome showed that the Council’s approach to attendance management was appropriate and that there was nothing further that could be recommended. The Council followed correct legislation and had robust processes in place to monitor and address sickness absence levels.

iv.            The COVID-19 category for absence had not been broken down to identify long-COVID as this often presented in different health issues and had been categorised accordingly. The Director explained that COVID-19 would not be formally monitored going forward as testing in the community had reduced. It was suggested that instances of COVID-19 could be included within the cough/cold/flu category.

v.              In terms of Stress, Depression and Mental Health, members noted that it was only where individual cases had been examined that specific causes for this type of absence had been identified. Members were assured that managers would continue to be provided with training and guidance for supporting their employees with stress, depression and mental health concerns. A piece of work had been undertaken within the Adults and Communities department and Children and Family Services around bereavement and the impact this had on personal and work life. The Council’s Wellbeing Service had further developed support for this and introduced groups whereby individuals could go for peer support which was facilitated by a counsellor. Members noted that these interventions had been successful and that the ideas would be utilised in offering employees struggling with mental health practical support to help them to operate in their role.

vi.            Absences recorded within the non-disclosed category were often a result of managers having not captured the reason in the first five days of absence rather than a refusal by an employee to provide a reason for their absence. Members were assured that work would be carried out with managers to reduce this type of administration error.

vii.           Sickness absence data could be analysed in attempt to understand the proportion of staff who are frontline, based at County Hall or working in a hybrid way, although, it was suggested that there would be a variety of variables to consider when analysing this type of data and a wide variety of reasons for sickness absence to consider.

viii.          The Council’s sickness absence data had been compared to comparator local authorities within a report presented to the Committee on 2 February 2023. In response to a question as to why Kent County Council had lower rates of sickness absence than Leicestershire County Council, the Director explained that the same sickness policy was applied in both authorities but that there may be differences in the types of services offered by them, as well as cultural and organisational differences to consider. The Director had not discussed attendance management in detail with Kent County Council but agreed to do so in order to understand the differences in data and to identify whether different approaches could be attempted to reduce the Council’s sickness absence figures.

RESOLVED:

That the overall position on sickness absence, as at the end of March 2023 (quarter 4, 2022/23) be noted.