Agenda item

Mike Talbot, HR and OD Service Manager, introduced a briefing note updating Members on the Council's progress following the introduction of the Apprenticeship Levy and Apprenticeship targets for public sector organisations.

The Committee was informed that the annual apprenticeship target for public sector organisations within scope of the legislation was 2.3% of the total workforce headcount.  This included employees within community schools, which was challenging as there was limited opportunity to create apprenticeships within smaller community schools.

The Government had confirmed that employment agencies would be levied 0.5% workforce costs on any workers placed on assignments. Agencies had since confirmed that they were unable to sustain this cost, and would be seeking to renegotiate contracts and placement costs, resulting in passing the financial burden onto Local Authorities and other organisations hosting temporary workers.

There was no penalty for failing to utilise the levy, beyond the loss of the funds, but there were consequences for public sector organisations failing to meet their apprenticeship targets. In such an instance, the organisations would be required to write to the Government explaining why the target had not been met, how due regard for the target had been demonstrated, and what measures were in place to ensure the target would be met in subsequent years.

It had been identified that the Council could 'offset' the cost of the levy by converting vacant posts to apprenticeship posts, due to the relatively lower salary costs required for apprentices.  The 18 posts already converted to apprenticeships would enable a workforce cost reduction of £183k.

In addition, existing staff could be re-trained through apprenticeships. In the last financial year, 34 existing employees attended first-line supervisory and management training funded by accessing government apprentice scheme grants. Similarly, 6 employees were trained in social care, and 18 employees attended business administration and customer care training. It was confirmed that, if this was replicated for the year ahead, using the levy, then these 58 employees would count towards the Council's apprenticeship target. Together with the newly appointed apprentices, this would ensure that the Council achieved the apprenticeship target (excluding schools).

Members sought clarity on whether apprentice roles would go on to be filled by new apprentices, once the previous apprenticeship had been completed. Mr Talbot confirmed that this was the case, with apprentice roles ongoing. However, it was highlighted that the Council endeavoured to retain newly qualified apprentices (dependant on a vacant role being available). Succession plans and contracts with agencies allowed the Council to hold vacant roles until a suitable apprentice completed their apprenticeship.

In addition, Members requested confirmation of whether apprenticeships were offered to local residents. In reply, it was confirmed that most apprentice roles were filled by local residents, though a small number were filled by people who lived outside of the Borough. Recruitment was targeted at local residents via the media and local fairs, and it was felt that local residents were preferable as they were likelier to remain under Council employment once they qualified. Logistics, including travel time and feasibility, were discussed as part of all interviews.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.