Agenda item

The Council's Workforce and Organisational Development Manager was in attendance at the meeting to speak to the Committee as part of the review's witness session.

The Committee heard that the Council monitored both voluntary and involuntary turnover on a quarterly basis, and that turnover of staff is beneficial to an organisation as new staff members can bring with them new ideas, which improves innovation, while a low turnover rate can lead to stagnation. Furthermore, "exit interviews" were ready to be implemented at the Council, which will help Human Resources to better understand the reasoning behind employees' decisions to leave the organisation.

It was confirmed that the target for voluntary turnover within the Council is 10%. Last year, the Council saw a 10.5% turnover rate, and this year it currently stands at 11%, although the period that historically has seen the most turnover has already passed, so the figure may yet decrease. By including involuntary turnover in this turnover figure, it rises to roughly 18%.

Members heard that staff turnover in specific areas of the Council were monitored and reported on a monthly basis. This allowed the organisation to implement retention schemes in areas of concern that ensured the Council did not see higher rates of staff turnover than desirable. One such scheme took place in Children's Social Care, an area which nationally saw a high turnover rate, and involved financial remuneration for those employees who confirmed that they would remain at the Council for a specific period. This "tie-in" was one year, as it was agreed this worked better than two years, which was used previously. These retention payments were also used for critical employees who were halfway through delivering a project. In these cases, a retention payment could be placed on an employee, based on a percentage of their salary and post, and this payment would be repaid in full if the employee left the organisation before delivering the project.

It was noted that 64% of staff were on permanent contracts, but there are trends to suggest that agency staff are actively looking to remain agency workers, and were not looking for permanent employment. The Committee heard that, nationwide, people are choosing higher pay rates over better job security, and despite not being eligible for pension contributions, agency staff were still able to receive annual leave and other benefits, while also having pay parity with permanent staff. However, it was confirmed that long-term employees preferred the whole benefits package they receive over the hourly rate, and instances of employees looking to become agency workers are rare.

Responding to Members' questioning, it was confirmed that situations had arisen where a senior member of a team had been headhunted and had taken some of the Council's employees with them to their new place of employment, but it was noted that this has also been a recruitment tactic by the Council as it used existing networks to find potential staff members.

The Workforce and Organisational Development Manager confirmed that the overall package received by employees was very competitive, the pension contribution was unmatched, staff received better annual leave than the average that increased after five and ten years of service, and employees received four days of free parking, which was rare in London. It was confirmed that discussions were ongoing with the Employee Forum to review other staff benefits, such as online discounts and reduced ticket prices for events. Furthermore, the provision of wellbeing activities at the Council, such as yoga, was good for work culture. Members also heard that the Employee Forum was involved in allocating money to improve the Civic Centre and work environment.

With regards to remuneration, the Committee were informed that benchmark salaries in key policy areas were monitored to ensure that neighbouring authorities did not increase pay and challenge the organisation for key employees. Meanwhile, the Council remained in the top quartile of social care payers, which eliminated money as a potential hurdle when employing staff in these key roles.

Councillors heard that potential improvements could be made to flexible and mobile working as this was considered very attractive to new roles in today's society and would improve competitiveness, particularly among social workers, who received very flexible working at other organisations.

It was confirmed to Members that the Council maintained a strong commitment to professional development, and access to training, among other development opportunities, was very advanced. Responding to questioning, the Workforce and Organisational Development Manager confirmed that with regards to the Council funding employees' Professional Education Training, the Council enforced a two-year "tie-in" period.

The Committee was informed that it was important that the culture and reputation of the organisation was visible to staff, and that there was a level of self-fulfilment that came with working for the Council and engaging with residents.

Members agreed that the witness evidence received at previous meetings suggested that the induction process was fit for purpose, and the intranet system was working well, but retention strategies may require enhancing. It was, however, noted, that there was not much in the induction process with regards to new staff members engaging outside their own department.

The Committee noted that a series of questions regarding staff induction and retention were to be sent out to private companies in the Borough to better understand the approach taken by private companies to these two aspects of staffing, and this evidence would be collated ahead of the next meeting and incorporated into the review.

Councillors noted that the review was heading towards its final stages, with recommendations and the final report due to be brought before the Committee at its next scheduled meeting.

RESOLVED: That the witness evidence was noted, and the review progressed to its next stage.