Agenda item

This report is a follow up to the Agency Staffing update report presented to the Board in July 2016.

Declarations of interest:

None

Witnesses:

Ken Akers, Head of HR & OD

Radhika Verma, HR Contracts Manager

Vicky McHugh, HR Advisor

Denise Le Gal, Cabinet Member for Business Services and Resident Experience

Key points raised during the discussion:

1.    The Head of HR & OD began by explaining that whilst the level of Business Services agency staff usage appeared to be high at 33.9%, the number of agency staff in that area had actually been significantly reduced from 70 to 26 over the past two years.

2.    The officer indicated that there was a need for specialised expertise within IT as a result of the scale of step-change and that these people are costly.  The Board was informed that the average agency charge for a skilled IT consultant was £42 per day under the MSTAR2 procurement framework.

3.    Members enquired as to whether there was information available detailing the length of tenure that agency staffed posts had been occupied.  There were concerns that if longer than 12 weeks, they would become a permanent employee.  The officers assured the Board that after 12 weeks, the agency staff would be entitled to the same entitlements as Surrey County Council employees, for example pay rates and training provision, however there was no risk of agency staff becoming permanent employees automatically. 

4.    The Board acknowledged that the data from the Adecco contract appeared to be much more comprehensive than the data supplied by the previous agency staff provider, although it was noted that it would currently be difficult to identify trends and generate comparative questions because of the stark differences between the two data sets.

5.    The Cabinet Member informed the Board that as with the Orbis contract, there had been a focus on ensuring that the data from the Adecco contract was robust and of quality. 

6.    The Head of HR & OD indicated that some services had delegated power to employ agency staff directly and that this had not been subjected to any HR scrutiny process.  The officer explained that instead, this would have been dealt with as a procurement.

7.    Members enquired as to what process was in place to ensure workforce planning was being undertaken to identify priority roles were being filled in a timely manner, and how the requirement of specialists was managed.  The officer explained that two senior HR business partners and a HR advisory team were assigned to support services in workforce planning and getting the best from the agency contract.  Whenever a post became available, it was the mutual strategic aim of the contract to liaise with service leads in order to fill the post efficiently.

8.    Members were assured that agency spend was monitored and reviewed on a quarterly basis in order to identify where long term vacancies existed and wherever possible, these would be filled with directly employed staff.  HR monitored agency staff tenure, and those exceeding six months were highlighted to the Head of Service for review.  

Actions/ further information to be provided:

·         Breakdown the direct spend posts to understand the type of post procured in this way and the reasons for doing so.

Recommendations:

·         That the high percentage of agency staff in IT & Digital should be investigated urgently by a Task Group with findings to be reported at the COB February meeting.  Membership of Eber Kington, Colin Kemp, Zully Grant-Duff and Hazel Watson was agreed by the Board.

·         That officers report to the Board on a six-monthly basis to review data on agency staff usage.