Agenda item

To provide the People, Performance and Development Committee with preliminary analysis exploring the options available to enhance the provision of key worker housing in Surrey and to determine whether further analysis into a fully costed feasibility study should be undertaken in this area.

Declarations of interests:

None

Witnesses:

Ken Akers, Head of HR & OD

Gill Kearney, Strategic Business Partner

Key points raised during the discussions:

1.    Some Members expressed disappointment at the recommendations contained within the report and challenged officers on whether the proposals  would deliver any tangible benefit in addressing staff shortages in key positions. Evidence from officers on the recruitment and retention of frontline staff at a previous PPDC meeting had stated that the cost and accessibility of housing in Surrey was making it more difficult to attract applications for vacant positions which seemed to be at odds with the conclusions drawn in the report.

2.    Discussions turned to the cost of operating a key worker housing scheme given the financial resources that were required to run a similar initiative by SCC in the past. A Member of the Committee suggested that the provision of key worker housing could help to reduce the costs associated with employing locums and agency staff by improving retention of permanent staff. This was challenged by the Committee who stressed that the amount spent on locums constituted a relatively small part of SCC’s staffing budget and that the cost of operating a key worker housing scheme would outstrip any potential savings which could be achieved by reducing reliance on locums. Officers further stated that changes in legislation that brought taxation for the self-employed in line with PAYE would encourage more locums to become permanent employees and therefore contribute to a reduction in the amount that SCC was required to pay in staff salaries.

3.    The Committee discussed staff members’ motives for leaving SCC to determine whether the cost and availability of housing in Surrey is a key reason why employees seek other opportunities. Officers indicated that the Council does not routinely undertake exit interviews with departing members of staff due to the difficulty in getting staff to engage meaningfully with the process although they had recently been introduced by Adult Social Care Directorate and trialled by Children’s Services for a year to contribute to their understanding of significant push factors. Members suggested that housing was not the primary concern of staff as exemplified by the low uptake of the Council’s previous key worker housing scheme.

4.    Discussions took place regarding the definition of what constitutes a key worker and the processes that would be required to ensure that housing was made available to the right members of staff. Members suggested that it would be problematic to establish and resource a system that would ensure that housing was targeted at the most challenging areas of recruitment and retention for the Council.

5.    Attention was drawn to recommendation ii which proposed asking district and borough councils to expand their eligibility criteria for key worker housing to include staff members from within the County Council that posed recruitment and retention challenges. Some Members suggested it was not realistic to expect district and borough councils to engage with this proposal in the absence of any recompense being offered by SCC. The Committee agreed to revise recommendation ii expanding it to encompass other institutions and public sector organisations operating in Surrey including universities and the NHS.

6.    The Committee emphasised the importance of supporting staff relocating from other parts of the country to navigate Surrey’s challenging property market to help them find a house that is right for them. Officers were asked  to review potential options for broadening the support available to assist staff relocating in order to take up a position at SCC. Members agreed that the outcomes of this review should be presented to a future meeting of PPDC.

Actions/ further information to be provided:

1.    Officers to investigate the full range of options to provide housing for staff taking up a role in a hard to recruit to position. This includes talking to other public sector organisations as well as institutions such universities.

2.    Officers to consider ways of improving the assistance it provides for staff required to relocate to take up a position at SCC and to present a report on the outcomes of this to a future meeting of PPDC.

RESOLVED:

That the People, Performance and Development Committee:

1. notes the suggestion to broaden the current signposting of available housing support in Surrey to all potential candidates;
2. agrees that the strategic leads identified should work with all relevant housing associations in Surrey to discuss the potential for expanding their eligibility criteria for key worker housing to include hard to recruit and retain posts in order to widen the support available; and
3. notes work undertaken in relation to recruitment and retention and agrees that the benefits to Surrey County Council through a focus on key worker housing does not warrant further investment based on the findings in this report.