Agenda item

The Committee considered an update report on the Council’s actions in relation to the supply and control of temporary labour.

At the last meeting held in June 2019, the Committee had requested a range of data and information.  In response, the OD/HR Business Partner presented the requested information, as set out on pages 91 to 96 of the report.

The Council continued to spend on temporary labour at a consistent rate of £8 - £10 million per year.  The reasons for employing temporary staff included: to fill gaps in the establishment; to meet peaks of workload; to meet the need for short term, fixed or project work, where there was no capacity in the permanent workforce; to provide specific skills or capabilities required on a short term basis. 

A Member queried why the cost of temporary labour remained consistent, whilst the overall head count of Council employees had been reduced.  In addition, he asked what percentage of the workforce was temporary.  In response, it was explained the Council workforce had reduced mainly due to the academisation of a number of schools; it was estimated that 25% of the workforce was temporary and this was not untypical for an urban council. 

The analysis showed that for lower cost roles, there were savings to be made from using temporary labour as well as increased flexibility for the Council.  It was recognised that this needed to be balanced against the Council’s obligation to provide permanent employment. 

The cost of temporary labour was circa £386,883 over the cost of equivalent employed labour.  It was highlighted that on costs, which were typically 27% to cover the cost of sickness absence, employer National Insurance contributions, pension and other costs, were not applicable to temporary workers and therefore could be less expensive than a permanent employee.

Members were informed that there were a number of posts classed as ‘national and local shortage’ and these roles impacted on the cost of employing such workers, with workers choosing to work as temporary labour in order to maximise their income.  This issue was not isolated to Slough; rather it reflected the broader labour market economics. 

In response to this identified issue, the Slough Academy project provided apprenticeships in hard to fill roles, such as social workers and planning officers, in anticipation that training local people would improve staff retention.

With regards to procuring temporary labour services from 2020 onwards, Members were informed that the contract with Matrix SCM was ending in January 2020.  As such, the Council was reviewing its requirements and a new contract re-procurement process had commenced.  The new contract would be implemented during November and December 2019, and would go live in January 2020.  The Council was seeking to change its model from a neutral vendor model to a hybrid vendor model.  The hybrid vendor model required the supplier to provide staff directly, whilst also utilising agency staff.  This change aligned to the requirements of the Council and was anticipated to generate significant savings.

Referring to page 98 of the report, a Member queried some of the roles listed as local shortage posts, such as the cemetery and parking roles.  It was explained that these posts had been advertised, but due to the shortage of suitable candidates had not been successfully filled.  It was agreed that further details about these roles would be provided at the next Committee meeting.

A Member asked if Brexit would have an impact on the Council’s workforce.  In response, it was advised that the short term impact would be minimal, however in the longer term the impact was unknown.

The Chair thanked officers for the report.

Resolved –

(a) That the report be noted.

(b) That further details regarding the cemetery and parking roles, identified as  being local skill shortage posts, be provided at the next meeting.