An investigation has been launched into why Bradford Council staff each take an average of almost a fortnight off sick every year.

Latest figures show that its 24,000 employees were on sick leave for an average of 13.06 days in 2004/5 - higher than almost every other equivalent council in Britain.

Now a wide-ranging review, agreed by the authority's corporate improvement committee, will examine the causes and how to tackle them in a bid to find a better way of managing sickness absence.

In 2003/4 the figure was even slightly worse with employees taking an average 14.23 days off sick. In 2002/3 the figure was 12.5 days and cost the authority £6.8 million.

It compares with a national average for metropolitan authorities in 2003/4 of 9.47 days with 14.71 days being the worst.

National figures are not yet available for 2004/5 but Bradford's performance is expected to again leave the authority as among the worst in the country.

Muftansir Butt, the Council's service improvement officer, told the committee the level of sickness had been growing in recent years.

He said the problem was caused by an increase in long-term sickness but the Council had been able to reduce sickness taken over short periods.

Issues to be addressed by the review will include:

* the causes of staff absence including the reasons given, trends, issues and other key factors;

* the recording of sickness absence within the Council;

* the role of human resources, including the role of occupation health, in managing attendance;

* the impact that staff absence has on service delivery.

It will look at other organisations, including the private sector, and consider innovative approaches with the aim of making the Council one of the best metropolitan authorities by 2008/9.

Committee chairman, Councillor Malcolm Sykes, said: "We are having the review to try to make things better. But I believe it isn't as easy for councils as the private sector because of the service element. I imagine people in social services for example find the job very stressful."

Patrick Kerry, a lead negotiator with City Hall Union Unison said: "The figures are a matter of concern and I welcome the review.

"The main cause is stress due to Government initiative, continued budget reductions and increased work loads, and job insecurity.

"The union is taking part in the review looking at it in terms of an employee welfare situation. We want to identify and deal with sickness before it happens."

Committee member Councillor Andrew Thornton said: "We must manage sickness in a fair, consistent and supportive way.

"We want to go forward with the engagement of the unions and staff. Clearly we would like to be among the best authorities, it is how we get there."

Councillor Howard Middleton said: "It is an important area. I think every councillor is concerned about it. I believe this review will highlight other issues including the relationship between the Council and its staff."

Social Services and environmental and waste management had the highest sick rate of slightly more than 15 days but the figure has dropped by five compared with the previous year.

The fewest days off were taken in the chief executive's office with an average of five days taken off, compared with about four in 2003/4.

The review has been started by the Council's service improvement section which will consult with councillors, unions and staff, human resources, departments and services and the chief executive's management team.

The results and recommendations will go to the improvement committee in the New Year and are expected to be implemented in March.