Council workers warned to slash sick days (From Bradford Telegraph and Argus)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting TANEWS to 80360, or email
Council workers warned to slash sick days
6:10am Friday 3rd July 2009 in
All Bradford Council staff have been told that days off sick must be dramatically reduced.
In a strongly-worded letter, chief executive Tony Reeves says the authority’s record is one of the worst in the country.
His letter warns that, on average, 12 days are lost per person per year to illness among the Council’s 18,275 employees – a situation he describes as “alarming”.
Mr Reeves says rates need to “radically improve” as they are costing taxpayers millions of pounds in agency costs and lost productivity.
Two departments have been identified as sickness hotspots. Workers in adult services have an average 20 days off a year due to poor health. In environment and neighbourhoods the average is more than 17 per person per year.
Changes have already been implemented mainly focused on early referrals with a pilot project operating in adult services.
Other successful methods have included: stress audits, training for managers, mediation, and a pilot scheme with GPs providing direct referrals to the Council’s occupational health service.
Attendance champions have also been appointed in each department to promote a culture of attendance at work.
Mr Reeves said: “We are aware that sickness levels are high at Bradford Council but we are tackling the issue by offering as much help and support as we can.
“As a good and caring employer we are taking measures where possible to get people back to work quicker. People are being referred to our Occupational Health Unit at the earliest opportunity who can then in turn refer people for counselling or fast track physiotherapy .
“However, I must emphasise that there are many staff within the Council who are never or rarely sick. I am confident that, after working closely with the trade unions, we can meet our targets to reduce sickness levels.”
Councillor Kris Hopkins, leader of the Council and the Conservative group, said: “The high levels of staff sickness in some parts of the Council are completely unacceptable, particularly at a time when we are operating in a climate of reduced resources and increased demands on services.
“As a publicly-funded body, it is essential we are run efficiently and provide value for money for Council taxpayers. I fully support the chief executive’s efforts.”
Councillor Ian Greenwood, leader of the Labour group, said: “Clearly sickness needs to be managed effectively and I’m surprised it’s taken this long to get round to tackling the problem.
“However, it should not be used as a smokescreen for the long-standing failures of leadership that have dragged Bradford into the worst ten per cent of councils.”
Councillor Jeanette Sunderland, Liberal Democrat group leader, said: “While no-one would deny the right to those that are ill to take the day off work, when people do go off sick it can put a lot of pressure on their colleagues.
“We have one of the worst absence records and we need to get to the bottom of why it is so high.”
Steve Torrance, regional organiser at public sector union, Unison, accepted that sickness levels need to be monitored closely, but said it was a joint issue and the union would work in co-operation with the Council to improve attendance levels.
“The focus must be upon ensuring the health and well-being of individuals and not using a big stick approach to those with genuine sickness. Each case needs to be looked at individually, and there should not be a blanket policy for everyone. There is a risk that the goodwill of long-standing employees will be eroded.”
Comments(29)
The Main Man
says...
7:32am Fri 3 Jul 09
I bet they are on full sick pay for there days off but that part wasn t in the story.
As normal with the T and A you only get one half off the story like always.
The T and A now are just looking for news storys now they need to bring the real issures up in Bradford not **** foot round like they normal do.
God Bless
keeponclucking
says...
7:56am Fri 3 Jul 09
' are people who ring you up at home,getting you out of your sick bed to see 'if you are ok'despite you having rung work 2 hours earlier to say you are not!The real reason is to check up on you secretly hoping that you don't pick up the phone so they can then go squealing to their boss.As for referrals to an occupational health unit linked to your employer,that's a complete joke.They are not even proper Doctors,just 'yes' men to the employer. You may have a note written by your family doctor who has known you for 30 years & yet someone from the Occupational Health unit decides they know better in the hour that they see you! I have been off with work related stress in the past & was taking calls 4 times a week from my employer morning,noon & night! A colleague went home with a headache & dizzy spells & didn't come in for a few days.Our employer rang him at home saying that he really should be back at work with such a minor ailment & the word was passed around to obviously label him a 'shirker'. He did return to work the next day even though he still didn't feel well...he has since being diagnosed with a brain tumour.
Thee Voice of Reason
says...
9:15am Fri 3 Jul 09
Thats a total of 219,300 sick days per year, which equals about 600 years of absence across the board per year.
But are all these employee's full time, I doubt it so the figure of 12 per employee will probably be a lot worse if scaled up in line with full time staff.
So much public money is wasted these days and you wonder why you bother paying your taxed, I have had one day off sick in the past 5 years, really it should have been more but I dragged myself to work even though feeling unwell, I get the feeling the council is such a soft touch that if you have a sniffle you can claim the day off sick.
The council, they couldn't run a bath.
lanzaman
says...
9:49am Fri 3 Jul 09
Thee Voice of Reason
says...
10:57am Fri 3 Jul 09
Once this shower of a government is voted out and of that I have no doubt will happen and public spending is slashed, cuts will be made at a national and local level. So all these people taking time off work at the tax payers expense will be the first out the door and if they aren't they should be. Then lets see what chance they have walking into another job when potential employers see they have 2 to 4 weeks a year of ill.
This report doesn't mention if the people get paid when off ill but I have a feeling they do because if they didn't I think numbers would be way down on what they are and just goes to show how much of our money is wasted by effectively having to employ agency staff to do the job someone else can't be bothered to do.
As they say it's easy spending other peoples money and once again Bradford Council is in the lower reaches of the league tables when it comes to service and value for money.
Which brings us to the park which is a different topic completely but why start on that pie in the sky idea when half of Bradford has been flattened, simple because it's not their money they are spending it's others, and they know it will be drastically reduced when someone who has sense decides we can't afford to waste money like this and puts a stop to it.
Edwin
says...
11:13am Fri 3 Jul 09
Numbers absent always rise in good sunny weather, recovering from illness in the garden works miracles.
In our county big sporting events such as a Test Match at Headingley or Ebor Handicap day at York Races magically increases sickness.
The answer is to cancell all sick pay for the first 3 days of absense.
ItchyBungle
says...
12:13pm Fri 3 Jul 09
The public sector is being squeezed at the moment and this will inevitably lead to more sickness from staff for physical and mental health issues.
Newswatcher
says...
12:34pm Fri 3 Jul 09
lanzaman wrote:I have also heard this. Perhaps some incentive for a good sickness record would be preferable.
Isn't it the case that council employees take their 'due sick days' as part of their annual leave. I have heard people say 'I haven't had all my sick days yet'!
Thee Voice of Reason
says...
12:47pm Fri 3 Jul 09
Newswatcher wrote:So now we have to reward people for turing up for work?
lanzaman wrote: Isn't it the case that council employees take their 'due sick days' as part of their annual leave. I have heard people say 'I haven't had all my sick days yet'!I have also heard this. Perhaps some incentive for a good sickness record would be preferable.
Any scheme to give people incentive to go to work rather than ring in sick is exactly why the country is why it is in the state it is.
Sounds a bit like giving children DVD players and stuff for turning up at school.
The country is fast becoming a joke.
Victor Clayton
says...
12:57pm Fri 3 Jul 09
ItchyBungle wrote:Nobody wants victimisation of the sick but the public sector is being squeezed no harder than the private sector. so why should there be such a huge difference? Frankly, as a Bradford rate payer I am offended the public servants are taking the P*ss! by the way. a friend of mine is very high up in Leeds council. they told me the Leeds bin men have an unofficial rota to take days off sick!
I agree that the council should try to reduce staff sickness, as should all organisations, but this is really not helpful to anyone. I work in the public sector in Leeds and I would be offended by this article if I worked for the council as it is purely negative and slaps in the face of those that are genuinely ill and work hard when at work. The public sector is being squeezed at the moment and this will inevitably lead to more sickness from staff for physical and mental health issues.
keelhambar
says...
1:04pm Fri 3 Jul 09
lassimangnayala
says...
1:08pm Fri 3 Jul 09
flashdonut
says...
1:13pm Fri 3 Jul 09
Stop the sick pay. I am sure the sick days will stop.
Penny pinching, lazy grubs.
peedoffratepayer
says...
1:18pm Fri 3 Jul 09
from Kris Hopkins following news of his 'expenses'!
Juice Terry
says...
1:46pm Fri 3 Jul 09
Duke of Odsal
says...
2:11pm Fri 3 Jul 09
Lets not forget though that for many staff their absence means just one thing - more work to do to catch up when they return. It is in my experience relatively rare for short term sickess (say up to a couple of weeks) to be covered by agency staff - this tends to be reserved for planned absence (like having an operation and recuperation time) and that is much less likely to be fakery on the part of the employee.
Welcome To The New World Order
says...
3:32pm Fri 3 Jul 09
Juice Terry
says...
4:06pm Fri 3 Jul 09
Thee Voice of Reason wrote:I've never had a day off sick in five years. I'm a better slave to the system than you!
12 days per person per year for 18,275 employees. Thats a total of 219,300 sick days per year, which equals about 600 years of absence across the board per year. But are all these employee's full time, I doubt it so the figure of 12 per employee will probably be a lot worse if scaled up in line with full time staff. So much public money is wasted these days and you wonder why you bother paying your taxed, I have had one day off sick in the past 5 years, really it should have been more but I dragged myself to work even though feeling unwell, I get the feeling the council is such a soft touch that if you have a sniffle you can claim the day off sick. The council, they couldn't run a bath.
Shirking lightweight!!
Windyass
says...
5:03pm Fri 3 Jul 09
ItchyBungle wrote:If you worked for Bradford Council you would not be offended by this article. You would be whole-heartedly agreeing with it, as you would be annoyed by some of your colleagues that ritually take the mick, and get away with it!
I agree that the council should try to reduce staff sickness, as should all organisations, but this is really not helpful to anyone. I work in the public sector in Leeds and I would be offended by this article if I worked for the council as it is purely negative and slaps in the face of those that are genuinely ill and work hard when at work.
The public sector is being squeezed at the moment and this will inevitably lead to more sickness from staff for physical and mental health issues.
spawny1
says...
6:41pm Fri 3 Jul 09
avagander
says...
9:38pm Fri 3 Jul 09
Why?
Company of 10, one person has a heart attack and is of for a year.
'Average' sick is 36.5 days per employee, yet 90% of staff have had no sick.
My wife has had two periods of being off for 8 weeks due to operations - not all the members of staff at her small company received letters about the average sick leave being too high. It was acknowledged she had a specific issue and it was managed.
With 20,000+ staff of all ages doing a wide range of jobs, some of them dangerous, there's a higher probability of poeple being on long term sick.
Get 50% of them sorted and watch the average fall.
hector0007
says...
10:11pm Fri 3 Jul 09
And for the saints out there who drag themselves in with illness when they are clearly not well..........more fool you. Don't forget when you drop dead, you will be replaced within a week and forgotten by the second week.
There is more to life than work, especially if its down to emploers that brought the illness on.
albion
says...
10:26pm Fri 3 Jul 09
hector0007 wrote:The whole problem here isnt about people being ill (if you are and there is some hassle, just get a doctors note) its about people using sick leave as an extension of their holidays. I am long since retired but i can remember this going on then and it was always the same culprits and often they made no secret of the purpose of their absence.
If its so wonderful working for the council and its a easy ride, i suggest you apply for a job at the council. All is definitely what it seems.
And for the saints out there who drag themselves in with illness when they are clearly not well..........more fool you. Don't forget when you drop dead, you will be replaced within a week and forgotten by the second week.
There is more to life than work, especially if its down to emploers that brought the illness on.
lonniejockstrap
says...
1:02am Sat 4 Jul 09
Maybe thats the 'root cause' of the sickness absence? If employees are unable to enjoy their work due to lack of resourses and greater demands they may use 'sickness' as a 'pressure release valve'.
Anyway, I don't think politicians are in a position to criticise anyone who 'might' be taking advantage of a sickness scheme. The politicians have set the moral standard. Once they have sorted out their own cheating colleagues, then maybe they will have some hope of people taking some notice of them telling others how to behave.
scanipoos
says...
1:08am Sat 4 Jul 09
t'old man
says...
3:35pm Sat 4 Jul 09
hardgravity
says...
10:40am Sun 5 Jul 09
What's changed?
the governing party.
The new 'management' seem intent on destroying the city,Forster Square, the Park at the Heart that nobody wants, now demoralise hard working staff and turn the public against them!
What next? sell Bradford to Leeds as a suburb?
albion
says...
11:39am Sun 5 Jul 09
hardgravity wrote:Would you buy it?
Regular sick problems in the council are usually stress or stress related. The council is in the BOTTOM10 per cent in the country, compared to a few years ago when it was in the TOP 5.
What's changed?
the governing party.
The new 'management' seem intent on destroying the city,Forster Square, the Park at the Heart that nobody wants, now demoralise hard working staff and turn the public against them!
What next? sell Bradford to Leeds as a suburb?
More Bradford stories
- Police still hunting 'brutal' murderers who killed Bradford dad
- Four more held in Keighley street murder probe
- Family pays tribute to girl killed in accident on Valentine's Day walk with boyfriend
- VIDEO: Bungling robber attempts raid on Eccleshill shop
- Man held after 44-year-old dies after fight
- Masked raider strikes at Bradford general store
- Bradford firefighters’ injury statistics revealed
- Principal’s ‘double success’ rate vow
- Cabbie’s ‘shock’ at hammer attack
- New visitor centre opens in key site
Unison’s Steve Torrance with one of the letters to staff
Most popular
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
albion says...
6:28am Fri 3 Jul 09