Agenda item

The Board received a presentation from Siobhan Saunders, Employment, Learning and Skills on the progress regarding Halton’s Work Programme Contracts. 

 

The presentation:-

 

·             Set out the background to the work programme;

 

·             Outlined Halton’s Work Programme; the delivery, the process and the customer journey;

 

·             Detailed the performance against targets via good news stories;

 

·             Explained Year 1 and Year 2’s delivery and the lessons learned; and

 

·             Set out the challenges and opportunities for Years 3 – 5 of the work programme.

 

The following comments arose from the presentation:-

 

·             It was noted that to date there had been 1700 referrals from A4E and 1700 from Ingeus.

 

·             It was noted that an individual’s situation would be assessed regarding their entitlements etc in order to ensure that they would not be worse off;

 

·             It was noted that customers accessed the service via the job centre, which was an automatic referral after 9 months;

 

·             A member of the Board raised concern at the suitability of the placements; whether health and safety checks were undertaken and training given to individuals. He indicated that a family member had been injured on a placement and he had been placed in an unsuitable environment. In response it was reported that it would not have been one of Halton’s contracts.  All Halton work placements were assessed for their suitability, strict additional guidelines were given out, the individual would also be assessed, and health and safety procedures were checked.  In addition, it was reported that a formal complaint could be made through the complaints procedure at the Job Centre.  If the placement was via A4E, they should complain directly via their complaints procedure.

 

·             The Portfolio holder, xx Councillor Jones reported that Halton People into Jobs had been very successful and had achieved excellent outcomes. However, the programme had been replaced by the Government to a contract with private providers. He highlighted that the change represented a huge internal cultural change for employees and he gave credit to Officers who had managed the change, the terms and conditions and the expectations.  He reported that the Council had been keen to deliver the new programme in order to retains some of the elements in a contract that the Council valued, to protect employees jobs and ensure that residents had direct involvement with the clients.  In conclusion, he reported that the programme had been successful for two years.

 

·             Concern was raised regarding zero contracts and that some of the jobs were only for 13 or 26 weeks.  In response, it was reported that the Authority were not encouraging people to take on agency work, but to obtain permanent employment.  In addition, it was reported that it was the payments that were for 13 or 26 weeks not the employment.  It was also highlighted that the public sector ethos was to ensure the sustainability of the employment and the Scrutiny Topic Group were also considering this matter;

 

·             It was noted that a contact centre in Sheffield undertook the random allocation to A4E and Ingeus to ensure that it was a fair allocation.  It was reported that up to date statistics had been requested on this information.

 

·             Clarity was sought on the funding for a certificate for a customer, if it was required to obtain an interview.  In response, it was reported that whether it was funded or not was based on the likelihood of the person obtaining a job from having the certificate.  It was also reported that work took place with the customer and a letter is sometimes sent to the employer asking if the certificate is essential and if it is, it is funded. The Authority also work with other organisations to enable the individual to obtain the certificate free of charge or undergo training to increase their chances of gaining employment. 

 

·             It was noted that when a customer commenced work, an assessment was completed.  If it was agency work they would be considered as a high risk and extra support was provided. The customer would continue to be job matched to ensure that they had an opportunity of long term employment.  They would indicate how often and how they would like to be contacted and how the support would be provided.  The minimum contact would be every four weeks.

 

·             Clarity was sought on the percentage of staff sickness.  In response, it was reported, that previously over a six month period there had not been a full capacity of staff and any one time.  However, this had greatly improved, the sickness absence had been managed and dealt with and the actual figures could be circulated to Members of the Board for information.

 

·             Clarity was sought on the percentage of customers who achieved employment and whether they were full time or part time.  In response, it was reported that part time or full time work was for 30 hours or more, which was a requirement of Job Seekers Allowance.  However, it was reported that some customers, preferred part time work initially in order to build up their confidence before commencing full time employment; and

 

·             The Board noted the significant demand on debt services in the Borough.  It was also noted that all available services were considered re debt management; A4E undertook staff training and Ingeus put customers on financial training courses.

 

RESOLVED: That

 

(1)        The presentation and comments raised be noted; and

 

(2)        Siobhan Saunders be thanked for her informative presentation.