absence management - agenda consulting...about using all the reports effectively and to network with...

People Count Third Sector 2017HR and Workforce Benchmarks for the Third Sector

ww

w.a

gend

acon

sulti

ng.c

o.uk

Volume 2.4

Absence Management

August 2017

1

FOREWORD Much has changed since the previous People Count study, both in the political environment and the voluntary sector itself, but in some regards meaningful progress has been lacking. So far the Brexit process has not done much to allow workforce planning to go ahead with any degree of certainty. The right to stay of European nationals working in the UK is still up in the air, as are the future processes for recruitment of skilled individuals from Europe. This will potentially cause considerable challenges for individual charities and, where a significant proportion of the workforce have traditionally come from the EU, even entire sectors in which UK charities operate, such as health and social care. While the country waits for representatives on both sides of the Brexit negotiations to reach a comprehensive agreement, charities must do their best to ensure they have solid strategies in place that help them create a positive and productive working environment for current staff. Now is as good a time as ever to revise your overall HR strategy, create meaningful learning and development opportunities, and establish a fair rewards system. But above all, this strategy must strike a fine balance between encouraging and supporting employees to achieve the best results for the charity’s beneficiaries, and living up to the sector’s values of respect and fairness by allowing them to do so in a sustainable way. I would encourage anyone working in HR or workforce planning to also look at the new Charity Governance Code, the major new edition of the sector-led publication which sets out the standards of governance charities should aspire to. HR professionals can do much to support their organisations’ boards to meet the code’s recommendations. Boards will look to HR for support in creating the positive workplaces: The code sets out basic principles such as integrity and diversity which must underpin all areas of work, and also provides more concrete

guidelines concerning processes for handling internal complaints or setting the remuneration of senior staff. You can find the code at www.charitygovernancecode.org. For the first time the code includes a dedicated section on diversity. In light of some of the figures contained in this report, it strikes me that this is an area where there is a clear need for further attention, not just at board level but also within staff teams. The sector does well on some aspects: For example, 68% of management employees in the sector are female, compared to 43% of management employees in the UK population as a whole. But this remains a smaller proportion than that of women in respondents’ workforces overall, at 73%. Importantly, employees from an ethnic minority background are still less likely to reach management level than their non-ethnic colleagues. There is no one simple solution to this, but I hope that we can all focus on identifying and removing any barriers to equal employment and progression within our organisations and the sector as a whole. Anyone who has worked in the sector for some time knows how challenging it can be to bring about change in the world. Sometimes, bringing about changes internally can be just as difficult. Yet so many organisations have proven time and again their desire to continually improve not just the world around them, but also themselves. This is why I am grateful for tools like this benchmarking study which allow us to identify instances of best practice, learn from each other and grow as a community. Sir Stuart Etherington Chief Executive National Council for Voluntary Organisations

http://www.charitygovernancecode.org/

2

CONTENTS FOREWORD ....................................................................................................................................... 1

1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 3

2 WHY PARTICIPATE IN PEOPLE COUNT? .......................................................................... 4

3 KEY FINDINGS .............................................................................................................................. 5

4 MEASURES..................................................................................................................................... 6

4.1 LIST OF MEASURES ............................................................................................................... 7

4.2 GENERAL INFORMATION ..................................................................................................... 8

4.3 ABSENCE MANAGEMENT .................................................................................................. 15

4.4 GOOD PRACTICE ................................................................................................................... 27

ANNEX A: DEFINITION OF MEASURES ................................................................................ 29

ANNEX B: METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLE.......................................................................... 32

3

1 INTRODUCTION People Count Third Sector 2017 This report – People Count Third Sector 2017: Volume 2.4 Absence Management – is based on findings from the People Count Third Sector 2017 Benchmarking Study.

eople Count is a Human Resource benchmarking study specifically tailored to the needs of the UK Third Sector. The study involved benchmarking the HR

processes of 67 Third Sector organisations in the UK (Annex B sets out the list of participants). The study was undertaken by Agenda Consulting in partnership with the Association of Mental Health Providers, the Charities HR Network, CHS Alliance, Hospice UK, the National Council for Voluntary Organisations, the National Union of Students and Voluntary Organisations Disability Group. The aim is to build a picture of the HR management processes of Third Sector organisations in the UK to enable participants to compare their performance with each other and to pinpoint their strengths and areas for development. Information in the study corresponds to activities and resources in the most recent complete financial year for which organisations have the required information; in most cases, this will be the financial year 2016-2017.

P

Publications in the People Count Third Sector 2017 study The following publications are available from our website:

Volume 2.1 – Composition of Workforce and Diversity

Volume 2.2 – Recruitment, Selection and Retention

Volume 2.3 – Learning and Development and Performance Management

Volume 2.4 – Absence Management

Volume 2.5 – Employee Relations and Reward Strategy Volume 2.6 – The HR Function

This report focuses on measures from the

People Count Third Sector 2017 study

relating to absence management. The report

is organised into the following chapters:

Chapter 2 – Why Participate in People Count? describes the benefits of participating in the study as experienced by previous participants

Chapter 3 – Key Findings: sets out the key findings from the study on the topic of absence management.

Chapter 4 – Measures: sets out, for each numerical measure, a detailed results table. The good practice section sets out the initiatives that participants have taken in the last year.

Annex A – Definitions of Measures: sets out the formulae used to calculate each measure in the report. Annex B – Methodology and Sample: describes the sample in detail and the way in which we have analysed and presented the data.

4

2 WHY PARTICIPATE IN PEOPLE

COUNT?

e hope that you find this report valuable and that it provides you with useful benchmarking information against

which to compare your own organisation. If so, we encourage your organisation to participate in the People Count Study in the future, which involves completing the Study questionnaire in respect to your own organisation. Participating in the People Count Study itself is by far the best way to gain the most benefit, both in the quality and breadth of the information you receive and cost effectiveness. In short, you pay less and get far, far more. By taking part your organisation enjoys a significant number of benefits which are not available to non-participants: Sector Wide Reports – every report containing the sector-wide results from all participants in the study is included. Your Own Organisation Scorecard – a detailed comparison of your organisation’s performance against your chosen peers on all measures in the study.

Access to a suite of online tools to examine your performance in more detail and illustrate your performance graphically. Ability to track your performance over time. One-to-One Telephone Consultation with one of our team to help get the most out of the reports. Access to Contacts from each participating organisation to share information and best practice. Invitation to a Results Conference and Product Training providing the opportunity to learn more about using all the reports effectively and to network with colleagues from other participating organisations. To find out more about the study and how to participate, go to www.agendaconsulting.co.uk, contact [email protected] or call Agenda Consulting on 01865 263720.

W

http://www.agendaconsulting.co.uk/

mailto:[email protected]?subject=People%20Count%20Third%20Sector%202016

5

3 KEY FINDINGS

In this section we set out some of the key findings in relation to absence management. These key findings do not cover all of the measures in this topic.

Please see sections 4.1 to 4.3 for the full detailed statistics tables for all measures and section 4.4 for the good practice material.

Absence Management

On average employees were absent for 8.1 days– slightly lower than the 2016 figure (8.5 days). The average level of employee absence for the UK workforce as a whole is 6.6 days (CIPD, 2014) (table 8.1).

For management employees the equivalent figure is 4.1 days per year. This close to the figure for People Count 2016 (4.2 days) and the same as 2015 (4.1) (table 8.2).

The median total cost of sickness absence per employee FTE in the last year is £843, lower than the 2016 figure (£1,008) (table 8.16).

87% of respondents believe that their response to absenteeism is highly or fairly effective (table 8.11).

6

4 MEASURES

This section sets out the detailed statistics tables for all

measures in the composition of workforce and diversity

topic as well as some general information about the

sample.

Where the measure is numerical, a standard format has been applied. The columns used are:

Number of responses: this is the number of organisations that answered the relevant questions, as not all of the 67 participating organisations answered each question.

10%: this is the value below which 10% of the distribution lies.

Lower Quartile is the value below which 25% of the distribution lies, or, equivalently, above which 75% of the sample lies.

Median is the value below which and above which 50% of the distribution lies.

Upper Quartile is the value below which 75% of the distribution lies, or, equivalently, above which 25% of the sample lies.

90%: this is the value below which 90% of the distribution lies.

Where the measure is multi choice e.g. Yes/No, we have reported the percentage of participants with each answer.

The statistics are calculated for the following rows in each table:

Whole sample: based on the answers from all participants.

Under 100: based on the answers from those participants with less than 100 employees

100 – 250: participants with 100-250 employees.

251 – 500: participants with 251-500 employees.

501 – 1,000: participants with 501-1,000 employees.

Over 1,000: participants with over 1,000 employees.

Sectors: based on answers from those participants that work in specific sectors. Participants could choose up to three sectors to describe their work.

In some cases, percentages may not add up to 100 due to differences in rounding.

Measures with fewer than 5 responses are not shown in this report. Similarly, in each table, rows for which there were fewer than 5 responses have been taken out of this report.

7

4.1 LIST OF MEASURES

Table 1.1 Total income of organisation (£ million) ................................................................. 8

Table 1.2 Total expenditure of organisation (£ million) .......................................................... 8

Table 1.3 Organisational paybill (£ million) ............................................................................ 9

Table 1.4 Organisational paybill as a percentage of expenditure (%) .................................... 9

Table 1.4.1 Average salary per employee (FTE) (£) ............................................................ 10

Table 1.5.1 Analysis of the number of participants by size .................................................. 10

Table 1.5.2 Analysis of the number of participants and percentage of the total for each sector ............................................................................................................................................ 11

Table 1.6 Location of head office (percentage of respondents for each size/sector) ............ 12

Table 1.7 Nations/regions from which staff are employed (percentage of respondents) ...... 13

Table 8.1 Average number of sick days taken per employee FTE per year: overall ............. 15

Table 8.2 Average number of sick days taken per employee FTE per year: management employees ........................................................................................................................... 15

Table 8.3 Average number of sick days taken per employee FTE per year: non-management employees ........................................................................................................................... 16

Table 8.4 Average number of sick days taken per employee headcount per year: overall ... 16

Table 8.5 Average number of sick days taken per employee headcount per year: management employees ........................................................................................................................... 17

Table 8.6 Average number of sick days taken per employee headcount per year: non-management employees ..................................................................................................... 17

Table 8.7 Average length of sickness absence (days) ......................................................... 18

Table 8.8 Average number of sick days per employee FTE which fell in episodes of 1 - 5 days ............................................................................................................................................ 18

Table 8.9 Average number of sick days per employee FTE per year which fell in episodes of 6 days - 4 weeks .................................................................................................................... 19

Table 8.10 Average number of sick days per employee FTE which fell in episodes of over 4 weeks .................................................................................................................................. 19

Table 8.11 How effective do you consider your organisational responses to absenteeism? 20

Table 8.13 Percentage absence: overall (%) ....................................................................... 20

Table 8.14 Percentage absence: management employees (%) ........................................... 21

Table 8.15 Percentage absence: non-management employees (%) .................................... 21

Table 8.16 Cost of occupational and statutory sick pay per employee FTE (£) .................... 22

Table 8.17 Cost of occupational and statutory sick pay per employee Headcount (£) ......... 22

Table 8.18 Cost of sickness absence in the last year (£) ..................................................... 23

Table 8.19.1 Cost of sickness absence per employee headcount in the last year (£) .......... 23

Table 8.19 Cost of sickness absence per employee FTE in the last year (£) ....................... 23

Table 8.20 Percentage absence: mental health concerns (%) ............................................. 24

Table 8.21 Percentage absence: muscular skeletal conditions (%) ..................................... 24

Table 8.22 Percentage absence: accidents at work (%) ...................................................... 25

Table 8.23 Do you use occupational health referrals? (%) .................................................. 25

Table 8.24 Number of occupational health referrals per 1,000 employees per year ............ 26

8

4.2 GENERAL INFORMATION

Table 1.1 Total income of organisation (£ million)

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)

Lower Quartile

(25%)

Median (50%)

Upper Quartile

(75%)

Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 67 6.4 10.5 21.3 55.0 88.2

Number of Employees

Under 100 9 1.8 2.1 2.9 8.3 13.7

100-250 18 7.4 8.6 12.0 19.0 40.7

251-500 13 8.6 12.1 16.3 32.9 78.2

501-1000 11 17.7 19.6 30.0 33.3 55.5

Over 1000 16 37.1 49.6 65.5 104.2 155.6

Sector

Children/Young People 12 6.6 8.4 17.1 77.2 106.6

Education/ Training 8 6.7 13.2 23.4 54.7 83.5

Elderly/Old people 5 11.2 15.9 27.8 54.5 83.8

Grant making 5 8.4 8.5 27.7 77.6 121.8

Health care/Medical research 13 3.1 7.6 21.3 28.7 62.2

Hospice 5 6.5 6.7 9.1 12.1 13.3

Housing 8 6.5 9.8 23.3 47.5 97.0

International development 10 2.7 6.9 19.6 75.7 84.1

Mental Health 8 13.4 26.2 31.4 36.0 54.7

People with disabilities 23 9.6 19.6 31.2 75.8 106.3

Social care 25 10.6 17.7 30.0 61.4 129.7

Other 8 8.7 11.0 21.1 78.7 102.8

Table 1.2 Total expenditure of organisation (£ million)

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)

Lower Quartile (25%)

Median (50%)

Upper Quartile (75%)

Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 67 3.7 8.8 20.3 52.2 91.3

Number of Employees

Under 100 9 2.0 2.1 2.3 8.3 13.4

100-250 18 7.3 9.0 11.9 20.5 47.5

251-500 13 6.7 11.8 16.6 30.9 82.4

501-1000 11 8.0 17.5 24.0 32.9 53.0

Over 1000 16 26.6 40.0 62.0 103.6 151.9

Sector




Grant making 5 9.0 10.0 27.9 67.8 115.3


Hospice 5 4.6 5.7 6.6 11.8 14.7

Housing 8 6.6 9.8 23.6 48.0 100.6


Mental Health 8 11.6 25.2 30.9 37.1 54.9


Social care 25 7.0 12.0 26.5 54.1 126.9

Other 8 9.6 11.0 21.0 72.8 105.3

9

Table 1.3 Organisational paybill (£ million)

Cost of salary, overtime and bonus for all employees excluding employer's NI and pension

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)


Median (50%)


Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 67 1.7 4.7 10.0 21.8 42.4

Number of Employees

Under 100 9 0.8 1.4 1.5 1.7 3.0

100-250 18 3.6 4.4 5.2 6.1 6.7

251-500 13 4.1 7.7 10.3 11.1 13.8

501-1000 11 12.1 13.5 16.1 20.7 24.8

Over 1000 16 27.0 33.4 40.3 53.1 78.9

Sector




Grant making 5 3.6 5.5 10.5 41.1 43.1


Hospice 5 4.0 4.3 5.4 7.7 9.1

Housing 8 3.0 5.5 12.8 33.8 69.7


Mental Health 8 7.7 15.6 19.0 24.6 40.1


Social care 25 6.0 13.1 18.5 40.1 61.4

Other 8 3.7 5.2 9.0 18.5 42.1

Table 1.4 Organisational paybill as a percentage of expenditure (%)

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)


Median (50%)


Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 67 18 39 57 68 81

Number of Employees

Under 100 9 22 27 42 59 70

100-250 18 10 20 45 54 60

251-500 13 14 38 55 64 68

501-1000 11 50 59 68 81 100

Over 1000 16 43 59 65 78 116

Sector

Children/Young People 12 11 20 42 56 60

Education/ Training 8 47 63 67 69 168

Elderly/Old people 5 47 47 52 62 306

Grant making 5 28 29 38 54 61

Health care/Medical research 13 27 47 55 60 68

Hospice 5 59 60 65 75 112

Housing 8 44 49 57 64 76

International development 10 10 11 22 32 51

Mental Health 8 57 59 66 70 73

People with disabilities 23 47 55 66 77 84

Social care 25 55 59 66 81 130

Other 8 15 25 41 57 64

10

Table 1.4.1 Average salary per employee (FTE) (£)

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)


Median (50%)


Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 67 22,955 25,894 29,861 37,565 44,889

Number of Employees

Under 100 9 28,818 29,338 35,757 40,135 48,115

100-250 18 24,314 28,448 31,708 42,378 47,472

251-500 13 25,035 25,729 37,270 38,208 39,408

501-1000 11 21,857 26,788 29,087 32,483 34,756

Over 1000 16 22,085 23,806 25,650 29,593 35,027

Sector

Children/Young People 12 27,751 27,779 29,223 37,443 38,225

Education/ Training 8 21,749 24,508 27,498 33,653 47,957

Elderly/Old people 5 26,738 27,778 32,641 33,029 37,177

Grant making 5 28,716 30,965 35,757 39,617 48,721

Health care/Medical research 13 26,432 29,338 30,775 37,879 49,257

Hospice 5 26,112 27,984 29,841 30,023 34,736

Housing 8 25,580 25,740 29,618 33,947 38,247

International development 10 25,920 37,443 38,246 46,724 51,881

Mental Health 8 22,474 24,710 27,506 29,953 32,192

People with disabilities 23 22,114 25,394 27,233 30,638 32,951

Social care 25 21,641 24,381 27,233 30,965 32,931

Other 8 26,366 28,786 34,586 44,064 47,957

Table 1.5.1 Analysis of the number of participants by size

Number of Responses % of Whole

Whole Sample 67 100

Number of Employees

Under 100 9 13

100-250 18 27

251-500 13 19

501-1000 11 16

Over 1000 16 24

11

Table 1.5.2 Analysis of the number of participants and percentage of the total for each sector

Sectoral analysis: please note percentages will not add up to 100 because each organisation can

choose up to three sectors

Number of Responses % of Whole

Whole Sample 67 100

Sector

Animal Welfare 1 1

Arts/Culture 0

Children/Young People 12 18

Civil rights/Citizenship/Law and Order 1 1

Economic/Community development/Employment 3 4

Education/ Training 8 12

Elderly/Old people 5 7

Environment/Conservation 4 6

Grant making 5 7

Health care/Medical research 13 19

Heritage 0

Hospice 5 7

Housing 8 12

International development 10 15

Mental Health 8 12

People of a particular ethnic or racial origin 1 1

People with disabilities 23 34

Religious/Missionary 2 3

Social care 25 37

Sport/Recreation 1 1

Students' Union 0

Umbrella body/Trade association 3 4

Other 8 12

12

Table 1.6 Location of head office (percentage of respondents for each size/sector)

Number of Responses

Scotland (%)

Wales (%)

N. Ireland (%)

London (%)

South East (%)

East of England (%)

Whole Sample

67 3 0 0 52 22 0

Number of Employees

Under 100 9 11 0 0 33 22 0

100-250 18 6 0 0 61 17 0

251-500 13 0 0 0 62 23 0

501-1000 11 0 0 0 45 9 0

Over 1000 16 0 0 0 50 38 0

Number of Responses

Scotland (%)

Wales (%)

N. Ireland (%)

London (%)

South East (%)

East of England

(%)

Sector

Children/Young People 12 0 0 0 58 42 0

Education/ Training 8 13 0 0 63 13 0

Elderly/Old people 5 0 0 0 80 0 0

Grant making 5 0 0 0 100 0 0

Health care/Medical research 13 15 0 0 38 23 0

Hospice 5 0 0 0 20 40 0

Housing 8 0 0 0 38 25 0

International development 10 0 0 0 80 20 0

Mental Health 8 0 0 0 50 13 0

People with disabilities 23 0 0 0 43 30 0

Social care 25 0 0 0 44 32 0

Other 8 0 0 0 88 0 0

East

Midlands (%)

West Midlands

(%)

South West (%)

Yorkshire and Humberside (%)

North East (%)

North West (%)

Overseas (%)

Whole Sample

4 1 9 4 0 3 0

Number of Employees

Under 100 11 11 0 0 0 11 0

100-250 6 0 11 0 0 0 0

251-500 8 0 8 0 0 0 0

501-1000 0 0 27 9 0 9 0

Over 1000 0 0 0 13 0 0 0

13

East

Midlands (%)

West Midlands

(%)

South West (%)

Yorkshire and Humberside

(%)

North East (%)

North West (%)

Overseas (%)

Sector




Grant making 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Hospice 20 0 20 0 0 0 0

Housing 0 13 13 13 0 0 0


Mental Health 0 0 25 13 0 0 0


Social care 0 0 12 4 0 8 0

Other 13 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 1.7 Nations/regions from which staff are employed (percentage of respondents)

Number of Responses

Scotland (%)

Wales (%)

N. Ireland (%)

London (%)

South East (%)

East of England

(%)

Whole Sample 67 34 34 27 69 60 37

Number of Employees

Under 100 9 22 11 11 56 44 22

100-250 18 22 11 17 67 33 17

251-500 13 54 38 31 62 69 31

501-1000 11 27 36 18 64 64 36

Over 1000 16 44 69 50 88 88 75

Sector




Grant making 5 80 80 80 100 80 80


Hospice 5 0 0 0 20 40 0

Housing 8 13 13 13 50 75 50


Mental Health 8 13 25 0 63 50 38


Social care 25 24 44 24 64 76 48

Other 8 50 25 38 100 50 50

14

East

Midlands (%)

West Midlands

(%)

South West (%)

Yorkshire and Humberside

(%)

North East (%)

North West (%)

Overseas (%)

Whole Sample 36 46 46 42 36 46 7

Number of Employees

Under 100 33 22 22 11 11 44 11

100-250 11 28 28 22 17 22 11

251-500 38 54 54 46 38 31 0

501-1000 36 45 64 45 36 55 18

Over 1000 63 75 63 75 69 81 0

Sector




Grant making 80 100 80 80 80 80 0


Hospice 20 0 20 0 0 0 0

Housing 38 50 63 50 50 50 0


Mental Health 25 25 63 50 50 38 0


Social care 44 52 56 48 36 56 0

Other 38 63 50 63 38 25 0

15

4.3 ABSENCE MANAGEMENT

Table 8.1 Average number of sick days taken per employee FTE per year: overall

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)

Lower Quartile

(25%)

Median (50%)

Upper Quartile

(75%)

Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 62 2.0 4.1 8.1 10.8 13.7

Number of Employees

Under 100 8 0.7 1.7 5.3 6.2 6.8

100-250 16 2.0 3.7 5.9 8.6 17.7

251-500 12 2.0 2.6 7.0 10.2 10.9

501-1000 11 2.7 6.2 8.9 13.0 15.2

Over 1000 15 8.0 8.3 10.6 11.9 13.5

Sector




Grant making 5 5.6 6.1 6.7 8.2 8.6


Hospice 5 8.2 8.8 9.1 10.0 12.7

Housing 7 1.9 5.2 9.7 15.4 22.6


Mental Health 7 7.3 10.2 12.6 15.4 16.7


Social care 22 7.2 8.3 10.6 12.5 15.1

Other 8 1.6 3.3 6.5 8.4 9.4

Table 8.2 Average number of sick days taken per employee FTE per year: management employees

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)


Median (50%)


Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 48 1.1 2.4 4.1 7.2 9.5

Number of Employees

Under 100 8 0.3 0.9 2.4 3.6 6.6

100-250 12 1.6 1.8 2.7 3.8 5.8

251-500 7 1.7 2.5 4.3 8.4 14.1

501-1000 9 2.5 3.3 7.1 7.7 9.0

Over 1000 12 3.0 4.1 5.8 8.0 10.4

Sector



Grant making 5 3.6 4.3 5.0 7.7 8.2



Mental Health 7 2.9 3.5 7.1 7.3 15.6


Social care 17 2.8 4.1 6.5 8.0 10.9

Other 6 0.7 1.2 2.4 4.5 6.3

16

Table 8.3 Average number of sick days taken per employee FTE per year: non-management employees

Number of

Responses

Lowest

(10%)


Median

(50%)


Highest

(90%)

Whole Sample 48 2.2 4.6 8.2 12.2 14.5

Number of Employees

Under 100 8 1.0 1.8 6.3 7.0 7.3

100-250 12 1.9 3.6 4.8 7.8 13.0

251-500 7 2.8 3.8 5.7 12.0 14.4

501-1000 9 6.3 8.8 12.1 13.5 16.5

Over 1000 12 8.8 8.9 10.7 12.3 14.6

Sector



Grant making 5 5.7 5.7 6.8 9.0 9.2



Mental Health 7 7.7 10.7 13.5 16.9 17.6


Social care 17 8.3 8.9 11.5 13.5 15.3

Other 6 1.6 3.0 5.7 8.4 9.2

Table 8.4 Average number of sick days taken per employee headcount per year: overall

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)


Median (50%)


Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 62 1.7 3.6 6.3 8.5 11.2

Number of Employees

Under 100 8 0.7 1.4 4.3 5.5 5.8

100-250 16 1.8 3.4 5.2 6.6 13.1

251-500 12 1.9 2.4 5.3 7.1 9.7

501-1000 11 2.2 5.4 8.5 10.1 12.0

Over 1000 15 6.3 7.5 8.1 10.0 12.0

Sector




Grant making 5 5.3 5.9 6.2 7.3 7.8


Hospice 5 6.2 6.9 7.0 7.5 9.7

Housing 7 1.4 4.7 7.7 13.1 19.4


Mental Health 7 5.9 8.2 10.7 13.2 14.9


Social care 22 5.5 6.6 8.6 10.5 11.9

Other 8 1.5 3.1 6.2 7.5 8.7

17

Table 8.5 Average number of sick days taken per employee headcount per year: management employees

Number of

Responses

Lowest

(10%)


Median

(50%)


Highest

(90%)

Whole Sample 48 1.0 2.1 3.6 6.9 9.3

Number of Employees

Under 100 8 0.3 0.9 2.0 3.2 6.2

100-250 12 1.5 1.7 2.5 3.4 5.8

251-500 7 1.6 2.4 4.2 7.8 13.8

501-1000 9 2.5 3.3 6.7 7.5 8.8

Over 1000 12 2.8 3.9 5.5 7.6 10.2

Sector



Grant making 5 3.6 4.2 5.0 7.5 8.1



Mental Health 7 2.8 3.4 6.7 7.0 14.1


Social care 17 2.8 3.3 6.0 8.0 10.7

Other 6 0.7 1.2 2.3 4.5 6.2

Table 8.6 Average number of sick days taken per employee headcount per year: non-management employees

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)

Lower Quartile

(25%)

Median (50%)

Upper Quartile

(75%)

Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 48 2.0 4.4 6.7 8.8 11.1

Number of Employees

Under 100 8 0.9 1.5 5.0 5.8 6.3

100-250 12 1.8 3.4 4.5 6.8 8.0

251-500 7 2.7 3.0 4.8 6.4 8.8

501-1000 9 6.2 7.9 8.8 11.2 13.2

Over 1000 12 6.8 7.5 8.6 10.2 11.0

Sector



Grant making 5 5.3 5.4 6.5 7.8 8.1



Mental Health 7 6.1 8.5 11.2 13.7 15.3


Social care 17 5.6 7.2 8.8 11.0 11.7

Other 6 1.6 2.9 5.3 7.4 8.1

18

Table 8.7 Average length of sickness absence (days)

Number of

Responses

Lowest

(10%)


Median

(50%)


Highest

(90%)

Whole Sample 53 2.5 3.4 4.2 6.4 9.6

Number of Employees

Under 100 8 2.0 2.4 3.6 4.3 5.2

100-250 11 2.5 3.0 3.8 5.0 5.9

251-500 9 2.8 3.0 3.4 4.0 10.0

501-1000 9 3.6 5.0 6.0 8.0 10.1

Over 1000 16 3.7 4.1 6.3 7.0 8.6

Sector





Housing 5 3.8 4.0 7.0 8.0 9.8


Mental Health 7 2.1 4.6 7.0 7.5 9.2


Social care 21 3.5 5.0 6.4 7.0 10.0

Other 6 2.7 3.0 4.7 6.2 6.7

Table 8.8 Average number of sick days per employee FTE which fell in episodes of 1 - 5 days

Number of working days lost due to sickness which fell in episodes of 1- 5 days divided by the number of employees FTE

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)


Median (50%)


Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 51 0.7 1.7 2.3 3.0 3.9

Number of Employees

Under 100 8 0.5 0.7 1.6 2.2 2.9

100-250 12 0.8 1.7 2.0 2.5 2.9

251-500 9 1.2 1.5 2.3 2.6 4.1

501-1000 8 1.8 2.2 2.3 2.6 3.1

Over 1000 14 1.8 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.1

Sector




Grant making 5 1.7 1.8 2.3 2.5 2.8


Housing 5 0.3 0.7 2.5 2.8 3.2


Mental Health 6 1.7 2.1 2.4 2.5 2.8


Social care 19 1.4 2.1 2.5 3.2 4.0

Other 8 0.8 1.5 2.0 2.5 2.7

19

Table 8.9 Average number of sick days per employee FTE per year which fell in episodes of 6 days - 4 weeks

Number of working days lost due to sickness which fell in episodes of 6 days- 4 weeks divided by the number of employees FTE

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)


Median (50%)


Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 51 0.3 0.8 1.8 2.7 3.6

Number of Employees

Under 100 8 0.1 0.3 1.1 1.8 2.0

100-250 12 0.0 0.5 0.8 1.5 3.4

251-500 9 0.4 0.6 1.6 2.2 2.8

501-1000 8 1.0 1.2 2.0 2.6 3.8

Over 1000 14 1.9 2.1 2.8 3.5 5.1

Sector




Grant making 5 0.8 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7


Housing 5 0.5 1.3 2.4 2.8 2.9


Mental Health 6 2.0 2.5 2.8 3.1 4.2


Social care 19 1.4 2.1 2.4 3.0 5.3

Other 8 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.3 1.5

Table 8.10 Average number of sick days per employee FTE which fell in episodes of over 4 weeks

Number of working days lost due to sickness which fell in episodes of over 4 weeks divided by the

number of employees FTE

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)


Median (50%)


Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 50 0.0 0.8 2.7 5.0 6.6

Number of Employees

Under 100 8 0.0 0.0 1.1 3.0 3.5

100-250 11 0.0 0.1 0.9 2.3 3.7

251-500 9 0.4 0.6 1.9 4.4 6.8

501-1000 8 1.6 3.0 5.5 7.1 8.5

Over 1000 14 1.5 2.4 4.8 5.5 6.3

Sector




Grant making 5 2.1 2.3 3.7 4.6 4.9


Housing 5 0.0 0.0 2.7 3.4 6.0


Mental Health 6 2.8 4.8 6.3 7.5 9.0


Social care 19 1.3 2.8 5.1 6.5 7.8

Other 8 0.3 0.8 3.6 4.7 5.4

20

Table 8.11 How effective do you consider your organisational responses to absenteeism?

Number of Responses

Not very effective (%)

Fairly effective (%)

Highly effective (%)

Whole Sample 62 13 74 13

Number of Employees

Under 100 7 14 57 29

100-250 17 6 82 12

251-500 11 9 73 18

501-1000 11 0 91 9

Over 1000 16 31 63 6

Sector

Children/Young People 11 0 73 27

Education/ Training 8 13 74 13

Elderly/Old people 5 0 60 40

Health care/Medical research 11 9 82 9

Housing 8 25 62 13

International development 8 38 49 13

Mental Health 8 25 75 0

People with disabilities 23 9 74 17

Social care 24 13 79 8

Other 8 25 75 0

Table 8.13 Percentage absence: overall (%)

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)


Median (50%)


Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 62 0.9 1.8 3.6 4.8 6.0

Number of Employees

Under 100 8 0.3 0.8 2.3 2.7 3.0

100-250 16 0.9 1.6 2.6 3.8 7.8

251-500 12 0.9 1.1 3.1 4.5 4.8

501-1000 11 1.2 2.7 3.9 5.7 6.7

Over 1000 15 3.5 3.7 4.7 5.2 5.9

Sector




Grant making 5 2.5 2.7 2.9 3.6 3.8


Hospice 5 3.6 3.9 4.0 4.4 5.6

Housing 7 0.8 2.3 4.3 6.8 10.0


Mental Health 7 3.2 4.5 5.5 6.8 7.4


Social care 22 3.2 3.7 4.7 5.5 6.6

Other 8 0.7 1.5 2.9 3.7 4.1

21

Table 8.14 Percentage absence: management employees (%)

Number of

Responses

Lowest

(10%)


Median

(50%)


Highest

(90%)

Whole Sample 48 0.5 1.1 1.8 3.2 4.2

Number of Employees

Under 100 8 0.1 0.4 1.0 1.6 2.9

100-250 12 0.7 0.8 1.2 1.7 2.6

251-500 7 0.7 1.1 1.9 3.7 6.2

501-1000 9 1.1 1.5 3.1 3.4 3.9

Over 1000 12 1.3 1.8 2.5 3.5 4.6

Sector



Grant making 5 1.6 1.9 2.2 3.4 3.6



Mental Health 7 1.3 1.5 3.1 3.2 6.9


Social care 17 1.3 1.8 2.9 3.5 4.8

Other 6 0.3 0.5 1.1 2.0 2.8

Table 8.15 Percentage absence: non-management employees (%)

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)


Median (50%)


Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 48 1.0 2.0 3.6 5.4 6.4

Number of Employees

Under 100 8 0.4 0.8 2.8 3.1 3.2

100-250 12 0.9 1.6 2.1 3.5 5.7

251-500 7 1.3 1.7 2.5 5.3 6.3

501-1000 9 2.8 3.9 5.4 6.0 7.3

Over 1000 12 3.9 3.9 4.7 5.4 6.4

Sector



Grant making 5 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.9 4.1



Mental Health 7 3.4 4.7 5.9 7.4 7.8


Social care 17 3.7 3.9 5.1 5.9 6.8

Other 6 0.7 1.3 2.5 3.7 4.0

22

Table 8.16 Cost of occupational and statutory sick pay per employee FTE (£)

Number of

Responses

Lowest

(10%)


Median

(50%)


Highest

(90%)

Whole Sample 34 23 180 517 634 793

Number of Employees

100-250 9 22 49 546 591 650

501-1000 6 80 179 437 736 795

Over 1000 12 371 424 559 765 877

Sector




Housing 6 54 159 575 782 856

Mental Health 7 101 321 506 795 848


Social care 17 25 150 506 589 796

Other 5 114 271 552 591 630

Table 8.17 Cost of occupational and statutory sick pay per employee Headcount (£)

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)


Median (50%)


Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 34 21 157 419 534 677

Number of Employees

100-250 9 18 38 446 521 555

501-1000 6 68 149 389 603 650

Over 1000 12 288 306 445 681 716

Sector




Housing 6 44 127 491 685 734

Mental Health 7 84 239 396 650 714


Social care 17 22 126 396 528 674

Other 5 113 268 521 536 593

23

Table 8.18 Cost of sickness absence in the last year (£)

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)


Median (50%)


Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 24 10,200 78,424 532,866 1,269,901 3,176,495

Number of Employees

100-250 5 31,426 78,565 102,226 108,708 462,980

Over 1000 9 935,705 1,047,208 2,765,578 3,260,135 3,787,293

Sector

Children/Young People 6 39,283 86,101 170,268 765,775 2,230,739

Housing 5 402,418 1,003,364 1,047,208 2,981,336 4,111,886

Mental Health 5 540,442 1,003,364 1,219,828 1,420,120 2,356,849

People with disabilities 12 107,366 616,013 1,081,793 3,051,036 3,491,962

Social care 12 92,497 343,564 1,111,596 2,889,217 3,491,962

Table 8.19.1 Cost of sickness absence per employee headcount in the last year (£)

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)


Median (50%)


Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 24 66 519 683 1,224 1,794

Number of Employees

100-250 5 179 446 547 611 1,922

Over 1000 9 672 741 824 1,293 2,072

Sector


Housing 5 314 686 942 1,283 1,689

Mental Health 5 844 1,283 1,293 1,410 1,739

People with disabilities 12 624 685 805 1,323 1,904

Social care 12 557 685 805 1,286 1,399

Table 8.19 Cost of sickness absence per employee FTE in the last year (£)

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)


Median (50%)


Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 24 74 545 843 1,518 2,163

Number of Employees

100-250 5 218 546 603 800 2,505

Over 1000 9 833 1,009 1,036 1,651 2,515

Sector


Housing 5 397 871 1,032 1,511 1,996

Mental Health 5 1,067 1,511 1,651 1,795 2,110

People with disabilities 12 693 857 1,068 1,687 2,268

Social care 12 571 857 1,068 1,566 1,781

24

Table 8.20 Percentage absence: mental health concerns (%)

Number of

Responses

Lowest

(10%)


Median

(50%)


Highest

(90%)

Whole Sample 52 0.1 0.3 0.7 1.2 1.5

Number of Employees

Under 100 7 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.0 1.5

100-250 11 0.1 0.2 0.4 1.0 1.3

251-500 10 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.7 1.0

501-1000 10 0.4 0.6 1.1 1.6 1.7

Over 1000 14 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.2 1.4

Sector



Grant making 5 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2



Mental Health 6 0.5 0.8 1.2 1.7 1.8


Social care 20 0.5 0.8 0.9 1.4 1.6

Other 8 0.1 0.2 0.7 1.2 1.3

Table 8.21 Percentage absence: muscular skeletal conditions (%)

Number of Responses

Lowest (10%)


Median (50%)


Highest (90%)

Whole Sample 51 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.9

Number of Employees

Under 100 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4

100-250 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.6

251-500 10 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.7

501-1000 9 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.9 1.3

Over 1000 14 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.8 1.2

Sector



Grant making 5 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.7



Mental Health 6 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.1 1.3


Social care 19 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.1 1.2

Other 8 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.7

25

Table 8.22 Percentage absence: accidents at work (%)

Number of

Responses

Lowest

(10%)


Median

(50%)


Highest

(90%)

Whole Sample 45 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1

Number of Employees

Under 100 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

100-250 13 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

251-500 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

501-1000 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1

Over 1000 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1

Sector



Grant making 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Housing 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Mental Health 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1


Social care 16 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1

Other 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Table 8.23 Do you use occupational health referrals? (%)

Number of Responses Yes (%) No (%)

Whole Sample 64 95 5

Number of Employees

Under 100 8 75 25

100-250 17 94 6

251-500 12 100 0

501-1000 11 100 0

Over 1000 16 100 0

Sector

Children/Young People 11 82 18

Education/ Training 8 100 0

Elderly/Old people 5 80 20

Grant making 5 100 0

Health care/Medical research 12 100 0

Hospice 5 100 0

Housing 8 100 0

International development 8 87 13

Mental Health 8 100 0

People with disabilities 23 96 4

Social care 24 100 0

Other 8 87 13

26

Table 8.24 Number of occupational health referrals per 1,000 employees per year

Number of

Responses

Lowest

(10%)


Median

(50%)


Highest

(90%)

Whole Sample 58 1 14 43 79 112

Number of Employees

Under 100 6 0 0 0 10 24

100-250 17 6 18 50 78 91

251-500 11 12 24 42 68 86

501-1000 9 9 19 57 99 203

Over 1000 15 9 26 54 108 133

Sector



Grant making 5 23 36 62 116 161


Hospice 5 65 79 86 102 107

Housing 8 1 21 43 78 80

International development 5 0 0 15 19 22

Mental Health 8 35 54 82 105 160


Social care 22 10 26 45 94 119

Other 7 11 24 62 101 146

27

4.4 GOOD PRACTICE In the study, participating organisations were asked to share any recent examples of good practice. For each open question in this topic we show the written responses from 2017, in full.

Good Practice in Absence Management (Table 8.99)

- Introduction of a Health and Wellbeing Strategy - Sickness data and analysis on

sickness reasons being more widely available to managers and HR to practice evidence based approach

Quarterly sickness absence reporting going

to all managers, including league table by department

Wellbeing events across the year (eg know

your numbers - BMI, blood pressure etc,

partnership with local fitness providers).

Introduction of guided mindfulness classes

and on-site drop-in counselling.

Introduction of training for managers when

dealing with sickness absence has helped reduce sickness levels and help employees back to work

Review of attendance policy and procedure

with reduction in absence levels to under 4% Effective use of Occupational Health and external provider with better reporting and assessment Identification of Employee Assistance Programme for roll out to staff

Use of the Bradford Factor (monitoring

short term sickness absence), Employee Assistance Programme

Employee assistance programme Various

wellbeing sessions

The introduction of cross-departmental

working, HR working alongside line managers to help reduce sickness absence; we were averaging at 8.4 days lost per FTE in 2015/16 we are now currently averaging at 7.4 days. We have taken a problem-

solving approach, promoting wellbeing initiatives, attending team meetings to discuss the impact of sickness and being proactive in supporting employees with medical conditions.

Training for all line managers in

performance management & mental health awareness training

Changed the sick pay policy to measure

sickness absence over a rolling 12 month period rather than a 12 month calendar period

More holistic, proactive approach to

managing absence. Training managers Executing zero pay at point in which policy is triggered.

Return to work conversations as standard

Continued to coach and train managers in how to effectively manage absence. Refined

use of absence data to establish trends in certain teams/job roles so can target support/solutions. HR team worked more closely with line management on targeting high sickness cases, resulting in closing of the cases.

No information from previous HR team so

new team will put a process in place.

Monitoring & managing absence,

management training with regard to managing absence

Introduced a well-being working group

Employee Assistance Programme, Support

with Long Term Sick

Chasing up Managers where triggers

reached but Managers have ignored the need to meet with the employee; Escalating non-compliance of the absence management procedures to a more senior level for review.

1. Production and distribution of monthly sickness absence reports for managers 2. The appointment of a dedicated Wellbeing Advisor who proactively follows up on sickness absence

1) Introduction of weekly absence welfare calls to employees with 10 days plus

absence 2) Embedding the use of Sickness metrics which provides information on trends and costs to support managers in managing sickness 3) Strengthening policy and reporting framework

Rewriting a guide for employees and

managers on the absence review process with revised trigger points.

Continued use of four spells and 4 weeks’

absence triggers. Facilitating ill-health absences training to upskill new managers and offer refreshers for existing managers. We introduced an Employee Assistance Programme as part of our Health and Wellbeing Strategy.

Return to work interviews Sharing absence information with line managers Getting line managers to input sickness data rather than

employees

We produce quarterly reports for our senior

management team. The reports are shared with operational managers. Where appropriate and in accordance with our absence management guidelines sickness

28

absence meetings are arranged with staff who absences breach the limits set by the organisation.

More HR coaching Quarterly case review meetings with OH More in depth analysis

1) Mandatory training for all managers on

how to manage sickness absence

effectively; 2) Monthly reports now

produced for individual departments now

alerts heads of depts to high absence rates

Closer Monitoring to identify issues that can

be resolved before they become a problem Implementation of New HR System - absence visible and triggers flagged

We have a Sick Pay Policy that has helped reduced and maintained sickness absence management with consistent Manager intervention

We have had a structured wellbeing and H&S communications programme through

the year for example Mental Health Awareness Week, H&S at work week to promote discussion and awareness. We monitor hot spots and support local absence management process and risk awareness. We provide manager training on sickness management and use external occupational health provider.

Providing managers with sickness reports

on a monthly basis so that they can make early interventions. The use of the government fit for work scheme

Recently revised policy to provide triggers for management action when specific Bradford scores reached.

Terms and conditions review which has

reduced sick pay entitlement from 6F and 6H to 1F and 1H. More robust absence management using data to compare different service areas on; days lost, costs of absence, number of staff on absence monitoring, RTW % complete and number of staff receiving capability sanctions. This compares different Area manager patches

against each other.

New Absence Management Policy

Review of quality of Occupational health referrals and implementation of improvements. Mental Health Awareness

month. Increased promotion of wellbeing programme. Currently reviewing and developing further our wellbeing strategy.

Tighter sickness policies with regards to

Occupational sick pay (withdrawal of OSP for short term unrelated absences) Staff awareness of sickness and the impact it has Managing sickness within a formal process

- Quarterly reporting of sickness absence

data to Operational Management Group - Regular conversations about team sickness absence in partnering meetings - Pulse check survey indicators around wellbeing

Employee support to be in regular contact with organisation while on long term sick absence. Gaining employee support and permission to write to their GP for health reports.

Updating Absence Procedure Flexible Working

Employee Assistance Programme Utilized physiotherapy service through insurers

Sports massage services for staff

29

ANNEX A: DEFINITION OF MEASURES Table Measure Definition (numbers in brackets refer to the

questions in the questionnaire) GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 Income (£ million) Income of organisation in the last year (A2) 1.2 Expenditure (£ million) Expenditure of organisation in the last year

(A3) 1.3 Organisational paybill (£ million) Organisation's pay bill in the last year (A4) 1.4 Organisational paybill as a percentage of

expenditure Organisation's pay bill in the last year (A4) divided by Expenditure of organisation in the last year (A3)

1.5.1 Analysis of the number of participants by size

Total number of employees (B1a)

1.5.2 Analysis of the number of participants and percentage of the total for each sector

Sectoral analysis (A6)

1.6 Location of head office Where is your head office located? (A7) 1.7 Nations/regions from which staff are

employed In which nations/regions to you employ staff? (A8)

ABSENCE MANAGEMENT

8.1 Average number of sick days taken per employee FTE pa: for all employees

Total number of working days lost due to sickness absence in the last year for all employees (F1c) divided by Total number of employees (FTE) (B2c)

8.2 Average number of sick days taken per employee FTE pa: management employees

Total number of working days lost due to sickness absence in the last year for management employees (F1a) divided by Number of management employees (FTE) (B2a)

8.3 Average number of sick days taken per employee FTE pa: non-management employees

Total number of working days lost due to sickness absence in the last year for non-management employees (F1b) divided by Number of non-management employees (FTE) (B2b)

8.4 Average number of sick days taken per employee headcount pa: for all employees

Total number of working days lost due to sickness absence in the last year for all employees (F1c) divided by Total number of employees (B1c)

8.5 Average number of sick days taken per employee headcount pa: management employees

Total number of working days lost due to sickness absence in the last year for management employees (F1a) divided by Number of management employees (B1a)

8.6 Average number of sick days taken per employee headcount pa: non-management employees

Total number of working days lost due to sickness absence in the last year for non-management employees (F1b) divided by Number of non-management employees (B1b)

8.7 Average length of sickness absence Average length of each sickness absence

period in days (F2)

8.8-10 Average number of sick days per employee FTE which fell in episodes of 1 - 5 days, 6 days - 4 weeks and over 4 weeks

Number of working days lost that fell in episodes of 1 - 5 days, 6 days - 4 weeks and over 4 weeks (F2.1a-c) divided by Total number of employees (FTE) (B2c)

8.11 Effectiveness in handling absenteeism How effective do you consider your

organisational responses to absenteeism? (F3)

8.13 Percentage absence: overall Total number of working days lost due to

sickness absence in the last year for all employees (F1c) divided by the result of Total number of employees (FTE) (B2c)

30

multiplied by 227 (the standard number of working days per annum)

8.14 Percentage absence: management employees

Total number of working days lost due to sickness absence in the last year for management employees (F1a) divided by the result of Number of management employees (FTE) (B2a) multiplied by 227 (the standard number of working days per annum)

8.15 Percentage absence: non-management employees

Total number of working days lost due to sickness absence in the last year for non management employees (F1b) divided by the result of Number of non-management employees (FTE) (B2b) multiplied by 227 (the standard number of working days per annum)

8.16 Cost of occupational and statutory sick pay per employee (FTE)

What was the total cost of occupational and statutory sick pay in the last year? (F4) divided by Total number of employees (FTE) (B2c)

8.17 Cost of occupational and statutory sick pay per employee (Headcount)

What was the total cost of occupational and statutory sick pay in the last year? (F4) divided by Total number of employees (B1c)

8.18 Cost of sickness absence in the last year The sum of Total cost of occupational and

statutory sick pay in the last year (F4) and: Total number of working days lost due to sickness absence in the last year (F1c) multiplied by Percentage of employees whose role requires temporary cover when they are absent (F7) multiplied by Average cost of temporary cover per person per day for those employees whose role requires temporary cover when they are absent (F8)

8.19 Cost of sickness absence per employee FTE in the last year

The sum of Total cost of occupational and statutory sick pay in the last year (F4) and: Total number of working days lost due to sickness absence in the last year (F1c) multiplied by Percentage of employees whose role requires temporary cover when they are absent (F7) multiplied by Average cost of temporary cover per person per day for those employees whose role requires temporary cover when they are absent (F8). This is then divided by the Total number of FTE employees (B2c)

8.19.1 Cost of sickness absence per employee headcount in the last year

The sum of Total cost of occupational and statutory sick pay in the last year (F4) and: Total number of working days lost due to sickness absence in the last year (F1c) multiplied by Percentage of employees whose role requires temporary cover when they are absent (F7) multiplied by Average cost of temporary cover per person per day for those employees whose role requires temporary cover when they are absent (F8). This is then divided by the Total number of headcount employees (B1c)

8.20 Percentage absence: mental health concerns

Number of days lost due to sickness absence in the last year due to mental health concerns as a % of total working days (F1.1a) divided by: Total number of employees (FTE) (B2c) multiplied by the

31

standard number of working days per year (227)

8.21 Percentage absence: muscular skeletal conditions

Number of days lost due to sickness absence in the last year due to muscular skeletal conditions as a % of total working days (F1.1b) divided by: Total number of employees (FTE) (B2c) multiplied by the standard number of working days per year (227)

8.22 Percentage absence: accidents at work Number of days lost due to sickness

absence in the last year due to accidents at work as a % of total working days (F1.1c) divided by: Total number of employees (FTE) (B2c) multiplied by the standard number of working days per year (227)

8.23 Do you use occupational health referrals?

Do you use occupational health referrals? (F5)

8.24 Number of occupational health referrals per 1,000 employees per year

Number of occupational health referrals made during the last year (F6) multiplied by 1,000 divided by Total number of employees (B1c)

8.99 Good practice points in absence management

Good practice in absence. In relation to absence, what have been your most successful two or three initiatives in the last three years? (F99)

32

ANNEX B: METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLE

METHODOLOGY AND TIMING

eople Count Third Sector 2017 was undertaken by Agenda Consulting in partnership with: the Charities HR Network,

CHS Alliance, Hospice UK, the Mental Health Providers Forum, the National Council for Voluntary Organisations, the National Union of Students, and Voluntary Organisations Disability Group. The Agenda team consisted of Tom Field, Clare Harris, Brittany Krier, Caroline Oates, Roger Parry,

Samantha Thornley, Emily Wayne and Tim Walters. The study was funded entirely by the price charged to participants. The study was overseen by a Steering Group which was consulted at key points during the study. The members of the Steering Group are listed towards the end of this Annex.

The five main phases of the methodology:

PHASE 1 Revising the questionnaire In Phase 1, the questionnaire was reviewed in close conjunction with the Steering Group. PHASE 2 Recruitment of organisations In Phase 2, information about the study was circulated to about 3,500 organisations in the UK through a number of means including direct mail and email. 69 organisations decided to participate. PHASE 3 Completion of questionnaires In Phase 3, participants completed the questionnaire. The time given was just over two months: 67 organisations completed questionnaires for 2017. PHASE 4 Report preparation In Phase 4, we analysed the data and prepared the reports. PHASE 5 Using the reports In Phase 5, reports are made available online. Organisations who participated are invited to attend the results conference and product training, and offered a one-to-one telephone consultation in order to get the most out of their reports.

P

33

Overview of sample

67

2.5

ORGANISATIONS 53,429 STAFF 203,815 VOLUNTEERS BILLION £ INCOME

The sample by size We defined size in terms of the number of employees (headcount). The largest participant had 7,092 employees and the smallest had 16. The median figure was 337 employees.

Source: Table 1.5.1, Base = 67

14%

27%

19%

16%

24%

% of participants by number of employees

Under 100

100-250

251-500

501-1000

Over 1000

34

The sample by subsector We developed a typology of 23 subsectors, and asked each participant to choose up to three which best describe its activities. The numbers shown in the graph below therefore add up to more than the 67 participants, because many organisations selected more than one category. The number of participants in each subsector is illustrated below.

Source: Table 1.5.2, Base = 67

5

5

5

8

8

8

8

10

12

13

23

25

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Elderly/old people

Grant making

Hospice

Other

Mental health

Housing

Education/training

International development

Children/young people

Health care/medical research

People with disabilities

Social care

Number of participants in each subsector

35

The sample by location The map below sets out:

The % of organisations whose head office is located in each region

The % of organisations that employ staff in each region

Although head offices are skewed towards London, the distribution of staff across the UK is much more even:

A further 7% of participants employ staff overseas Source: Table 1.6 and 1.7, Base = 67

36

Participating organisations

67 organisations participated in the People Count Third Sector 2017 study. Whole sample figures are based only on these 67 participants.

Action Against Hunger UK

Action for Children

Advertising Standards Authority

Aldingbourne Trust

Alzheimer’s Society

Amnesty International UK

Arthritis Research UK

Ashgate Hospice Limited

Ayrshire Hospice

Blind Veterans UK

Bond

Borough Care

Brighton Housing Trust

Care International

Certitude

CLIC Sargent

Deafness Support Network

Disabilities Trust

ellenor

Emmaus UK

FARM Africa

Fitzroy Support

Friends of the Earth

Guide Dogs

International HIV/AIDS Alliance

International Institute for Learning and

Development

Jewish Care

MacIntyre

MCCH Society

Mencap

Milestones Trust

Money Advice Trust

MS Society

National Autistic Society

National Children’s Bureau

National Star

One YMCA

Parkinson’s UK

Place2be

Plan UK

RAPt

Religious Society of Friends

Rethink Mental Illness

Royal British Legion

Royal College of Nursing UK

Second Step

SeeAbility

Sense

Shelter

St Andrew’s First Aid

St Anne's Community Services

St Joseph’s Hospice

St Margaret’s Hospice

St Michael’s Hospice

StepChange Debt Charity

The Donkey Sanctuary

The Royal Star and Garter Homes

Toybox

UNICEF UK

United Response

UnLtd

Volunteering Matters

WaterAid

Wildlife Trusts

Wilf Ward Family Trust

WWF UK

Zoological Society of London

Participants were self-selecting in that they chose to take part in the study. The sample was never intended to be representative of the whole sector and should not be seen as such.

37

Steering group members We are very grateful to the following Steering Group members who contributed to the study:

Bield Housing & Care Jennifer Clarke, Assistant Director Human Resources International AIDS / HIV Alliance Vickie Sharkey, Acting HR Manager Marie Curie Cancer Care Ceri Evans, Business Partner HR MCCH Society Ltd Caroline Howarth, HR Systems Officer Mencap Karen James, Head of Reward and Projects

National Autistic Society Irene Fufeyin, Head of HR Rola Onikan, HR IT System Co-ordinator Royal College of Nursing Andrew West, HR Manager Sense Lorraine Jenkins, Resourcing and Engagement Manager StepChange Debt Charity Lesley Cheeseman, Head of People Services

Acknowledgements We are very grateful to:

Those organisations who participated;

Members of the Steering Group;

Our partners for support with promoting the study.

38

Partners The Charities HR Network (CHRN) Contact: Kim Maidment, Co-ordinator Tel: 023 80860984/07900 822861 Email: [email protected] Website: www.chrn.org.uk The Charities HR Network is the platform for HR professionals in the charitable sector to exchange ideas, increase their knowledge and find innovative HR solutions. Recent events have included Driving HR Transformation and Collaboration in the Third Sector and a round table discussion with Peter Cheese, CIPD. Membership is open to those with overall responsibility for HR in a charity, voluntary or not for profit organisation with a significant number of employees. For further details please contact us.

CHS Alliance (formerly People In Aid and HAP International)

356 Holloway Road London N7 6PA Contacts: Samantha Wakefield, People Management and HR lead Julius Kaberere, Senior Project Manager Karen Glisson, Membership and Operations Manager Judith Greenwood, Executive Director Tel: 020 3137 3590 Email: [email protected] Website: www.chsalliance.org Bringing together more than two decades of experience in quality, accountability and people management, the CHS Alliance forms one of the largest and most influential networks of organisations committed to improving humanitarian and development work through the application of standards.

The CHS Alliance has expertise in the provision of services to members and partners in the humanitarian and development sectors and provides policy support, technical assistance, training and other capacity development initiatives.

We work in the following strategic areas:

Developing, promoting and maintaining the Core Humanitarian Standard (CHS)

Verification and certification against the CHS

Capacity strengthening

People management

Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA)

Policy, research and advocacy

Networks and learning groups

The Core Humanitarian Standard on Quality and Accountability (CHS) sets out Nine Commitments that organisations and individuals involved in humanitarian response can use to improve the quality and effectiveness of the assistance they provide. It also facilitates greater accountability to communities and people affected by crisis: knowing what humanitarian organisations have committed to will enable them to hold those organisations to account.

Find out more about becoming a member of the CHS Alliance on our website - http://chsalliance.org/membership/why-become-a-member

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.chrn.org.uk/

http://chsalliance.org/what-we-do/chs

http://chsalliance.org/what-we-do/verification

http://chsalliance.org/what-we-do/capacity-strengthening

http://chsalliance.org/what-we-do/people-management

http://chsalliance.org/what-we-do/psea

http://chsalliance.org/what-we-do/policy-research-and-advocacy

http://chsalliance.org/what-we-do/networks

http://chsalliance.org/membership/why-become-a-member

39

Hospice UK

34-44 Britannia Street London WC1X 9JG Contact: Alan Mustafa, Head of HR Email: [email protected] Website: www.hospiceuk.org We are the national charity for hospice care, supporting over 200 hospices in the UK. We believe that everyone matters throughout their life right up until they die, and that no one should die in avoidable pain or suffering. Collectively hospices in the UK provide vital care to 200,000 people with terminal or life-limiting illnesses every year, as well as providing support for many of their loved ones. We work closely with them to support their vital work and to create a stronger voice for hospice care.

Association of Mental Health Providers First Floor, Kinnaird House 1 Pall Mall East London, SW1Y 5BP Contact: Kathy Roberts, Chief Executive Telephone: 020 7766 7498 Email: General - [email protected] // Communications – [email protected] Website: www.amhp.org.uk Twitter: @AssocMHP // LinkedIn: AMHP Association of Mental Health Providers is the leading representative body for voluntary and community sector mental health organisations in England and Wales. A registered charity, we represent our membership of small, medium and large providers – from locally focused to regional and national organisations with the purpose of providing a professional platform on which the vital work of all our members can be seen and heard. The Association is dedicated to supporting the development of the mental health voluntary and community sector to effectively meet the needs of individuals, their mental health and wellbeing. We do this through three key areas of work: sustainability – ensuring the continuation and growth of the sector; whole-system approaches – encouraging coordinated planning to provide joined-up care; and prevention – promoting wellness and good mental health with a consideration of the wider determinants to prevent mental ill-health. We recognise that everyone can be affected by mental ill-health and we believe it is essential that the mental health voluntary and community sector works together for a whole-system approach to improve health and care in the UK.




http://www.amhp.org.uk/

https://twitter.com/AssocMHP

https://linkedin.com/company/amhp

40

National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) Society Building 8 All Saints Street London N1 9RL Registered charity number: 225922 Membership enquires: [email protected] 020 7520 2414 Venue hire or conference suite bookings: [email protected] 020 7520 2404 General enquiries: [email protected] 020 7713 6161 NCVO believes that the voluntary sector and volunteering are essential for a better society. That’s why, inspired and empowered by over 12,000 members, we champion them. We do this by connecting, representing and supporting voluntary organisations, from the smallest community groups to the largest charities. VODG (Voluntary Organisations Disability Group) New Bridge Street House

30-34 New Bridge Street London

EC4V 6BJ

Contact: Rhidian Hughes, Chief Executive

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.vodg.org.uk

Twitter: @VODGmembership

VODG (the Voluntary Organisations Disability Group) is the national body that represents leading voluntary social care and disability organisations. Whilst our members are diverse in terms of their size, history and individual strategies we all share common values. These values are discernible through the promotion of rights for disabled people, approaches to citizenship and user choice and control. Our values are brought together in a vision for full choice and control for disabled people. In addition VODG members lead the sector in terms of delivering high quality person-centred services, developing new and innovative services and investing in the workforce.

VODG works on behalf of its members to influence and develop care and support policy, to build relationships with government and key agencies and to promote good practice. By influencing policy and practice providers can deliver progressive, high quality and sustainable services that uphold the rights and meet the needs of disabled people.





http://www.vodg.org.uk/

41

Copyright in this publication is protected under the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended from time to time) and is owned by Agenda Consulting Ltd. Neither the whole nor any part of this survey may be copied, reproduced, distributed or transmitted to a third party by any means whatsoever without first obtaining our consent in writing. Extracts from this publication may only be used or quoted with our prior permission (which is at our sole discretion) and provided we are fully credited. Disclaimer: This publication should not be relied upon as a substitute for specific advice concerning your organisation. Agenda Consulting Ltd accept no responsibility for any consequences and/or for any loss occasioned to your organisation (whether directly or indirectly) as a result of any person acting or refraining from acting as a result of any statement or opinion contained in this publication.

© Agenda Consulting 2017

People Count 2017

Agenda Consulting The Jam Factory 27 Park End Street Oxford OX1 1HU UKT: +44 (0)1865 263 720 E: [email protected] W: www.agendaconsulting.co.uk C

ode:

PC

-Aug

17

Surveys and Support to enable organisations to understand their people better:

• Employee and Volunteer Engagement Surveys

• Pulse, On-boarding and Exit Surveys

• Action Planning and Developing Engagement Strategies

• Engagement Research

Benchmarking Studies to provide evidence to support decision-making:

• People Count – HR and Workforce

• Volunteers Count – Volunteer Management

• Annual Cost of Living Award

Social Care services:

• Social Care Reward Study

• Social Care Employee Engagement Survey

Events:

• People Count Results Conference (September)

• Volunteers Count Results Conference (October)

• Strategic People Conference (March)

Agenda ConsultingWe help not-for-profit organisations develop and sustain the highest levels of employee and volunteer engagement. We offer:

Find out more:• Join a free webinar

agendaconsulting.co.uk/events

• View range of surveys and our surveys’ clients agendaconsulting.co.uk/surveys

• Learn more about other benchmarking studies agendaconsulting.co.uk/benchmarking

• Find tips, good practice, research findings, press releases, blogs agendaconsulting.co.uk/newsblog

Contact us: www.agendaconsulting.co.uk/people-count

+44 (0)1865 263 720

[email protected]

Agenda Consulting, The Jam Factory, 27 Park End Street, Oxford OX1 1HU, UK

@AgendaConsult

LinkedIn

absence management - agenda consulting...about using all the reports effectively and to network with...

Documents