Report attached.

Officers reported that there had been a continued improvement in staff absence levels with overall sickness levels continuing a downward trend from 10.8 to 10.2 days per employee per year. Mental health issues were the main cause of sickness absence and it was accepted that long term sickness remained a pressure point.

There had been an increase in demand for wellbeing support and the new provider of Occupational Health and Employee Assistance services was now fully in operation. It was accepted that budget constraints would limit expansion but it was hoped to expand the Mental Health First Aider network.

Managers were now increasingly aware of the Occupational Health referral process and how this could reduce sickness absence levels and help staff to return to work. It was noted that a reduction in referral numbers was expected in 2026 due to the six week handover period to the new provider.

Detail could be given on how one day sickness absences were treated and it was clarified that staff could take up to 5 days carers leave per year. It was suggested that future HR reports to the Board could include comparative data with other boroughs but officers felt it was best not to identify other areas specifically in the data. Comparisons could also be provided with sickness absence in the private sector.

Trends in absence around musculo-skeletal issues could be looked at and work had been undertaken with a local chiropractic clinic although this was limited by budgetary constraints. Those staff who had attended had provided positive feedback and it was hoped managers would encourage more colleagues to attend the sessions.

A Member felt that patterns of sickness absence should be managed and the effect of working from home should be investigated. Officers emphasised that support was available to managers when dealing with sickness trends etc. Sickness certificates were required to be produced after 5 days absence. Further details of the full cost to the Council of sickness absence could be provided in future reports. Staff received full pay for their first six months of sickness absence with half pay for the following six months. Phased returns and reasonable adjustments were offered to assist with returns to work.

Working from home was not specifically mentioned in the sickness statistics as some staff did also come into the office. Carers leave etc was recorded separately. It was felt that it was not cost effective to seek external accreditation for sickness management given current resources. Learning was shared with other Local Authorities via networks.

The following recommendations were AGREED:

1.    That it be recognised that an improvement in sickness absence rates had been achieved under very difficult financial circumstances.

2.    That ways in which other comparable Local Authorities deal with sickness absence be investigated.

3.    That an update be given to a future meeting on sickness absence due to musculo-skeletal issues be given to a future meeting of the Board.

4.    That messaging on ways to prevent short term illness be provided to staff.

5.    That officers work towards 100% completion by staff of training on musculo-skeletal and stress issues.