This report asks the Committee to note the annual statement of workforce monitoring and recruitment activity.

The Committee received a report of the Head of Human Resources setting out the details of Watford Borough Council’s workforce and applicants for posts.

The Head of Human Resources asked the Committee to note some corrections to the report. He referred to the table at the top of Page 8 and advised that the total percentage of BME employees was 17.77 percent rather than 46.68 percent. He advised that the last sentence on Page 8 should read “There are 422 employees within Watford BC…” On Page 13 the first sentence should read: “The above table indicates a high level of applicants…”.

The Head of Human Resources explained the background to the report and highlighted key areas of the report for the Committee’s attention.

The Chair asked about the disparity between how the ethnic origins were classified for employees (Page 7) and job applicants (Page 12). The Head of Human Resources responded that the categories used for employees had been reduced for ease; this will be rectified for future reports.

The Chair referred to the numbers of employees and job applicants from the Bangladeshi and Pakistani communities and asked why these groups were under-represented as compared to the local population. The Head of Human Resources noted that only five of the 1003 applicants were Bangladeshi; he added that the roles on offer may not be attractive or they may not wish to apply for a role at the Council.

Councillor Turmaine advised that it would be useful if the data could show how many of the applicants from each protected characteristic were successful in their applications.

The Chair noted that staff morale was considered to be very good; he asked what this could be attributed to. The Head of Human Resources said that it reflected the work done by the Managing Director in setting up Extended Leadership Team allowing more staff to be involved in decision-making. He also outlined other ways in which senior management engaged with staff. He explained the service prioritisation process and advised that although difficult it was considered a success and staff at all levels had been involved. He referred to Step Change which pledged that the Council would be open, honest and inclusive in organisational change.

In response to a question from Councillor Turmaine, the Head of Human Resources explained that the HR system was provided by the payroll provider, Northgate. This system allowed HR to run reports and gave fuller data than the previous system. Staff were asked to complete equalities data online but this was voluntary.

Councillor Turmaine asked about the Corporate Equalities Working Group and the One Watford Equality Panel. The Head of Human Resources explained that the former was an internal group for officers who helped shape this report. The latter would receive this report after it had been to this Committee for their views.

Councillor Turmaine asked why staff might be reluctant to disclose whether they had a disability. The Head of Human Resources advised that HR did explain the importance of the data. He felt that the Council were good at making adaptations in the workplace for staff. He said that it was possible that staff felt that they could be vulnerable to budget cuts if they disclosed a disability.

The Vice Chair asked if the Council had a statutory duty to employ a certain proportion of people who were disabled or from particular ethnic groups. The Head of Human Resources advised that positive discrimination was illegal but the Council had target figures and held ‘Two Ticks’ status which recognised that it met certain obligations. This was independently reviewed annually.  He informed the Committee that he had an objective to review recruitment data and understand whether enough was being done to attract disabled people to apply to the Council. He noted that budgets for advertising were limited and most roles were advertised on the website and via job centres. This provided cost-effective recruitment but he was not sure if they reached all sections of the community.

Councillor Counter commented that people with certain illnesses, such as cancer or HIV, may not consider themselves disabled.  She noted the low turnover of employees reflected that they were content and may therefore be less likely to disclose a disability. 

In response to a question from the Chair, the Head of Human Resources responded that apprenticeship schemes were very good and Hertfordshire County Council ran a scheme. He explained how the scheme worked and advised that apprentices needed a lot of support. The smaller teams at Watford often did not have the capacity to support apprentices. There had been apprentices in larger teams, such as the depot, and they were supported in achieving NVQs. He informed the Committee that the Council had taken on five apprentices this year but the company had its funding cut and so were no longer running the scheme.

RESOLVED –

                   That the report be approved as corrected.