Human Resources Activity Report€¦ · 12000 14000 16000 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to date Cert. LT...

OFFICIAL

Human Resources Activity Report Human Resources Committee

Date: 4 December 2015 Agenda Item 5 Submitted By: Director of Service Support

Purpose To inform Members of sickness absence to the end of September 2015 and personnel activity to the end of October 2015.

Recommendations 1. That Members approve the amendment to the establishment, including theintroduction of a Fire Protection False Alarms Reduction Officer post (Grade 8) as recommended at the Community Safety Committee meeting on 30 October 2015.

2. That Members note the content of the report.

Summary This report informs Members of the Authority’s key areas relating to Human Resources for 2015/16.

Local Government (Access to information) Act 1972

Exemption Category: None

Contact Officer: Jim Butters, Area Manager Service Support T: 01274 655704 E: [email protected]

Background papers open to inspection: None

Annexes: None

9

mailto:[email protected]

1. SICKNESS ABSENCE – WORKING DAYS LOST PER EMPLOYEE 1 APRIL 2013 – 30 SEPTEMBER 2015

Green indicates achieving or exceeding target Amber indicates satisfactory performance (within 10% of target) Red indicates not achieving target

1,556 employees as at 30 September 2015

DAYS PER QUARTER

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

Ops Response 1.43 1.57 1.62 1.63 1.62 1.94 2.06 1.71 1.75 1.69 Ops Support 2.60 1.33 0.94 3.69 0.71 0.14 0.21 1.00 0.13 1.02 Prev & Prot 0.93 1.48 4.62 5.06 6.17 4.42 5.35 1.97 2.65 1.85

Legal & Governance 1.56 0.32 2.09 4.73 2.21 1.20 0.96 1.29 2.00 1.73 Service Support 2.38 1.97 2.64 1.72 1.12 1.98 1.49 2.01 1.72 1.31

Finance 0.55 1.07 0.21 3.52 0.78 5.33 6.37 3.31 0.00 0.00 FSHQ 0.00 0.04 0.07 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.07 0.02 Total 1.52 1.56 1.79 1.78 1.66 1.95 2.02 1.68 1.68 1.56

Target 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.65 1.65

0

1

2

3

4

5

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

10

http://wydtdev.westyorksfire.gov.uk/servers/wydtpmi1/pmidashboard/Default.aspx?z=400&i=5040






SICKNESS ABSENCE – WORKING DAYS LOST PER EMPLOYEE 1 APRIL 2013 – 30 SEPTEMBER 2015


DAYS PER YEAR

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to 30 Sep

Ops Response 6.24 7.33 3.44 Ops Support 8.56 2.06 1.15 Prev & Prot 12.10 17.91 4.51

L & G 8.70 5.66 3.73 Service Support

8.71 6.59 3.03

Finance 5.35 15.79 0.00 FSHQ 0.11 0.10 0.09 Total 6.66 7.31 3.24

Target 6.12 6 3.30

Further Information

Sickness absence in each of the three months of the second quarter has been below the target set, the forcast for the end of year now suggests that the organsation will come in under target.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to30 Sep

2015/16Forecast

11

http://wydtpmi1.westyorksfire.gov.uk/live/Default.aspx?z=400&i=5040








SICKNESS ABSENCE – DAYS LOST 1 APRIL 2013 – 30 SEPTEMBER 2015

CERTIFIED LONG TERM SICKNESS

DAYS PER QUARTER

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Q113/14

Q213/14

Q313/14

Q413/14

Q114/15

Q214/15

Q314/15

Q414/15

Q115/16

Q215/16

12


CERTIFIED SHORT TERM SICKNESS

DAYS PER QUARTER

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Q113/14

Q213/14

Q313/14

Q413/14

Q114/15

Q214/15

Q314/15

Q414/15

Q115/16

Q215/16

13


NON-CERTIFIED SICKNESS

DAYS PER QUARTER

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Q113/14

Q213/14

Q313/14

Q413/14

Q114/15

Q214/15

Q314/15

Q414/15

Q115/16

Q215/16

14


BROKEN DOWN INTO LONG-TERM, SHORT-TERM AND NON-CERTIFIED SICKNESS

DAYS PER YEAR

Further Information

The majority of the absence continues to be due to long- term certificated sickness although, in comparison to last quarter, all types of sickness have shown a decrease.

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to date

Cert. LTCert. STNon-cert.

15

SICKNESS ABSENCE – BENCHMARKING WORKING DAYS LOST PER EMPLOYEE 1 APRIL – 30 JUNE 2015

Twenty-six UK fire services share sickness and absence data amongst themselves. Unfortunately, because the reporting requirements differ between services, it is not possible to benchmark against all of our own information.

There is also a delay resulting from the collation of data and publication. The results from the first quarter of 2015/16 are tabulated below.

Six of the seven metropolitan FRS’s share their data and these are highlighted in the tables.

FRS Score RankCheshire FRS 0.85 1Metropolitan FRS - Anon 1.13 2Anon 1.21 3Anon 1.43 4Anon 1.48 5Anon 1.49 6Anon 1.55 7Cleveland Fire Brigade 1.61 8Buckinghamshire FRS 1.62 9Hampshire FRS 1.71 10West Yorkshire FRS 1.78 11Tyne & Wear FRS 1.86 12Metropolitan FRS - Anon 1.91 13Durham FRS 1.92 14Anon 1.95 15Metropolitan FRS - Anon 1.98 16Anon 2.01 17Royal Berkshire FRS 2.03 18Anon 2.07 19Anon 2.07 20Essex FRS 2.08 21Anon 2.09 22London Fire Brigade 2.11 23Anon 2.55 24Northern Ireland FRS 2.69 25Gloucestershire FRS 4.76 26Average 1.92

Wholetime Staff including ControlFRS Score RankCheshire FRS 0.77 1Anon 1.16 2Metropolitan FRS - Anon 1.52 3Anon 1.54 4Anon 1.55 5Buckinghamshire FRS 1.58 6Durham FRS 1.65 7Anon 1.77 8Cleveland Fire Brigade 1.80 9West Yorkshire FRS 1.82 10Metropolitan FRS - Anon 1.82 11Metropolitan FRS - Anon 1.87 12Anon 1.93 13Tyne & Wear FRS 1.98 14Anon 1.99 15Anon 2.02 16Royal Berkshire FRS 2.02 17Anon 2.04 18London Fire Brigade 2.07 19Hampshire FRS 2.10 20Essex FRS 2.13 21Anon 2.23 22Anon 2.43 23Anon 2.59 24Northern Ireland FRS 2.94 25Gloucestershire FRS 5.31 26Average 2.02

Wholetime, Control and Green Book Staff

16


SHOWING PROPORTION OF MENTAL HEALTH RELATED SICKNESS

DAYS PER QUARTER

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

All Other

Mental Health Related

17


SHOWING PROPORTION OF MENTAL HEALTH RELATED SICKNESS

DAYS PER YEAR

Further Information

Mental Ill health continues to be a major contributor to absence, the majority of managers of grade 10/SC and above have now attended the mental health awareness course delivered by Leeds MIND, a course will be run in the next training year to ensure that all managers of this grade have attended. Over the next training year Leeds Mind will be delivering mental health awareness training for managers at supervisory level. Staff at all levels within the organisation have been given stress awareness training via an elearning module and individuals are supported by Occupational Health.

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

13/14 14/15 15/16 to date

All Other

Mental Health Related

18

1.1 SICKNESS ABSENCE – OPERATIONS RESPONSE


DAYS PER QUARTER

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

Districts 1.39 1.56 1.58 1.58 1.55 1.95 2.08 1.72 1.80 1.73 Control 2.05 2.38 3.15 3.42 4.02 2.54 1.86 1.96 0.87 1.32

Total 1.43 1.57 1.62 1.63 1.62 1.94 2.06 1.71 1.75 1.69 Target 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.65 1.65

0

1

2

3

4

5

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

19


SICKNESS ABSENCE – OPERATIONS RESPONSE


DAYS PER YEAR

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to 30 Sep

Districts 6.11 7.30 3.54 Control 11.00 10.38 2.19

Total 6.24 7.33 3.44 Target 6.12 6.00 3.30

Further Information

It is pleasing to see that sickness absence within Control continues to be below target, unfortunately District sickness continues to slightly exceed target which, due to their size, has a great effect on overall sickness levels for the organisation. The attendance support manager is meeting with managers on Districts to offer advice on strategies to assist them in reducing sickness absence.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to30 Sep

2015/16Forecast

20


1.2 SICKNESS ABSENCE – OPERATIONS SUPPORT

15 employees as at 30 September 2015

DAYS PER QUARTER

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

Total 2.60 1.33 0.94 3.69 0.71 0.14 0.21 1.00 0.13 1.02 Target 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.65 1.65

0

1

2

3

4

5

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

21

SICKNESS ABSENCE – OPERATIONS SUPPORT


DAYS PER YEAR

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to 30 Sep

Total 8.56 2.06 1.15 Target 6.12 6.00 3.30

Further Information

Operations Support continues to perform well with a very low sickness absence rate.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to30 Sep

2015/16Forecast

22

1.3 SICKNESS ABSENCE – PREVENTION & PROTECTION


DAYS PER QUARTER

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

Prevention 1.46 2.78 9.62 8.98 8.12 4.69 5.40 3.66 5.42 3.67

Protection 0.43 0.36 0.67 1.99 4.92 4.43 5.60 0.74 0.74 0.56

Total 0.93 1.48 4.62 5.06 6.17 4.42 5.35 1.97 2.65 1.85

Target 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.65 1.65

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

23



SICKNESS ABSENCE – PREVENTION & PROTECTION


DAYS PER YEAR

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to 30 Sep

Prevention 22.83 21.87 9.08 Protection 3.45 15.68 1.30

Total 12.10 17.91 4.51 Target 6.12 6.00 3.30

Further Information

Prevention continues to have high sickness absence despite a significant reduction in absence this quarter with the return of a number of personnel from long term sickness. Preventions’ sickness continues to be influenced by a small number of personnel who have periods of long term absence. It should be noted that Protection are below target for the third quarter in a row.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to30 Sep

2015/16Forecast

24



1.4 SICKNESS ABSENCE – LEGAL AND GOVERNANCE


DAYS PER QUARTER

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

Total 1.56 0.32 2.09 4.73 2.21 1.20 0.96 1.29 2.00 1.73 Target 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.65 1.65

0

1

2

3

4

5

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

25

SICKNESS ABSENCE – LEGAL AND GOVERNANCE


DAYS PER YEAR

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to 30 Sep

Total 8.70 5.66 3.73 Target 6.12 6.00 3.30

Further Information

This small team’s sickness absence has exceeded target for the quarter despite showing a drop in absence This has been mainly due to the absence of a couple of individuals.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to30 Sep

2015/16Forecast

26

1.5 SICKNESS ABSENCE – SERVICE SUPPORT


DAYS PER QUARTER

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

Data & Technology 0.97 0.27 1.50 1.25 1.09 1.03 1.48 1.79 0.62 1.99 Transport & Logistics 2.86 3.06 2.11 2.03 0.94 1.96 1.16 2.44 1.50 0.51

Property 0.13 4.50 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.63 2.63 4.07 3.00 0.83 Emp Services 2.59 0.58 2.93 2.62 0.70 0.00 0.38 1.63 1.41 1.58

OHSU 4.43 0.00 0.13 1.11 0.00 0.38 0.69 0.38 0.00 0.00 Training 3.80 2.89 2.45 2.24 0.71 0.85 2.38 3.08 3.42 1.51

Emp Resourcing 1.88 1.73 3.84 1.56 1.69 3.76 1.23 1.23 1.19 1.42 Total 2.38 1.97 2.64 1.72 1.12 1.98 1.49 2.01 1.72 1.31

Target 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.65 1.65

0

1

2

3

4

5

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

27







SICKNESS ABSENCE – SERVICE SUPPORT


DAYS PER YEAR

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to 30 Sep

Data & Technology 3.98 5.40 2.62 Transport &

Logistics 10.06 6.50 2.01

Property 4.63 8.32 3.83 Emp Services 8.73 2.71 2.99

OHSU 5.66 1.44 0.00 Training 11.38 7.02 4.93

Emp Resourcing 9.00 7.92

2.61

Total 8.71 6.59 3.03 Target 6.12 6.00 3.30

Further Information

Service Support continues to show an improvement in sickness absence, the poor performance during the last quarter by Data and Technology can in part be attributed to the long term certificated absence of one member of staff.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to30 Sep

2015/16Forecast

28











1.6 SICKNESS ABSENCE – FINANCE


DAYS PER QUARTER

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

Total 0.55 1.07 0.21 3.52 0.78 5.33 6.37 3.31 0.00 0.00 Target 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.65 1.65

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

29

SICKNESS ABSENCE – FINANCE


DAYS PER YEAR

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to 30 Sep

Total 5.35 15.79 0.00 Target 6.12 6.00 3.30

Further Information

For the second quarter running Finance has had no sickness absence.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to30 Sep

2015/16Forecast

30

1.7 SICKNESS ABSENCE – FSHQ INCLUDING STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT


DAYS PER QUARTER

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

Total 0.00 0.04 0.07 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.07 0.02

Target 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.65 1.65

0

1

2

3

4

5

Q1 13/14 Q2 13/14 Q3 13/14 Q4 13/14 Q1 14/15 Q2 14/15 Q3 14/15 Q4 14/15 Q1 15/16 Q2 15/16

31

SICKNESS ABSENCE – FSHQ INCLUDING STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT


DAYS PER YEAR

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to 30 Sep

Total 0.11 0.10 0.09 Target 6.12 6.00 3.30

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to30 Sep

2015/16Forecast

32

2. ESTABLISHMENT AND STRENGTH AS AT 31 OCTOBER 2015

Staff Group

Establishment Employees

No. of Posts following

HR Committee 25 Sept 2015

Amendments to Establishment

Proposed Number of Posts

(New Establishment)

Enrolments 1 Aug to

31 Oct 2015

Leavers and Retirees 1 Aug to 31 Oct 2015

Number of People Employed

Whole Time 1126 - 48 * 1078 24 1079

Retained 120 120 5 7 145 (99 posts)

Control (formerly Mobilising and Communication Centre)

42 42 47

Green and Blue Book (Non-Operational) Personnel

273 +1 ** 274 11 # 4 271

Total 1561 - 47 1514 16 35 1542

Further Information - Establishment

* At the meeting on 21 December 2012, the Fire Authority approved the:- relocation of the fire station at Dewsbury to Carlton Road and the consequent closure of the fire station at Batley, with a reduction in the Whole Time establishment of four Watch Commander, four Crew Commander and sixteen Firefighter posts.

- opening of a new fire station at Killingbeck and the consequent closures of the fire stations at Gipton and Stanks, with a reduction in the Whole Time establishment of four Watch Commander, four Crew Commander and sixteen Firefighter posts.

** At the meeting on 10 July 2015, the HR Committee approved the creation of:

- two new positions in Strategic Development – a Grade 10 Programme Framework Manager and a Grade 5 Project Framework Administrator.

- a restructuring of Fire Prevention – resulting in the deletion of five existing posts (2 Grade 3 Advisors, 2 Grade 5 District Support Officers and the Grade 8 Partnerships, Policy and Volunteer Co-ordinator) and the creation of three new posts (2 Grade 7 Fire Prevention Supervisors and a new Grade 10 Partnerships, Policy and Volunteer Manager).

At the meeting on 30 October 2015, the Community Safety Committee meeting approved the creation of a new Fire Protection False Alarms Reduction Officer (Grade 8). 33

Further Information - Employees

# Four of the Green Book enrolments are on fixed-term contracts and one is on a temporary contract. One of the enrolments included in the non-operational personnel figures is on a Blue Book contract.

One of the Whole Time retirements and one of the Retained retirements were due to medical reasons.

34

2.1 CHANGES IN ESTABLISHMENT AND STRENGTH IN PAST FIVE YEARS

Total Establishment and Strength

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

12 Nov2010

28 Jan2011

1 Jul2011

11 Nov2011

27 Jan2012

6 Jul2012

2 Nov2012

18 Jan2013

12 Apr2013

5 July2013

1 Nov2013

17 Jan2014

4 April2014

5 Sep2014

14 Nov2014

23 Jan2015

27 Mar2015

10 Jul2015

25 Sep2015

4 Dec2015

TOTAL ESTABLISHMENT

TOTAL STRENGTH

35

Wholetime Establishment and Strength

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

12 Nov2010

28 Jan2011

1 Jul2011

11 Nov2011

27 Jan2012

6 Jul2012

2 Nov2012

18 Jan2013

12 Apr2013

5 July2013

1 Nov2013

17 Jan2014

4 April2014

5 Sep2014

14 Nov2014

23 Jan2015

27 Mar2015

10 Jul2015

25 Sep2015

4 Dec2015

WHOLETIME ESTABLISHMENT

WHOLETIME STRENGTH

36

Retained Establishment and Strength

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

12 Nov2010

28 Jan2011

1 Jul2011

11 Nov2011

27 Jan2012

6 Jul2012

2 Nov2012

18 Jan2013

12 Apr2013

5 July2013

1 Nov2013

17 Jan2014

4 April2014

5 Sep2014

14 Nov2014

23 Jan2015

27 Mar2015

10 Jul2015

25 Sep2015

4 Dec2015

RETAINEDESTABLISHMENTPOSTS COVERED

37

Control Establishment and Strength

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

12 Nov2010

28 Jan2011

1 Jul2011

11 Nov2011

27 Jan2012

6 Jul2012

2 Nov2012

18 Jan2013

12 Apr2013

5 July2013

1 Nov2013

17 Jan2014

4 April2014

5 Sep2014

14 Nov2014

23 Jan2015

27 Mar2015

10 Jul2015

25 Sep2015

4 Dec2015

CONTROL ESTABLISHMENT

CONTROL STRENGTH

38

Green Book Establishment and Strength

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

12 Nov2010

28 Jan2011

1 Jul2011

11 Nov2011

27 Jan2012

6 Jul2012

2 Nov2012

18 Jan2013

12 Apr2013

5 July2013

1 Nov2013

17 Jan2014

4 April2014

5 Sep2014

14 Nov2014

23 Jan2015

27 Mar2015

10 Jul2015

25 Sep2015

4 Dec2015

GREEN BOOK ESTABLISHMENT

GREEN BOOK STRENGTH

39

Summary Figures – Establishment and Strength

TOTAL ESTABLISHMENT

TOTAL STRENGTH

WHOLETIME ESTABLISHMENT

WHOLETIME STRENGTH

RETAINED ESTABLISHMENT

RETAINED POSITIONS COVERED

CONTROL ESTABLISHMENT

CONTROL STRENGTH

GREEN BOOK ESTABLISHMENT

GREEN BOOK STRENGTH

12 Nov 2010 2087 2045 1448 1449 165 134 53 54 421 408

28 Jan 2011 2083 2022 1447 1437 165 132 53 54 418 399

1 Jul 2011 1968 1928 1383 1396 161 130 52 55 372 347

11 Nov 2011 1954 1913 1381 1388 161 128 51 51 361 346

27 Jan 2012 1943 1901 1370 1377 161 128 51 51 361 345

6 Jul 2012 1907 1856 1343 1341 156 125 51 50 357 340

2 Nov 2012 1893 1811 1330 1310 156 123 51 53 356 325

18 Jan 2013 1763 1749 1288 1295 156 120 51 50 268 284

12 Apr 2013 1719 1701 1244 1272 156 121 51 50 268 258

5 July 2013 1699 1681 1236 1256 144 117 51 49 268 259

1 Nov 2013 1689 1658 1226 1235 144 114 51 49 268 260

17 Jan 2014 1685 1647 1222 1220 144 118 51 46 268 263

4 April 2014 1657 1629 1202 1204 144 118 43 47 268 260

5 Sep 2014 1641 1608 1186 1193 144 112 43 44 268 259

14 Nov 2014 1624 1600 1166 1182 144 110 43 45 271 263

23 Jan 2015 1611 1579 1165 1164 132 103 42 42 272 270

27 Mar 2015 1587 1563 1153 1156 120 96 42 41 272 270

10 Jul 2015 1585 1536 1150 1124 120 101 42 45 273 266

25 Sep 2015 1561 1514 1126 1102 120 100 42 47 273 265

4 Dec 2015 1514 1496 1078 1079 120 99 42 47 274 271

Reduction 2010-2015 573 549 370 370 45 35 11 7 147 137

40

3. NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION OF POSTS AS AT 31 OCTOBER 2015

GradePrevious

EstabApproval Sought

New Estab Grade

Previous Estab

Approval Sought

New Estab Grade

Previous Estab

Approval Sought

New Estab Grade

Previous Estab

Approval Sought

New Estab Grade

Previous Estab

Approval Sought

New Estab Grade

Previous Estab

Approval Sought

New Estab

ACO 1 1 ACO 1 1 DCFO 1 1 ACO 0 0 Chief 1 1 Prin Off 4 4AM 3 3 AM 1 1 AM 0 0 AM 0 0 AM 0 0 AM 4 4GM 8 8 GM 3 3 GM 2 2 GM 0 0 GM 0 0 GM 13 13SM 39 39 SM 6 6 SM 5 5 SM 0 0 SM 0 0 SM 50 50WM 141 -8 133 WM 39 39 WM 2 2 WM 0 0 WM 0 0 WM 182 -8 174CM 163 -8 155 CM 27 27 CM 0 0 CM 0 0 CM 0 0 CM 190 -8 182FF 651 -32 619 FF 32 32 FF 0 0 FF 0 0 FF 0 0 FF 683 -32 651WT 1006 -48 958 WT 109 0 109 WT 10 0 10 WT 0 0 0 WT 1 0 1 WT 1126 -48 1078

Prin Off 0 0 Prin Off 0 0 Prin Off 0 0 Prin Off 1 1 Prin Off 1 1 Prin Off 2 2EO 0 0 EO 2 2 EO 0 0 EO 0 0 EO 1 1 EO 3 3G14 2 2 G14 5 5 G14 0 0 G14 1 1 G14 0 0 G14 8 8G13 0 0 G13 0 0 G13 0 0 G13 0 0 G13 0 0 G13 0 0G12 0 0 G12 2 2 G12 0 0 G12 0 0 G12 0 0 G12 2 2G11 3 3 G11 3 3 G11 0 0 G11 0 0 G11 0 0 G11 6 6G10 12 1 13 G10 8 8 G10 0 1 1 G10 4 4 G10 1 1 G10 25 2 27G9 0 0 G9 8 8 G9 0 0 G9 0 0 G9 2 2 G9 10 10G8 24 24 G8 9 9 G8 0 0 G8 3 3 G8 1 1 G8 37 37G7 6 2 8 G7 31 31 G7 0 0 G7 2 2 G7 1 1 G7 40 2 42G6 2 2 G6 16 16 G6 0 0 G6 1 1 G6 3 3 G6 22 22G5 22 -2 20 G5 9 9 G5 0 1 1 G5 3 3 G5 0 0 G5 34 -1 33G4 0 0 G4 9 9 G4 0 0 G4 0 0 G4 4 4 G4 13 13G3 43 -2 41 G3 16 16 G3 0 0 G3 3 3 G3 0 0 G3 62 -2 60G2 1 1 G2 3 3 G2 0 0 G2 4 4 G2 0 0 G2 8 8G1 0 0 G1 0 0 G1 0 0 G1 0 0 G1 0 0 G1 0 0

APP 0 0 APP 1 1 APP 0 0 APP 0 0 APP 0 0 APP 1 1Green 115 -1 114 Green 122 0 122 Green 0 2 2 Green 22 0 22 Green 14 0 14 Green 273 1 274WM® 10 10 WM® 10 10CM® 20 20 CM® 20 20FF® 90 90 FF® 90 90

Retained 120 0 120 Retained 120 0 120GM(Con) 0 0 GM(Con) 0 0SM(Con) 0 0 SM(Con) 0 0WM(Con) 6 6 WM(Con) 6 6CM(Con) 12 12 CM(Con) 12 12FF(Con) 24 24 FF(Con) 24 24MACC 42 0 42 MACC 42 0 42Total 1283 -49 1234 Total 231 0 231 Total 10 2 12 Total 22 0 22 Total 15 0 15 Total 1561 -47 1514

TOTALSSERVICE DELIVERY SERVICE SUPPORT STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT LEGAL & GOVERNANCE FSHQ

41

4. RETIREMENT PROFILE OF WORKFORCE (up to 2021)

Financial Year Month Firefighter Crew Manager

Watch Manager

Station Manager

Group Manager

Area Manager

Chief and ACO Total

2007-08 FEB 2008 1 1Result 1 1

2013-14 JAN 2014 2 2Result 2 2APR 2015 1 1

2015-16 JUN 2015 1 1AUG 2015 1 1OCT 2015 1 1DEC 2015 1 1 1 3JAN 2016 3 2 5FEB 2016 1 1 2MAR 2016 1 4 5Result 7 9 1 1 1 19APR 2016 4 3 7

2016-17 MAY 2016 1 1 2JUN 2016 1 1JUL 2016 1 2 1 4SEP 2016 6 1 2 1 1 11OCT 2016 3 3 6NOV 2016 1 1DEC 2016 1 1 2JAN 2017 7 2 1 2 12FEB 2017 1 1 2MAR 2017 1 1 2Result 24 6 13 4 1 1 1 50APR 2017 1 1 2

2017-18 MAY 2017 1 1JUN 2017 1 1 3 1 6JUL 2017 1 1AUG 2017 1 1SEP 2017 5 1 3 1 1 11OCT 2017 1 1NOV 2017 1 1 2DEC 2017 3 2 1 6JAN 2018 3 1 1 1 6FEB 2018 2 1 3MAR 2018 5 2 3 10Result 19 10 15 5 1 50APR 2018 1 1 2

2018-19 JUN 2018 4 3 4 3 14JUL 2018 1 2 1 4SEP 2018 7 2 5 4 2 1 21OCT 2018 2 2NOV 2018 1 1 2DEC 2018 1 1JAN 2019 4 1 1 1 1 8FEB 2019 1 1 2MAR 2019 1 1 2Result 22 11 11 8 5 1 58APR 2019 4 3 1 4 12

2019-20 MAY 2019 1 1 2JUN 2019 4 1 2 1 8JUL 2019 4 1 5AUG 2019 2 1 3SEP 2019 7 1 3 3 14OCT 2019 1 1NOV 2019 1 1DEC 2019 4 1 2 1 8JAN 2020 5 1 1 7FEB 2020 3 3MAR 2020 3 2 3 8Result 38 11 14 8 1 72APR 2020 2 1 3

2020-21 MAY 2020 1 1 2JUL 2020 1 2 1 4AUG 2020 2 2OCT 2020 1 1NOV 2020 1 1Result 8 2 3 13APR 2021 1 1

2021-22 MAY 2021 1 1AUG 2021 2 2OCT 2021 1 1JAN 2022 1 1FEB 2022 1 1Result 3 1 1 1 1 7

42

5. HEALTH AND SAFETY PERFORMANCE

Lost time up to 3 days

Actual performance Q1and 2 Target 2015/16 7 42

Lost time over 3 days

Actual performance Q1 and 2 Target 2015/16 13 26

Riddor Major injury/disease

Actual Performance Q1 and 2 Target 2015/16 1 No target set

The Riddor event was as a result of an injury sustained whilst undertaking water rescue training, resulting in 50 working days lost to sickness.

6. DIVERSITY PROFILE OF WORKFORCE

Included at financial year end after the full out-turn figures for the year have been collated.

7. AGE PROFILE OF WHOLE TIME WORKFORCE

Included at financial year end after the full out-turn figures for the year have been collated.

8. RESULTS OF FIREFIGHTER AEROBIC TESTS

Included at financial year end.

43

Purpose To inform Members of how we currently use Personal Development Reviews and how these will operate in the future.

Recommendations That Members note the content of this report

Summary Personal Development Reviews continue to be an important element of our Workforce Development Strategy and the new electronic format is not only more efficient but, when conducted in line with the accompanying guidance, should prepare staff better for future challenges, whether that is remaining in their current role or progressing through the organisation.

OFFICIAL

Personal Development Reviews - update Human Resources Committee Date: 4 December 2015 Agenda Item: 6Submitted By: Director of Service Support



Contact Officer: AM Jim Butters, Service Support E: [email protected] T: 01274 655704


Annexes: Personal Review manual form

44


1 Introduction 1.1 Personal Development Reviews (PDR) have been carried out In West Yorkshire Fire and Rescue

Service (WYFRS) for a number of years. They present an opportunity for the individual and the manager to pause and reflect on how the post holder is performing in relation to:

• the duties and responsibilities of their post• their current agreed objectives• the development needs of the post holder• the setting of future objectives

1.2 In WYFRS these are held every 12 months, generally between November and February. However, there is no reason why they cannot be held on a more regular basis if it is deemed by both parties that there is value in this.

1.3 The PDR process can add significant benefit to both the individual and the organisation and is an excellent trigger to re-focus efforts. The current refresh will hopefully re-instil the positive value of a good PDR. In some areas it has become clear that the PDR is seen as a “tick box” exercise, particularly where the individual does not have any ambition for promotion. For this reason we have not just updated the format of the PDR form but we have also refreshed the accompanying guidance.

2 Information

2.1 The initial driver to look at the PDR form came from the fact that this was still one of our paper-based processes and, as such, resulted in a significant administrative burden on the Workforce Development Team who had to process 1500 forms every year. Making the form electronic not only does away with paper but also means that the team can search for common themes which can be used to inform future training course provision.

2.2 In addition to this the electronic form cannot get lost when an individual moves post so the previous years’ PDR forms would always be available as a reference point to the Manager conducting the PDR.

2.3 Perhaps most importantly is the fact that a PDR, when conducted in an organised, structured way, can lead to greater employee engagement and help the individual see how their role fits in to the overall aims and objectives of the organisation.

2.4 In putting the new PDR form together consultation has been undertaken with all directorates and representative bodies. In addition to this it has also been presented to all Managers at the quarterly Service Support meeting where the content of the form was discussed. All this consultation has resulted in a number of changes to the content contained in the old paper form.

3 Financial Implications

3.1 The cost of the PDR process and review is met from within the existing approved revenue budget.

4 Equality and Diversity Implications

4.1 The PDR process is one of the ways we ensure that all our staff are not only fulfilling the requirements of their role but are given the training and development to excel at their role. If carried out well this should provide a substantial benefit to both the individual and the organisation.

5 Health and Safety Implications 5.1 Part of the PDR process is to ensure that the individual has received all the required training for

their role, which will also help to ensure they are operating safely.

45

6 Service Plan Links 6.1 Provide a safe skilled workforce that serves the needs of a diverse community

7 Conclusions

7.1 The new PDR process is more efficient and is better suited to ensure that individuals are fulfilling the requirements of their respective roles. As an electronic document it will also be far easier to make any future changes to the content.

46

WEST YORKSHIRE FIRE & RESCUE SERVICE

Date:

Personal Review of:

Core Values & Behaviours

Core Values Behaviours

Service to the Community

We value service to the community by…

• Working with all groups to reduce risk

• Treating everyone fairly and with respect

• Being answerable to those we serve

• Striving for excellence in all we do

Taking Responsibility

Social Responsibility

Exemplary Attitude to Work

People

We value all our employees by practising and promoting…

• Fairness and respect

• Recognition of merit

• Honesty, integrity and mutual trust

• Personal development

• Co-operative and inclusive working

Teamwork

Leadership

Diversity

We value diversity in the service and the community by…

• Treating everyone fairly and with respect.

• Providing varying solutions for different needs andexpectations

• Promoting equal opportunities in employment andprogression within the service

• Challenging prejudice and discrimination.

Integrity

Cultural Awareness

Improvement

We value improvement at all levels of the service by ….

• Accepting responsibility for our performance

• Being open-minded

Problem Solving

Continuous Improvement

47

• Considering criticism thoughtfully

• Learning from our experience Efficiency

Behavioural Indicators are on pages 2-3. Use the scoring system below to agree and record your overall performance level scores for each of the ten behaviours. To come to a decision you will need supporting evidence and examples that will form the basis of your discussion.

4 – Consistently Behavioural Indicators are consistently demonstrated on a day to day basis. 3 – Frequently Behavioural Indicators are frequently demonstrated on a day to day basis. 2 – Sometimes Behavioural Indicators are sometimes demonstrated. Reasons for this may

include, further development required – may still be growing into the role (6-12 months), opportunities to demonstrate behaviour required or an increase in confidence levels required.

1 – Rarely Little or no evidence of behavioural indicators being demonstrated. Reasons for this may include, recent promotion or new role (0-6 months), new to organisation, capability and/or attitude, non work related issues. Consistent performance at this level may result in the formal poor performance process.

Behaviours and Indicators

1. Taking Responsibility

Items to consider • Uses own initiative to find the right solution and finds ways of developing self and others• Demonstrates personal resilience when under pressure• Identifies, analyses and manages risk in line with business expectations• Acts in ways that are in the best interest of the organisation• Ensures your own/your teams Health and Safety whilst at work• Is sensitive to the feelings and well-being of colleagues

Taking Responsibility performance level 1 2 3 4

2. Social Responsibility

Items to consider • Increases own knowledge of cultural and social environments• Uses knowledge of cultural and social environments to behave appropriately and take most

effective action• Seeks opportunities to build relationships for the benefit of the organisation and wider

communities• Promotes a positive image of the organisation within the wider community

Social Responsibility performance level 1 2 3 4

3. Exemplary Attitude to Work

Items to consider • Goes the extra mile for the benefit of colleagues and the organisation• Strives to meet and improve on, performance measures

48

• Displays a positive attitude towards their role and responsibilities• Volunteers for unpopular tasks and promotes the positive aspect to colleagues

Exemplary Attitude to Work performance level 1 2 3 4

4. Teamwork

Items to consider • Communicates in a clear, concise and consistent manner• Listens to and considers the views and opinions of others and acts appropriately• Addresses issues/conflict in an appropriate manner• Negotiates with others to maximise business goals, resources, time and priorities

Teamwork performance level 1 2 3 4

5. Leadership

Items to consider • Takes responsibility for own actions and has a ‘can do’ approach• Delegates work effectively to continually develop others• Talks with energy and enthusiasm about the Services vision and values and inspires

others to follow

Leadership performance level 1 2 3 4

6. Integrity

Items to consider • Is trusted by colleagues and managers• Seeks to understand the diverse skills and ideas of others• Treats people fairly, consistently and with respect• Openly shares what is important to them• Respects confidentiality

Integrity performance level 1 2 3 4

7. Cultural Awareness

Items to consider • Understands the value each area of the organisation brings• Encourages the sharing of ideas and best practice across the organisation• Considers the consequence of their behaviour on others• Chooses the appropriate style to get the best out of diverse relationships• Challenges unacceptable behaviour

Cultural Awareness performance level 1 2 3 4

8. Problem Solving

Items to consider • Finds positive solutions to overcome obstacles and barriers• Sets aside thinking time to explore more creative ways of doing things• Supports others to generate ideas

49

• Uses expertise and knowledge of colleagues to generate the most effective solution

Problem Solving performance level 1 2 3 4

9. Continuous Improvement

Items to consider • Explores and examines alternative ways of working to enhance performance• Celebrates achievements and takes pride in what has been achieved• Owns own development• Positively supports and contributes to organisational change initiatives

Continuous Improvement performance level 1 2 3 4

10. Efficiency

Items to consider • Brings together internal knowledge and expertise to achieve objectives.• Builds strong internal partnerships & relationships, shares knowledge & lessons learnt• Analyses effectiveness and efficiency of current processes; seeks ways of adding value• Ensures the activity of self and others add value.

Efficiency performance level 1 2 3 4

Transfer your personal review totals into the table below

Band Definition Performance Level Range

Tick level achieved

Considered action

A Achieving excellence 34 – 40 Interim PDR review

B Achieving required standards 26 – 33 C Development required in some

areas 18 – 25

D Development required in most areas Up to 17

Achievements/Outcomes from the last 12 months

Using Behaviours and Indicators from page 3 and your own departmental objectives, record below areas you are working towards

Individual behaviours

50

Comments

Appraisee signature:

Print name:

Appraiser/Line Manager signature:

Print name:

Staff Meeting Confirmation Form

To be returned to Workforce Development

Name of Appraisee: (PleasePrint)

Fire Service Number:

Job Title: Role:

Department/Station & Watch: Substantive/Temp:

Appraiser/Line Manager: Transferred in from another brigade? When?

Yes/No Date

Date of meeting: Sponsorship form attached for additional development: Yes/No

R E C O R D O F S C O R I N G

Departmental objectives

What development/help do you need to achieve these?

How will your achievements be measured?

Record what action you are going to take

Date to review above objectives:

51

Band A 34 – 40 Band C 18 – 25 Date of Interim Review Band B 26 – 33 Band D Up to 17

Would you like to be contacted regarding coaching?

Would you like a mentor? Refer to Workforce Development intranet site forfurther details

Yes No

Yes No

Appraisee Signature:

Appraiser/Line Manager: Name: (Please Print) Signature:

CPD & Development into next role to be completed by GREY book staff only Development into next role

• The Appraisee is demonstrating their potential for the nextrole Yes No



C P D

The applicant is eligible for CPD

Station Manager or equivalent must verify CPD applicants Y NThe applicant meets all the following criteria

• Professional competence & results

• Commitment to the job

• Relations with the public and colleagues

• Willingness to learn and adjust to new circumstances

• Served the minimum period required at the competent levelYes No

The applicant is applying for CPD for the first time

If yes, CPD pack MUST be attached in order for the applicant to be successful.

Yes No

Applicant’s Signature:

Line Manager: Name: (Please Print) & Signature: Fire Service No:

Verified by: Name: (Please Print) & Signature: Fire Service No:

52

This is Page 1 of 5 Date of Revision September 2011

WEST YORKSHIRE FIRE & RESCUE SERVICE

Date:

Personal Review of:

Core Values & Behaviours

Core Values Behaviours

Service to the Community

We value service to the community by…

• Working with all groups to reduce risk

• Treating everyone fairly and with respect

• Being answerable to those we serve

• Striving for excellence in all we do

Taking Responsibility

Social Responsibility

Exemplary Attitude to Work

People

We value all our employees by practising and promoting…

• Fairness and respect

• Recognition of merit

• Honesty, integrity and mutual trust

• Personal development

• Co-operative and inclusive working

Teamwork

Leadership

Diversity

We value diversity in the service and the community by…

• Treating everyone fairly and with respect.

• Providing varying solutions for different needs and expectations

• Promoting equal opportunities in employment and progressionwithin the service

• Challenging prejudice and discrimination.

Integrity

Cultural Awareness

Improvement

We value improvement at all levels of the service by ….

• Accepting responsibility for our performance

• Being open-minded

• Considering criticism thoughtfully

• Learning from our experience

Problem Solving

Continuous Improvement

Efficiency

Behavioural Indicators are on pages 2-3. Use the scoring system below to agree and record your overall performance level scores for each of the ten behaviours. To come to a decision you will need supporting evidence and examples that will form the basis of your discussion.

4 – Consistently Behavioural Indicators are consistently demonstrated on a day to day basis. 3 – Frequently Behavioural Indicators are frequently demonstrated on a day to day basis. 2 – Sometimes Behavioural Indicators are sometimes demonstrated. Reasons for this may

include, further development required – may still be growing into the role (6-12 months), opportunities to demonstrate behaviour required or an increase in confidence levels required.

1 – Rarely Little or no evidence of behavioural indicators being demonstrated. Reasons for this may include, recent promotion or new role (0-6 months), new to organisation, capability and/or attitude, non work related issues. Consistent performance at this level may result in the formal poor performance process.

53


Behaviours and Indicators

1. Taking Responsibility

Items to consider • Uses own initiative to find the right solution and finds ways of developing self and others• Demonstrates personal resilience when under pressure• Identifies, analyses and manages risk in line with business expectations• Acts in ways that are in the best interest of the organisation• Ensures your own/your teams Health and Safety whilst at work• Is sensitive to the feelings and well-being of colleagues

Taking Responsibility performance level 1 2 3 4

2. Social Responsibility

Items to consider • Increases own knowledge of cultural and social environments• Uses knowledge of cultural and social environments to behave appropriately and take most

effective action• Seeks opportunities to build relationships for the benefit of the organisation and wider

communities• Promotes a positive image of the organisation within the wider community

Social Responsibility performance level 1 2 3 4

3. Exemplary Attitude to Work

Items to consider • Goes the extra mile for the benefit of colleagues and the organisation• Strives to meet and improve on, performance measures• Displays a positive attitude towards their role and responsibilities• Volunteers for unpopular tasks and promotes the positive aspect to colleagues

Exemplary Attitude to Work performance level 1 2 3 4

4. Teamwork

Items to consider • Communicates in a clear, concise and consistent manner• Listens to and considers the views and opinions of others and acts appropriately• Addresses issues/conflict in an appropriate manner• Negotiates with others to maximise business goals, resources, time and priorities

Teamwork performance level 1 2 3 4

5. Leadership

Items to consider • Takes responsibility for own actions and has a ‘can do’ approach• Delegates work effectively to continually develop others• Talks with energy and enthusiasm about the Services vision and values and inspires others

to follow

Leadership performance level 1 2 3 4 54


6. Integrity

Items to consider • Is trusted by colleagues and managers• Seeks to understand the diverse skills and ideas of others• Treats people fairly, consistently and with respect• Openly shares what is important to them• Respects confidentiality

Integrity performance level 1 2 3 4

7. Cultural Awareness

Items to consider • Understands the value each area of the organisation brings• Encourages the sharing of ideas and best practice across the organisation• Considers the consequence of their behaviour on others• Chooses the appropriate style to get the best out of diverse relationships• Challenges unacceptable behaviour

Cultural Awareness performance level 1 2 3 4

8. Problem Solving

Items to consider • Finds positive solutions to overcome obstacles and barriers• Sets aside thinking time to explore more creative ways of doing things• Supports others to generate ideas• Uses expertise and knowledge of colleagues to generate the most effective solution

Problem Solving performance level 1 2 3 4

9. Continuous Improvement

Items to consider • Explores and examines alternative ways of working to enhance performance• Celebrates achievements and takes pride in what has been achieved• Owns own development• Positively supports and contributes to organisational change initiatives

Continuous Improvement performance level 1 2 3 4

10. Efficiency

Items to consider • Brings together internal knowledge and expertise to achieve objectives.• Builds strong internal partnerships & relationships, shares knowledge & lessons learnt• Analyses effectiveness and efficiency of current processes; seeks ways of adding value• Ensures the activity of self and others add value.

Efficiency performance level 1 2 3 4

55


Transfer your personal review totals into the table below

Band Definition Performance Level Range

Tick level achieved

Considered action

A Achieving excellence 34 – 40 Interim PDR review B Achieving required standards 26 – 33

C Development required in some areas 18 – 25 D Development required in most areas Up to 17

Comments

Appraisee signature: Print name:

Appraiser/Line Manager signature: Print name:

Achievements/Outcomes from the last 12 months

Using Behaviours and Indicators from page 3 and your own departmental objectives, record below areas you are working towards

Individual behaviours

Departmental objectives

What development/help do you need to achieve these?

How will your achievements be measured?

Record what action you are going to take

Date to review above objectives:

56


Staff Meeting Confirmation Form To be returned to Workforce Development

Name of Appraisee: (Please Print)

Fire Service Number:

Job Title: Role: Department/Station & Watch: Substantive/Temp:

Appraiser/Line Manager: Transferred in from another brigade? When?

Yes/No Date

Date of meeting: Sponsorship form attached for additional development: Yes/No

R E C O R D O F S C O R I N G Band A 34 – 40 Band C 18 – 25

Date of Interim Review Band B 26 – 33 Band D Up to 17

Would you like to be contacted regarding coaching?

Would you like a mentor? Refer to Workforce Development intranet site for further details

Yes No

Yes No



CPD & Development into next role to be completed by GREY book staff only Development into next role

• The Appraisee is demonstrating their potential for the next role Yes No



C P D The applicant is eligible for CPD Station Manager or equivalent must verify CPD applicants.

Yes No The applicant meets all the following criteria

• Professional competence & results

• Commitment to the job

• Relations with the public and colleagues

• Willingness to learn and adjust to new circumstances

• Served the minimum period required at the competent level

Yes No

The applicant is applying for CPD for the first time

If yes, CPD pack MUST be attached in order for the applicant to be successful.

Yes No

Applicant’s Signature:

Line Manager: Name: (Please Print) & Signature: Fire Service No:

Verified by: Name: (Please Print) & Signature: Fire Service No:

57

Purpose To provide an update on the 3-year Action Plan in place to address equality issues.

Recommendations That Members note the report.

Summary West Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service’s (WYFRS) performance in the areas of diversity and inclusion has been assessed periodically over the past 5 years and an output of this assessment is a three-year Equality Framework Action Plan. This report provides some background and an update of progress made to date against the Action Plan.

OFFICIAL

Equality Framework Action Plan Update Human Resources Committee Date: 4 December 2015 Agenda Item: 7Submitted By: Chief Employment Services Officer



Contact Officer: Emily Dew, Diversity and Inclusion Officer E: [email protected] T: 01275 655815


Annexes: Annex 1 - Equality Framework Action Plan Annex 2 – Spotlight On – Mental Health Annex 3 – Spotlight On – Police Camps

58


1 Introduction 1.1 The Public Sector Equality Duty (as part of the Equality Act 2010) requires the Authority to publish

one or more specific and measurable equality objectives at least every four years. The next update will be in April 2016.

1.2 Just as importantly, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) suggests that equality objectives should be "…seen as part of an organisation's business plan and as supporting delivery of it. Desired outcomes are more likely when…objectives are seen as an integral part of business performance”. With this in mind, work to support Diversity and Inclusion has been embedded into the Authority’s annual Service Action Plan. Moreover, where relevant, Equality Analyses are carried out for key actions or initiatives contained in the Action Plan.

1.3 It is crucial that the Authority holds itself to account, and thus performance in the areas of diversity and inclusion has been assessed periodically over the past 5 years. An output of this assessment is a three-year equality action plan.

2 Information

2.1 Below is a summary of the periodical equality and diversity assessments:

• In 2010 WYF&RS’s diversity and inclusion performance was reviewed independently via PeerChallenge. It was measured against the “National Fire and Rescue Service EqualityFramework” which had 23 indicators summarised into five key areas: knowing yourcommunities; involving your communities; responsive services and customer care; leadership,partnership and organisational commitment; skilled and committed workforce. In 2010 thePeer Challenge team concluded that WYFRS was performing at 'Excellent' level, the highestlevel of accomplishment. WYFRA was the first Fire Authority to be awarded this prestigiousaccolade.

• WYFRS was assessed against the Framework again in 2013 - this time through a self-assessment process. The self-assessment was based on an initial high level review inJanuary 2013, followed by a more detailed investigation including interviews with keymanagers and employees. This assessment found that the Authority was operating at anintermediate, 'Achieving' level.

• A further review was performed in 2014 which concluded that the Authority was still operatingat the 'Achieving' level. This was scrutinised by the Corporate Driving Diversity Board (CDDB)and was reported to the Authority via the Human Resources Committee on 5 September 2014.The ‘Achieving’ status was concluded as accurately reflecting the impact of change followingthe change programmes such as the Fundamental Review and the fact that some of thecriteria had changed since the 2010 process. A resultant 3-year equality framework actionplan was developed, which is a ‘live’ document, owned by the Diversity and Inclusion Officer,scrutinised by the CDDB (and the Authority) and executed by senior managers and theirteams.

2.2 The 2014-2017 Equality Framework action plan contains 30 actions which are designed to specifically address some of the areas for development identified in the latest self-assessment exercise. It recognises change cannot happen overnight and therefore the plan is designed for phased delivery over three years.

2.3 As at November 2015 WYFRS has completed or partially completed 73% of the actions (43% fully complete, 30% ongoing), 23% (7 out of 30) remain outstanding. The updated action plan can be found in Annex 1.

59

2.4 Key successes include:

1. Community involvement focussing on vulnerable groups. For example, targetedinterventions with young adults from low socio-economic backgrounds.

2. Behavioural training to help Managers lead through change. For example, creating a“Positive Work Environment Relationships” module which has received very positivefeedback.

3. Relationships with local partners. For example WYFRS has seconded a WatchCommander into Leeds and York NHS Foundation Trust.

4. A renewed effort to increase staff awareness about supporting those with mental healthissues both internal and external to the organisation.

5. Positive engagement of Fire Brigades’ Union (FBU) Diversity Representatives withplans in the pipeline for 2016, including events to celebrate national days such as“International Women’s Day” and “International Day for Person’s With Disabilities”

6. Raised profile of WYFRS at important diversity and inclusion events. For example,Stonewall Annual Workplace Equality Conference.

2.5 The main areas for development are:

1. Internal and external communication strategies

2. Equality Analysis on key activities (yet to be ‘mainstreamed’ as part of ‘business asusual’ activity)

3. Gathering, analysis and publication of workforce data

4. Staff survey to understand the workforce’s needs

2.6 A new Diversity and Inclusion Officer was appointed in August 2015 and a new post of Chief Employment Services Officer has been introduced with effect from October 2015. The postholders are working directly with Management Board and the HR Manager to prioritise ‘People’ plans for 2016 – 2020.

2.7 Self-assessment provides a mechanism for the Authority to continue to deliver equality performance improvements without incurring the financial or resource costs associated with the independent Peer Challenge process. The Action Plan remains a pivotal tool for us to clearly monitor our delivery of our equality objectives.


3.1 The cost of the peer challenge process is met from within the approved revenue budget for equalities and diversity.


4.1 The Self-assessment identified opportunities to make equality performance improvements. Progress against the approved Equality Framework Action Plan and this will continue to be monitored by CDDB.

4.2. Using the Equality Framework as a tool to set and deliver equality objectives enables the Authority to demonstrate compliance with the Public Sector Equality Duty and benchmark its equality performance against other Fire and Rescue Services.

60

4 Health and Safety Implications 5.1 There are no direct health and safety implications associated with this report. There is however, a

plethora of evidence that suggests the creation of a diverse and inclusive workplace can have a positive effect on the wellbeing of its employees.

5 Service Plan Links

6.1 This report relates to the following Priority:

• Provide a safe, competent and diverse workforce.

6 Conclusions

7.1 The Authority remains committed to diversity and inclusion, and maintaining the highest possible standards. It takes a pragmatic and focused approach towards delivery of both its moral and legal equality duties.

7.2 The Action Plan continues to improve equality performance. Progress will be periodically reported to the Corporate Driving Diversity Board and to the Authority (through the Human Resources Committee).

7.3 The next few years promise to be exciting and challenging times for WYFRS. A renewed focus on our internal ‘People’ agenda is vital as we move through unchartered waters. The new Diversity and Inclusion Officer continues to work closely with Management Board and the Corporate HR Manager to prioritise key action areas to help make WYFRS both a great place to work and ‘fit for the future’.

61

[Title] Page 2 of 7

Annex 1: Equality Framework Action Plan

Action Plan FRS EQUALITY FRAMEWORK ACTION PLAN 2014-2017

November 2015 Update

We will: Our action: Responsible Update

1.

Use the Equality Framework as a self-assessment tool and to provide evidence of compliance with the Public Sector Equality Duty

1.1 Report on performance improvements and positive outcomes for employees and at risk communities to Corporate Driving Diversity Board

Senior Managers • Renewed / refreshed training including OperationalLearning, driver training and Dementia training

• New Station Visits schedule to create a full feedbackloop

• Watch Commander seconded into Leeds and YorkPartnership NHS Foundation Trust

• Liaison with Migrant Community Network to provideFire Protection advice

• Summer Camps for young people (multi-agencyinitiative)

Complete

2.

Publish information externally that demonstrates how the Authority meets the needs of employees and service users with protected characteristics

2.1 Review the 'Spotlight On' process to ensure that good practice delivered within Districts and centrally is communicated internally and externally

AM Fire Safety, AM HR, Public Information Office

• Two new “Spotlight Ons” November 2015

• 4 more by February 2016

Ongoing

2.2 Provide reports on good practice to the HR and Community Safety Committees at least once a year

AM Fire Safety and AM HR

• Many reports to Community Safety Committeeincluding Safeguarding Report and Youth TrainingReport

Complete

62

3.

Share equality information with partners to inform service planning and deliver outcomes for at risk communities (1.3/2.3/3.3)

3.1 Review the effectiveness of Data Sharing Protocols with partners and address any gaps.

AM Fire Safety • Revised Data Sharing Protocol introduced and agreedin August 2015

• New “Exeter Data” available which identifies allpersons over 65 in County

Complete

4.

Actively encourage Representative Bodies to fulfil a positive role in delivering a wide range of corporate service and workforce objectives (1.7/2.7/3.7)

4.1 Service Support to work with Rep Bodies to develop and maintain trust and a positive working relationship

Director Service Support, AM HR, Rep Bodies

• D&I Officer has regular meetings with FBU DiversityReps

• Meeting with CFOA National Lead for Equality andInclusion October 2015

Ongoing

5.

Mitigate risks as a result of equality analysis and monitor equality outcomes from decision-making (1.8/2.8/3.8)

5.1 New Equality Analysis training, Guidance and a WYFirespace EA library will be introduced

Corporate Diversity

Outstanding

5.2 Implementation and effectiveness of the updated approach to be monitored, and best practice EAs communicated. Mitigate risks as a result of equality analysis and monitor equality outcomes from decision-making (1.8/2.8/3.8) (CONT)

Corporate Diversity • Numerous Equality Analyses completed, IRMPchange projects (e.g. staff selection, new builds etc)

• New Staff Transfer Policy and Guidance currently indesign

• Carers Survey live in December to add depth to ourWorkforce Equality Data

• Equality Analysis to be built into 2016 ProjectManagement training

Ongoing

5.3 Corporate Diversity to be included in the Project close-down

Change Management

63

process Board Outstanding

6.

Demonstrate significant, year-on-year improvements in outcomes for employees and at risk communities as a result of the Public Sector Equality Duty (1.9/2.9/3.9)

6.1 Implement, monitor and report on the delivery of the annual Corporate Equality & Diversity Action Plan and this Equality Framework Action Plan

Corporate Driving Diversity Board, Management Board, Authority Committees

• Scrutiny by Corporate Driving Diversity Board

• HR Committee reports, September 2014, December2015, April 2016

Complete

7.

a) Demonstrate senior leaders'public commitment todeveloping an organisationwhich values and supportsequality and any humanrights considerations(1.4/2.4/3.4)

b) Design and deliver effectiveinternal and externalcommunications to fostergood relations among, anddeliver equality outcomes for,West Yorkshire communities(1.10/2.10/3.10)

7.1 Review the Authority's internal and external communication strategies

Public Information Office and Corporate Diversity

• New Diversity and Inclusion Officer has emailed allstaff and featured in “Burning Issues” Magazine

Outstanding Key 2015/2016 Project;

stakeholders engagement continues

7.2 Ensure the communication strategies provide for the Authority Chair, CFO and Senior Managers to visibly champion equality issues

• Chief’s letter re. culture and wellbeing, October 2015

• New diversity posters up in Oakroyd Hall

• Stonewall poster to all Management Team

• Stonewall Conference – Diversity Champions, AMFire Safety and D&I manager attended

• Business Support Supervisor from the Fire Protectionteam invited to speak at the “Engaging DiverseCommunities” event in September, AM Fire Safety

64

and D&I manager attended

• Chair attending AFSA National conference, Nov 2015

Complete

7.3 Report back to Corporate Driving Diversity Board on the delivery and effectiveness of the communication strategies

Public Information Office Outstanding –

time restrictions, next CDDB 9th December

8.

Demonstrate that our procurement processes contribute to the organisation's equality priorities (1.11/2.11/3.11)

8.1 Provide updates to Corporate Driving Diversity Board on existing arrangements and significant new contracts or procurement activity, and the equality impacts arising from them

Corporate Resources

• New supplier policy includes D&I requirements

• WYFRS awarded the “Responsible ConstructionAward”

Complete

9.

Involve at risk communities in the design and delivery of interventions that deliver improved outcomes (1.13/2.13/3.13)

9.1 Establish how at risk communities will be involved in the design and delivery of interventions aimed at them

AM Fire Safety • Updated Partnership Register and strong localpartnerships (e.g. Alzheimer’s Society Bradford,Calderdale Multi-Agency Hoarding Process, SadekLok in Kirklees, Front Door in Leeds, Wakefield andDistrict Society for the Deaf)

• Reinforced relationships with D&I counterparts inWest Yorkshire Police and Yorkshire AmbulanceService

Complete

10.

Monitor and act upon local community feedback (including perceptions and satisfaction) to achieve measurable improvements in service delivery and outcomes for at risk groups (1.14/2.14/3.14)

10.1 Review the way we engage with, measure and act upon the feedback from the diverse communities of West Yorkshire, particularly at risk groups

Service Delivery Board

• Various projects lead by the District PreventionManagers including:

- Attendance at Neighbourhood Policing Teams meetings

- Members of the Community Safety Partnerships

65

- Boxing - Youth Engagement

- Liaison with groups such as the Council of Mosques

Complete

11.

Create and develop good equality practice that other organisations look to for information and advice (1.16/2.16/3.16)

11.1 Proactively identify opportunities to share equality information, advice and good practice (linked to Objective 2 in this Plan)

Corporate Diversity • New relationships established with D&I managers inother F&RS including Merseyside, Hertfordshire andCheshire.

• New relationships established within other blue lightsand local councils Cultural Awareness Guide to beshared with partners and peers

• D&I Manager continues to attend local/regionalDiversity group meetings

Complete

12.

Employ, develop and promote a diverse workforce (1.18/2.18/3.18)

12.1 Review employment, development, promotion and retention to identify and address barriers encountered by different groups of employees

HR and Corporate Diversity

• D&I Manager observed interviews and continues tooffer managers advice/guidance

• RDS recruitment project

• New online PDR and process

Ongoing- in line with promotion process and RDS recruitment

timescales 12.2 Review the labour market and its needs in order to identify how to improve how we recruit (including the use of positive action and social media)


• RDS recruitment project

Ongoing

13.

Monitor, analyse and publish appropriate employment data (in line with Statutory Duties) (1.19/2.19/3.19)

13.1 Review and agree the organisation's approach to collating workforce disability, sexual orientation and religion or belief

Service Support Outstanding –

2016 approach needed, biggest barrier breakdown of relationships therefore fear on erroneous, invalid data

66

data

14.

Assess the equality effects of all HR policies and procedures in order to mitigate adverse impact and promote equality of opportunity (1.20/2.20/3.20)

14.1 Carry out an audit of equality analyses for HR policies and procedures as part of the broader 'Ways of Working Improvement Strategy'


• New Policy prioritisation system to be applied to allHR policies

• New overall HR Strategy, aims and objectives

• New Staff Transfer Policy

Ongoing

15.

Communicate regularly with employees on equality issues and take action to achieve high employee satisfaction levels for different groups (1.21/2.21/3.21)

15.1 Produce an employee engagement strategy business case and action plan

Service Support • Employee Engagement Working Group established

• Health and Wellbeing survey conducted

• Station visits

• Ageing Workforce Task & Finish Group established(ongoing)

Outstanding Key 2015/2016 Project;

stakeholders engagement continues

15.2 Consider whether carrying out a staff survey should form part of the action plan

Service Support Ongoing

– has been discussed but no conclusion yet

16.

Achieve significant improvements to the working environment e.g. equipment, travel, training, clothing, facilities, food (1.22/2.22/3.22)

16.1 Ensure equality and diversity issues are addressed within the Property Asset Management Plan – e.g. dorm privacy, shower facilities, disability accessibility to/within Authority premises

Property Management Unit and Corporate Diversity

• Equality Analysis performed on all property

Complete

16.2 Provide updates on the equality and diversity issues relating to welfare provision, catering, work-wear, new station builds,

Corporate Resources, ITC, Corporate Services

• CDDB updated on:

- Dyslexia equipment

- Welfare provision

67

software/database tools to Corporate Driving Diversity Board

- D&I officer consulted on Shipley/Idle station build

Complete

17. Carry out an Equal Pay Audit (1.23/2.23/3.23)

17.1 Produce a business case for carrying out an equal pay audit among employees with protected characteristics

HR and Corporate Diversity Outstanding

18. Ensure policies, procedures and systems are in place to identify, prevent and deal with inappropriate workplace behaviour (1.24/2.24/3.24)

18.1 Review the Dignity and Respect Policy

Corporate Diversity • Reviewed by previous Corporate Diversity Officer

Complete

18.2 Monitor and report on trends to Corporate Driving Diversity Board

Corporate Diversity Quarterly CDDB meetings, latest session September 2015

Complete

18.3 Deliver training and support for line managers


• Various new staff training introduced including:

- Positive Environment training

- Mental Health training

- Absence and attendance training

- Tenders ongoing for Unconscious Bias training

- E-learning offer being review

Ongoing

19. Ensure the appraisal process deliverspositive outcomes and is used torecognise good performance(1.25/2.25/3.25)

19.1 Review the benefits of establishing a more formal approach to development/support for Green Book employees, particularly supervisors/line managers

Training and Development Ongoing

Stakeholder meetings continue

20. The service can demonstrate it has knowledgeable and well trained employees who are better equipped to meet the diverse needs of local communities (1.26/2.26/3.26)

20.1 Review the effectiveness of equality training and awareness delivered to employees

Corporate Diversity • D&I Manager reviewed Diversity e-learning

• Feedback to be gathered from staff

Ongoing

68

Spotlight on...Mental Health - Watch Commander seconded into Leeds and YorkPartnership NHS Foundation Trust (LYPFT)

What the need was and how we identified it:

LYPFT engage with vulnerable adults and families whose lifestyle increases their risk of having an accidental dwelling fire. Furthermore, they engage with vulnerable adults who may potentially be the victims of hate crime, targets for arson attacks or those who may be the perpetrators of anti-social behaviour. By having a WYFRS member of staff embedded in these organisations, we can establish robust referral pathways and facilitate increased information sharing. Additional benefits include WYFRS being able to rapidly respond to emerging risk, improved direct and effective communication lines, embedded referral pathways and improved joint working allowing both agencies to work with vulnerable adults to deliver preventative risk reduction services.

What we did and the difference we made:

Watch Commander B, Darren Metcalfe, has been seconded full-time into Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (LYPFT) for 12 months and his role as Partnership Liaison Officer (PLO) is now established. The post itself forges links between LYPFT and WYFRS, creating a single point of contact between both partners. The aim is to identify high risk individuals, the most vulnerable in our society in relation to “Fire” and provide the correct support and interventions needed to reduce the risk.

LYPFT provides mental health services across Leeds and York. It is made up of two directorates; mental health and specialist and learning disability services. LYPFT is a large organisation and the initial focus of the secondment was to promote the role within the organisation through

numerous forums. Examples of this include a trust wide communication strategy, involvement in the Annual Members Day and Strategic Planning Day, the ManUp Campaign, Mental Health Awareness Week and many more. This has resulted in staff from both organisations directly liaising with the secondee to share the common goal of promoting the wellbeing of service users.

Training is currently being delivered to all clinical LYPFT staff, with an emphasis on community-based personnel who visit service users in their own homes. The training focuses on promoting fire risk assessment and identification but also raises the awareness of fire and its association with mental health. Following training, staff process their referrals using WYFRS’s Secure Partner Web Based System which is covered in the WYFRS training package.

The partnership has established new ways of working which have been adopted across both organisations and adding value in the following areas:

• Information sharing – Prior to the secondment anddue to Data Protection and the disclosure processwithin LYPFT, requests from WYFRS for informationrelating to an individuals health record, for thepurpose of fire prevention, were difficult to obtain.The WYFRS PLO has now been authorised to have fullaccess to LYPFT systems, thus ensuring informationis available and gathered in a timely manner andassists greatly in the prevention of fire incidents andpromotes best practice.

www.westyorksfire.gov.ukMaking West Yorkshire Safer

West YorkshireFire & Rescue Service

An inclusive Fire and Rescue Service Making a difference 69

• Processes – The in-patient to communitydischarge form has been amended toaccommodate “Fire Risk” and the need forWYFRS interventions. Prior to an individualbeing discharged from an inpatient unit theirrisk assessment and discharge plan will nowincorporate their risk of fire and a Home Fire safetyCheck (HFSC) will be completed once they havereturned to their own homes.

• Data Protection release/sharing forms have alsobeen developed and agreed by InformationGovernance Managers from LYPFT and WYFRS andadopted along with Police requests as best practice.

• Single Point of Contact – The secondmenthas allowed both organisations to developsingle points of contact which assist with rapidinterventions being implemented by either agencywhen required.

• High risk cases – Numerous complex caseshave been resolved or progressed due to thepartnership. An example being; one individual whowas deemed ready for discharge had to be housedin the hospital setting at a cost of approximately£350 per night because their property wasuninhabitable. Through joint partnership working,the delay in discharge was potentially reduced bytwo months.

Outcomes:

The partnership is allowing Fire and Mental Health to work corroboratively to specifically target vulnerable individuals living in our communities. In addition, we have been able to increase the awareness of clinical staff in identifying fire risks and individuals who pose a risk of fire and enabling them to seek interventions from WYFRS. Furthermore, we are building and sharing

a common understanding of each organisation and sharing best practice.

What are the keys to our success?

• This project has been driven by the commitmentfrom senior members of both organisations and‘buy in’ from all stakeholders involved; energy andcreativity has been demonstrated by all thoseinvolved.

• Good partnership working and feedback betweenWYFRS and LYPFT, promoting communicationbetween each organisation sharing learningpoints and good practice

• Partners are able to receive advice and guidancewhere necessary from the presence of auniformed specialist in their organisation.

• The formation of a multi-agency steering group todrive the partnership.

• Influencing cultural change within WYFRS andLYPFT.

• Provision of short but highly effective training tostaff.

Contact:

Darren Metcalfe

Partnership Liaison Officer

WYFRS & LYPFT (Mental Health)

07760167964

[email protected]

An inclusive Fire and Rescue Service Making a difference



This ‘spotlight on’ contributes to...

DELIVERING A PROACTIVE FIRE PREVENTION AND PROTECTION PROGRAMME ENSURING WE DELIVER TO VULNERABLE GROUPS IN OUR COMMUNITIES

Equality priorities

AGE, DISABILITY (MENTAL HEALTH)

TO ADVANCE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY BETWEEN PEOPLE WHO SHARE A PROTECTED CHARACTERISTIC AND THOSE WHO DO NOT.

FOSTERING GOOD RELATIONS BETWEEN PEOPLE WHO SHARE A PROTECTED CHARACTERISTIC AND THOSE WHO DO NOT.

70

Spotlight on...Police Camps

What the need was and how we identified it:

Bradford District population figures list that 23.6 per cent are aged under 16 years of age. This is the third highest number of children aged 0-15 in England, with only Birmingham and Leeds having higher numbers.

During the school holidays, due to the austerity measures, there are less out-of-school activities for these 124,650 young people to engage in. A percentage of these young people have therefore had little or no access to services and some have become involved in setting nuisance fire and causing Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) offences across the District.

This increase in activity for the statutory and non-statutory organisations has meant a need for an increase in investment in terms of extra resources to respond to emergencies and also in physically repairing communities or indeed rebuilding the community cohesion where it is affected.

What we did:

As a result of these issues, Police Camps were created.

The Police Camps are multi- agency initiatives which seek to reduce anti-social behaviour and low level crime, improve community cohesion and relationships with local services, and to raise aspirations of young people.

In 2015 there were four weeks of camp (May, August and October) and partners included Bradford College, West Yorkshire Police, West Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service, Bradford Council, British Transport Police, Places for People, Incommunities, Accent Housing and The British Army.

Three-hundred 9-15 year olds from across the Bradford

District participate per week, during school holidays. The young people engage in activities run by the partners which promote awareness and knowledge on key issues that impact the age groups. The key issues generally fall in the following categories; personal safety, road safety, community safety, crime prevention, sports, health and wellbeing and citizenship and communities.

In addition to the programme of activities, a daily piece of homework is given to youngsters so that they can reflect on what they have learned during the day. This also allows us to disseminate key messages to parents such as being able to request a free fire safety check by WYFRS, important phone numbers for the council and information on how to ‘target harden’ homes. Submission of homework is encouraged by rewarding the best pieces of work with homework prizes (pens, notebooks, arts & crafts materials, meal/ activity vouchers donated by local businesses).

What difference are we making?

The information and skills taught have real value to youngsters and their families, as demonstrated by Kayne Holden in August 2013. Kayne saved his mother’s life after she choked on some food; he had learnt to perform the Heimlich Manoeuvre at a Police Camp just days before. (see http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/hero-son-saves-mum-choking-2194363)

Youngsters are booked on to the programme by their parents/ guardians or as referrals from schools, the police, youth services, residential children’s homes and community groups. Referrals are made as a result of



An inclusive Fire and Rescue Service Making a difference 72

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/hero-son-saves-mum-choking-2194363

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/hero-son-saves-mum-choking-2194363

a specific need, ranging from low confidence to participation in negative behaviours.

The camps are staffed by partner agencies and volunteers; young people aged 16+ from previous camp cohorts, Bradford College, local schools, police volunteers and the wider public are able to apply to become a Police Camp Volunteer via Bradford College.

All staff wear a uniform so that youngsters don’t know where they work until the final day of camp. This is to foster positive relationships between young people and staff from the police/ other agencies without any preconceived stereotypes impacting on the attitudes of youngsters towards staff. This also allows us to provide attendees with positive role models from the services/ agencies we work with.

Each week culminates with an end of camp Awards Ceremony where parents/ guardians and partner agencies are invited to see youngsters rewarded for positive behaviour with prizes. Rewards are usually related to sports and education to encourage youngsters to keep active and fit (e.g. mountain bikes and scooters). It is also when all uniformed staff reveal their occupations to the youngsters by arriving in their uniforms.

Other outcomes are listed below:

1. Reduced crime and anti-social behaviour locally,both short and long term.

2. Engaging with young people through mediumsthey understand to build trust and providepositive role models.

3. Increased awareness of emergency services andwhat they do.

4. Increased public confidence and satisfaction in

Neighbourhood Policing by being visible in the community.

5. Actively promoted diversity and inclusive practice.

6. Offered young people the opportunity to developtheir employability skills and to make a positivecontribution to society.

7. Worked with partner agencies to resolve socialissues that impact on all

What are the keys to our success?

The success of this ongoing project is the joint working between partners.

A united objective of improving the community of Bradford by actively engaging with young people and empowering them to be active citizens has resulted in an improved community for all.

The support from each partner in terms of resources, funding or business support has achieved a positive and effective management team from which the project has been led and continues to go from strength to strength.

What are we doing next?

WYFRS will continue to work in partnership with Police Camps and all the partner agencies. This is the main focus for youth engagement for the District as it not only identifies and brings together vulnerable young people but allows us to deliver the key safety messages to a motivated audience.

An inclusive Fire and Rescue Service Making a difference



This ‘spotlight on’ contributes to...

DELIVERING A PROACTIVE FIRE PREVENTION AND PROTECTION PROGRAMME ENSURING WE DELIVER TO VULNERABLE GROUPS IN OUR COMMUNITIES

Equality priorities

AGE, YOUNG ADULTS.

TO ADVANCE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY BETWEEN PEOPLE WHO SHARE A PROTECTED CHARACTERISTIC AND THOSE WHO DO NOT.

FOSTERING GOOD RELATIONS BETWEEN PEOPLE WHO SHARE A PROTECTED CHARACTERISTIC AND THOSE WHO DO NOT.

73

Purpose To inform Members on the results of the recent Work & Wellbeing Survey

Recommendations That Members note the content of the report

Summary An Authority-wide Work & Wellbeing survey was undertaken in March 2015, commissioned by the Member Task & Finish Group. The survey was part of a wider research project undertaken by Middlesex University and the University of Bedfordshire. The results have proved a valuable insight into how staff feel about working for West Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service (WYFRS).

Comparisons with the survey undertaken in 2009, with the HSE’s (Health and Safety Executive) Management Standards for work related stress, the other Fire and Rescue Services (FRS’s) which took part in the survey and a recent Police survey have allowed our position to be benchmarked. This has revealed some interesting results which are summarised in the report.

OFFICIAL

Work & wellbeing Survey- Results Human Resources Committee Date: 4 December 2015 Agenda Item: 8Submitted By: Chief Employment Services Officer



Contact Officer: Mark Dixon, Occupational Health & Safety Manager E: [email protected] T: 01274 655878


Annexes: Annex 1 – Work & Wellbeing Survey Report - summary

74


1 Introduction 1.1 In March 2015, WYFRS took part in a piece of research undertaken by Middlesex University and

the University of Bedfordshire. This was commissioned by the Members Task & Finish Group looking at mental health sickness absence management. The Universities were researching levels of health & wellbeing amongst the British Fire & Rescue Services and nine FRS’s took part in the research.

1.2 The survey was undertaken on-line and all staff were encouraged to complete it. The survey used, in the main, the HSE’s Management Standards approach for measuring work-related stress, which is widely accepted as best practice. The HSE has also produced benchmarks for each of the seven hazards (demands, control, peer support, managerial support, role clarity, relationships & change). These are based on survey findings of 136 organisations, both public & private sector, using “organisational averages”.

1.3 Work-related stress is defined by the HSE as “the adverse reaction people have to undue pressures and demands placed on them at work”. It is one of the most commonly reported health problems experienced by employees. According to the most recent Labour Force Survey, work-related stress affects an estimated 487,000 employees in the UK, with a total of 11.3 million working days lost in 2010/11 (HSE, 2013/2014).

1.4 Additionally, a number of other measures were used in the survey including work / life balance, employee engagement, health & lifestyle and job satisfaction - all of which have a bearing on wellbeing.

1.5 There is strong evidence to show that organisations which employ positive employee engagement strategies with their staff are rewarded with improved levels of health & wellbeing and other significant benefits. Gallup in 2006 examined 23,910 business units and compared top quartile and bottom quartile financial performance with engagement scores. They found that:

• those with engagement scores in the bottom quartile averaged 31% – 51% increasedemployee turnover, 51% greater inventory shrinkage and 62% more accidents.

• those with engagement scores in the top quartile averaged 12% increased customeradvocacy, 18% higher productivity and 12% increase in profitability.

1.6 WYFRS has seen a significant increase in the number of mental ill health cases and associated working days lost to sickness.

1.7 A similar survey, using the HSE’s Management Standards approach was undertaken in 2009 and so comparisons with these previous results have also been undertaken.

1.8 The sample size was relatively small and this needs to be considered when drawing Authority-wide conclusions from the report.

2 Information

2.1 The full report is available on request. However, as it is over 50 pages long, a summary report has been produced and this is included at Annex 1. The main findings from the survey are detailed below:

75

• A total of 387 respondents completed the survey which is a 24% response rate. This compares to1043 respondents to the 2009 survey, which represented a 45% response rate.

• Overall, none of the HSE benchmarks for the seven hazard groups were met. However“demands” and “peer support” were very nearly met. The two groups which had the biggest“wellbeing gap” were “control” (level of autonomy over working methods, pace and timings) and“change” (measures how well organisational changes are managed and communicated) and theseare recommended as priorities for intervention.

• Grey Book staff did not meet any of the seven HSE benchmarks. Green Book staff, however, metand exceeded four out of the seven.

• Green Book staff consistently reported a higher score (i.e. greater sense of wellbeing) than theirGrey Book colleagues.

• In comparison to the other FRS’s which took part in the survey, WYFRS compared favourably onthree of the groups (demands, peer support and role clarity) and less favourably on four (control,managerial support, relationships & change).

• In comparison to the police survey undertaken in 2012, WYFRS reported higher levels ofwellbeing in six of the groups, with the exception of relationships which was only just lower.

• In comparison to the survey undertaken in WYFRS in 2009, the 2015 survey reported lowerscores in six of the seven groups with control scoring slightly higher, which suggests an overalllower level of wellbeing than in 2009.

• In relation to the employee engagement questions (page 12 of the report), support staff responseswere generally just above the midpoint of the response scale (i.e. on the agree side) whereasoperational staff responses were generally just below the midpoint of the response scale (i.e. onthe disagree side). The difference in mean scores between operational and support staff wassignificant for all statements, with support staff having a more positive perception of working forWYFRS on all items except ‘I feel secure in my job’.

Finally there are a number of areas within the report that require further analysis and that piece of work is on going.


3.1 There are currently no direct financial implications from this report, the cost of any initiatives introduced following consideration of the findings will be reported to this committee.


4.1 Further analysis of the results are required to get a better understanding of some of the issues. The Diversity & Inclusion Officer will be fully involved in this work.

76

5 Health and Safety Implications

5.1 Good mental health & wellbeing will help the Authority deliver a high quality service to the community of West Yorkshire. However, poor mental health has proven to create a range of counterproductive attitudes and behaviours such as cynicism, low morale, sabotage and increased sickness absence. The same approach to the identification, assessment and control of Health & Safety hazards commonly employed in workplaces, should be applied to the hazard of work-related stress and this survey, using the HSE’s Management Standards, is the first “strategic” risk assessment in this process. Action now needs to be taken to reduce the “stressors” the survey has identified.

5.2 There is robust evidence to link engaged workforces with improved health & wellbeing, but also other desirables such as reduced sickness absence, workplace accidents and turnover, increased morale, customer advocacy, efficiency & profit. The survey results would suggest there are improvements which need to be made to better engage staff, especially operational staff.

5.3 The ability of the Authority to affect non-work related stress is limited. However providing support, advice and assistance will all help mitigate the consequences and impact on work. It is rare for mental health cases to be either purely work or non work; they are more often a combination of the two.

6 Service Plan Links

6.1 To provide a competent, safe and diverse workforce.

7 Conclusions

7.1 The survey provides a useful insight into how staff feel about working for WYFRS. The two hazard groups with the biggest “wellbeing gap” are “control” and “change” and these will be prioritised for intervention. Some of the results are perhaps understandable given the rate of change in recent times and also the ongoing industrial action. However, some are more difficult to understand and some targeted work is required to better understand these issues, before interventions are considered.

7.2 The report has been considered by Management Team and it will now be referred to the Employee Engagement Group for further consideration and the drawing up of an action plan to address the key concerns. It is recognised however that this report is just one indicator of how staff feel about working at WYFRS and it should not be viewed in isolation. Other recent reports have raised questions about the prevailing cultures in Fire and Rescue Services.

7.3 The Independent Cultural Review of Essex County Fire and Rescue Service resulted in a final report being published on 2 September 2015. Key findings were:

The organisational culture is toxic with dangerous and pervasive bullying and intimidationtaking place.

Including senior, corporate positions, aggressive and inappropriate behaviour iscommonplace, but is worse on some fire stations.

77

Longer serving personnel exert a deeply malign influence over anyone who attempts tochallenge existing attitudes.

There is an appetite for change; firefighters are tired of industrial action.

There is a 'them and us' sub-culture of distrust at so many different levels.

Attempts at workforce transformation have been constantly undermined at every level byofficers and not just trade unions.

Transformation is essential and needs the support of the whole organisation if it is tosucceed.

7.4 Last year, the then Fire Minister Penny Mordaunt launched an independent review aimed at assessing whether Conditions of Service of firefighters continue to appropriately support the frontline work of preventing fires and protecting the public over coming years. The review was led by Adrian Thomas, an expert in the field of personnel management and staff resourcing.

7.5 A report by former Chief Fire Adviser, Sir Ken Knight, 'Facing the Future', published in 2013 outlined the potential for improvements to be made to frontline services if firefighters' conditions of service (in his opinion, often a barrier to change) were reviewed.

7.6 The Thomas Review, therefore, has considered whether the current terms and conditions are conducive to the fire and rescue service of the future, which will obviously have involved a great deal of evidence gathering. The review took around 6 months to complete with a final report submitted to Government in February 2015.

7.7 Whilst that report has still not been formally published, Adrian Thomas has delivered a number of presentations at public events. Several key points include:

Rebuilding required around culture and trust.

Early engagement with employee representatives over change programmes andproposals.

Improved training in 'effective change management', 'leadership & employee engagement',and 'industrial relations'.

Some have confused the term 'bullying' with 'unhappiness with relationships'.

Increased importance should be placed on employee communication.

7.8 We await the findings and recommendations of the full report, which presumably will be released by the Government once it has fully considered the detail and potential implications. Suffice to say several of the above points correlate with other salient outcomes of both our own staff survey and that of the Essex cultural review.

78

7.9 The Authority’s Human Resources Strategy is due for review and it is intended that the new strategy will question and address the potential concerns described above through gaining a more detailed insight into working life at WYFRA and putting in place interventions to build on strengths and address areas for improvement. The HR Strategy and progress against various action plans will be reported to the Human Resources Committee in due course.

79

1 | P a g e

Analysis of the results of the Work & Wellbeing Survey undertaken in West Yorkshire Fire & Rescue Service by Middlesex University and the University of Bedfordshire.

Prepared by: Mark Dixon, Occupational Health & Safety Manager

Report Date: August 2015

80

2 | P a g e

CONTENTS

Page 1 Background 3 2 Introduction 4

3 Findings 5

3.1 HSE management standards 5

3.2 Additional stressors & working for WYFRS

11

3.3 Work life balance 12

3.4 Feelings about the job 13

3.5 Health & lifestyle 14

4 Conclusions 15

5 Recommendations 17

81

3 | P a g e

1 Background

Work-related stress is defined by the HSE as “the adverse reaction people have to undue pressures and demands placed on them at work”. It is one of the most commonly reported health problems experienced by employees. According to the most recent Labour Force Survey, work related stress affects an estimated 487,000 employees in the UK, with a total of 11.3 million working days lost in 2010/11 (HSE, 2013/2014). This survey reported that, on average, each employee who experienced work-related stress was absent from work for 27 days during that year. West Yorkshire Fire & Rescue Service (WYFRS) has seen a significant rise in the number of mental health cases and subsequent working days lost. (See table below).

Year No. of cases Working days lost

Average days lost per case

Cost*

2012/13 58 1951 33.6 £399,955 2013/14 71 1451 19.9 £297,455 2014/15 94 3821 40.9 £783,305 *This is an approximate cost based on a Firefighters daily pay plus on costs.

As well as ill health and sickness absence, work-related stress has also been associated with reduced levels of job satisfaction, motivation and commitment, substance abuse, increased employee turnover, impaired job performance and creativity, and a range of counter productive workplace attitudes and behaviours, such as cynicism, incivility and sabotage. The negative impact of work-related stress is also likely to “spill over” into the home domain and limit opportunities for relaxation and recovery leading to impaired health and job performance. The incidence of workplace stress has generally risen since the mid-1990s. There is evidence, however, that it is particularly common amongst emergency professionals. UK Fire and Rescue Service professionals may experience stressful events on a regular basis when performing their operational duties. In addition to operational stressors, Firefighters may experience organisational stressors in relation to their employment, such as poor management, inadequate support and interpersonal conflict. Moreover, psychological distress caused by the job has the potential to lead to traumatic stress symptoms, which has been found to be a significant problem in the Fire and Rescue Service (Home Office, Equality and Fairness in the Fire Service, 1999; Del Ben et al. 2006). This report also highlighted high levels of bullying and harassment. The financial and organisational costs of failing to manage work-related ill-health in the fire service have been recognised (Home Office Fit for Duty, 2000). Working conditions also have the potential to lead to work-life conflict, through factors such as long working hours, rotating shifts and traumatic experiences. There is also evidence that Firefighters, although required to demonstrate optimum levels of fitness, commonly engage in harmful behaviours, such as an unhealthy diet and lack of regular physical activity (Ranby et al. 2011). Negative health behaviours such as these have previously been linked to work-related stress and poor work-life balance.

In order to inform the development of interventions to enhance the wellbeing of our staff and the service they provide, it is vital to gain insight into the work-related stressors they experience and their wellbeing and work-life balance. It is also important to consider the health behaviours and how they are related to their working conditions and wellbeing. This survey examines these issues.

82

4 | P a g e

2 Introduction

The survey was undertaken jointly by Middlesex University and the University of Bedfordshire who were undertaking research into work & wellbeing in the Fire & Rescue Service. There was therefore an opportunity to undertake an Authority wide stress risk assessment at no cost to the Authority which would provide us with a better understanding of the issues which affect our staffs mental health & wellbeing and allow us to consider options to address such. The survey, undertaken in March 2015, aimed to examine the extent to which WYFRS is meeting the minimum standards stipulated by the HSE for the management of work-related stress (HSE Management Standards). Mean scores were calculated across all seven of the hazard categories. Comparisons were made between the mean scores obtained in this survey for each hazard and the newly developed benchmark scores published by the HSE (representing the 80th percentile). If met, these benchmarks indicate that the organization has the “green light” for each of the hazard dimensions, representing a high level of wellbeing. The previous survey undertaken in 2009 also used the HSE Management Standards so allowed a comparison to be made to the state of mental health & wellbeing then.

In addition to the HSE questions, which are general by nature, this survey also examined a range of more job-specific stressors. Levels of psychological wellbeing and satisfaction in relation to work were also investigated. A range of issues related to the work-home interface were explored, such as perceptions of flexibility in working patterns, the nature of the work-life balance culture in the organisation, and perceptions of work-life balance from a personal perspective. Finally, information relating to health behaviours, such as sleep, alcohol consumption, and smoking behaviour was obtained. Working conditions and job characteristics differ considerably between different roles within the Fire and Rescue Service. How these differences might relate to levels of work-related stressors, wellbeing, work-life balance and health behaviours were also explored.

An online survey was developed by the University research team and the survey was promoted internally by OHSU to all employees. Staff were given just over six weeks in which to respond and reminders were issued whilst the survey was open. The survey results were managed by the University team, with only a summarised report being presented to WYFRS, to assure staff it was confidential. Before the deadline staff were sent reminders.

There were 387 (24%) responses to the survey, which was disappointing given there were 1043 responses (45%) to the 2009 survey. However, the University research team have confirmed that the sample size is consistent with the other FRS’s who took part in the survey.

This report is a summary of the full 48 page report which is available on request.

83

5 | P a g e

3 Findings

3.1 HSE management standards

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has developed a set of management standards to assist employers in managing work related stress and wellbeing. They advocate a risk-assessment approach whereby stressors are measured and managed like any other workplace hazard. They are based around standards of good management practice (or benchmarks) for measuring employers’ performance in preventing work-related stress from occurring at source.

Seven elements of work (psychosocial hazards) considered relevant to the majority of UK employees and have a strong evidence base as the most critical predictors of employee wellbeing and organisational performance were developed:

• Demands includes workload, pace of work and working hours;• Control measures levels of autonomy over working methods, as well as pacing and

timing;• Peer Support encompasses the degree of help and respect received from

colleagues;• Managerial Support reflects supportive behaviours from line managers and the

organisation itself, such as the availability of feedback and encouragement;• Relationships assesses levels of conflict within the workplace including bullying

behaviour and harassment;• Role examines levels of role clarity and the extent to which employees believe that

their work fits into the overall aims of the organisation;• Change reflects how well organisational changes are managed and communicated.

The HSE then developed a survey tool to help employers measure the key hazards within their organisations and compare their performance with national standards and it is this which has been used in this survey. This risk assessment approach is widely used by organisations to diagnose the most stressful aspects of work. The process allows employers to assess how well they are managing the different hazard categories within their workforce, and helps them develop precisely targeted interventions to enhance the work-related wellbeing of their staff.

Comparison with the HSE benchmarks have been made for the organisation overall and also for operational & support staff. Any significant differences between the two are shown in red.

The benchmarks are based on surveys conducted within 136 organisations and is constituted of ‘organisational averages’. Where scores for any of the hazards are compared unfavourably, the HSE suggests interim and longer-term target scores to help organisations improve their performance. Although the HSE approach has been extensively used in the UK and a range of normative scores has been obtained, it has been predominantly utilised by health and social care organisations and some private sector companies. With the exception of the police (Houdmont et al. 2012), little is known about emergency service professionals and this needs to be bore in mind when madding judgements against the HSE

84

6 | P a g e

benchmarks. Perhaps more relevant, the average scores for the FRS’s who took part in the survey are also included in the conclusion section.

3.1.1 Demand

Respondents indicated they sometimes have demands from different groups at work that are hard to combine. They seldom have unachievable deadlines, and seldom feel unable to take sufficient breaks. Respondents sometimes have to work very fast and intensively. They sometimes neglect some tasks because they have too much to do. They seldom have unrealistic time pressures and seldom feel pressurised to work long hours. Significant differences in five of the eight areas were found between operational and support staff in levels of well-being related to demands.

Operational staff reported significantly lower wellbeing, compared to support staff, in relation to feeling pressurised to work long hours, having unrealistic time pressures, having to work fast, being unable to take sufficient breaks, and different groups demanding things that are hard to combine. There was also a difference between operational and support staff in overall levels of wellbeing related to demands, with operational staff again reporting greater demands. Additionally, Station Managers (and above) reported significantly higher demands than all other staff and support managers (grade 9+) also reported higher demands than all staff apart from Station Managers (and above).

Demand Summary

Comparison of the data with the results of the Health and Safety Executive’s benchmark indicates that the organisation as a whole was only very slightly below the HSE target, in relation to the demands made on employees. However, as can be seen below, support staff exceed the benchmark, whilst operational staff fall just below the target.

HSE scale out of 5 1=low well-being; 5=high well-being WYFRS 3.25 Operational staff 3.18 Support staff 3.38 HSE target 3.29

3.1.2 Control

Respondents said they can often decide when to take a break. They sometimes have a say in controlling their work speed, and sometimes have some say over the way they work. They indicated that they sometimes have a choice in deciding how they do their work and what they do at work and they sometimes feel that their working time can be flexible.

Significant differences were found between operational and support staff relating to perceptions of control. Operational staff reported significantly lower perceptions of control overall, compared to support staff, and also less control in relation to all of the individual aspects. In particular, Firefighters reported significantly lower control than all other staff and Watch Managers reported lower control than all other staff except Firefighters.

Control Summary

85

7 | P a g e

Comparison of the data alongside the Health and Safety Executive’s benchmark indicates that the organisation as a whole does not meet the benchmark for levels of control over the way they work. As can be seen below, however, support staff exceed the benchmark, but operational staff fall below the target.


3.1.3 Managers’ Support

Respondents said they were sometimes given supportive feedback on the work they do, and can often rely on their line manager to help out with a work problem. They indicated that they can often talk to their line manager about something that has upset or annoyed them about work. Respondents said that they sometimes feel supported through emotionally demanding work and their line manager sometimes encourages them at work. Significant differences were found between operational and support staff in two of the five areas; levels of supportive feedback received and being supported through emotionally demanding work, with support staff reporting higher levels of well-being (i.e. more manager support). There was also a difference between operational and support staff in overall levels of wellbeing related to manager support, with support staff again reporting better well-being. In particular, lower grade support staff (managers and non manager) and also Station Managers (and above) reported significantly greater managerial support than Watch Managers.

Managers’ Support: Summary

Comparison of the data alongside the Health and Safety Executive’s benchmark indicates that WYFRS falls slightly below the HSE benchmark in relation to the level of managers’ support for employees.


3.1.4 Peer Support

Respondents said their colleagues would often help them if work gets difficult. They indicated that they often receive the help and support they need, and the respect they believe they deserve, from colleagues. Respondents indicated that their colleagues are often willing to listen to their work related problems. There were significant differences between operational and support staff in three of the four individual aspects relating to peer support; receiving help and support from colleagues, receiving respect at work from colleagues and colleagues being willing to listen to work-related problems, as well as in overall colleague support. Support staff reported higher levels of well-being (i.e. more colleague support). In particular, lower grade support staff (managers and non managers) reported significantly

86

8 | P a g e

greater support from colleagues than Station Managers (and above) (and above), Watch Managers and support managers (grade 9+).

Peer Support Summary

Comparison of the data alongside the Health and Safety Executive’s benchmarks indicated very slightly less well-being than the HSE benchmark in relation to the level of peer support experienced by employees. However, support staff actually exceed the benchmark, while operational staff fall below the target.


3.1.5 Relationships

Respondents said there is sometimes friction or anger between colleagues and relationships at work are sometimes strained. Respondents said they are seldom subject to personal harassment at work and seldom subjected to bullying. However, 18% reported having been bullied sometimes, often or always and 24% reported being subject to personal harassment sometimes, often or always. Significant differences were found between operational and support staff relating to relationships at work. Operational staff reported significantly poorer relationships overall, compared to support staff, and also poorer relationships in relation to all of the individual aspects. In particular, Firefigthers and Watch Managers reported significantly poorer relationships than lower grade support staff (manager and non-manager).

Relationships Summary

Comparison of the data alongside the Health and Safety Executive’s benchmark indicates that the organisation as a whole does not meet the benchmark on relationship at work. As can be seen below, however, support staff just meet the benchmark, but operational staff fall below the target.


3.1.6 Role

Respondents indicate that they often know what is expected of them at work, they often have the information required to get their job done and are often clear about their personal duties and responsibilities. Respondents are often clear about the goals and objectives of their department and often understood how their work fits in with the overall aim of the

87

9 | P a g e

organisation. Only one significant difference was found between operational and support staff; support staff have a clearer understanding of how their work fits in with the overall aim of the organisation. Additionally, there was also a difference between operational and support staff in overall levels of role clarity, with support staff again reporting more clarity.

Role Summary

Comparison of the data alongside the Health and Safety Executive’s benchmark indicates slightly less well-being than the HSE benchmark in relation to how clearly employees’ understand their role at work.


3.1.7 Change

Respondents indicated that they sometimes have sufficient opportunities to question managers about change at work. They said that staff are sometimes consulted about change at work and they are sometimes clear about how changes will work out in practice. Significant differences were found between operational and support staff relating to change at work. Operational staff reported being significantly less informed about change overall, compared to support staff, and also less informed in relation to all of the individual aspects. In particular, Firefighters and Watch Managers reported being significantly less informed about change than Station Managers (and above) and lower grade support staff (managers and non-managers).

Change Summary

Comparison of the data alongside the Health and Safety Executive’s benchmark indicates less wellbeing, in the organisation as a whole, regarding the way change is handled at work.

HSE scale out of 5 1=low well-being; 5=high well-being

WYFRS 2.84 Operational staff 2.70 Support staff 3.09 HSE target 3.24

88

10 | P a g e

3.1.8 Summary of Hazard Groups

1=low well-being; 5=high well-being

Demands Control Managerial support

Peer support

Relationships Role Change

HSE benchmark

3.29 3.72 3.65 3.89 4.04 4.31 3.24

WYFRS 3.25 3.24 3.38 3.80 3.76 4.12 2.84

‘Well-being gap’

-0.04 -0.48 -0.27 -0.04 -0.28 -0.19 -0.40

WYFRS, as an organisation has very nearly met, two of the HSE benchmarks for the management of work-related stress; demands and peer support. The categories with the largest well-being gap are ‘control’ and ‘change’, which indicates that these should be a priority for intervention in order to enhance the wellbeing of employees.

3.1.9 Summary of differences between support & operational staff



Peer support


HSE benchmark

3.29 3.72 3.65 3.89 4.04 4.31 3.24

Operational staff

3.18 2.89 3.28 3.72 3.60 4.05 2.70

Support staff

3.38 3.87 3.58 3.95 4.04 4.21 3.09

A pattern of differences is evident between operational and support staff on all the hazard categories. As can be seen above, operational staff did not meet any of the benchmarks and the largest wellbeing gaps were in control (a gap of -.83) and being informed about change (a gap of -.54). In contrast, support staff exceeded four of the HSE benchmarks (demands, control, peer support, and relationships). The largest wellbeing gap for support staff was in being informed about change (a gap of -.15). However, some differences within groups were found; Station Managers (and above) and support managers (grade 9+) reported a higher level of demands than other staff and Firefighters and Watch Mangers reported a lower level of control than other staff. Firefighters and Watch Mangers also reported more problems with relationships at work and being less informed about change, especially compared to lower grade support staff (manager and non manager).

Lower grade support staff also reported more colleague and manager support, especially compared to Watch Managers.

89

11 | P a g e

3.2 Additional stressors & working for WYFRS

3.2.1 Additional stressors

A range of more job-specific stressors were also examined. Participants were asked to indicate how bothered they were by a range of issues using a scale ranging from 0 to 100. The highest rated stressor, for the group as a whole, was ‘financial strain due to inadequate pay’, which was rated just above the ‘somewhat bothered anchor’.

The highest rated stressors for operational staff were inadequate pay, observing the negative effects of stress on co-workers, exposure to an overly demanding colleague, isolation, poor diet, disruption of sleep and dislike of paperwork. These were all rated above the ‘somewhat bothered’ anchor.

For support staff, the highest rated stressors were inadequate pay, not being able to predict or control events, and exposure to an overly demanding colleague. For support staff no stressors were rated above the ‘somewhat bothered’ anchor. There were significant differences between operational and support staff on all but one of the stressors, with operational staff reporting significantly higher levels of stress than support staff.

3.2.2 Working for WYFRS (employee engagement)

Additional questions about working for WYFRS were included. Participants were asked to rate eight statements on a scale of 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree, such that a higher score denotes more positive perceptions of working for WYFRS. The chart below shows mean scores for operational and support staff for each statement. Support staff responses were generally just above the mid point of the response scale (i.e. on the agree side) whereas operational staff responses were generally just below the mid point of the response scale (i.e. on the disagree side). The difference in mean scores

90

12 | P a g e

between operational and support staff was significant for all statements, with support staff having a more positive perception of working for WYFRS on all items except ‘I feel secure in my job’.

3.3 Work Life Balance

3.3.1 Flexibility in Work Pattern

Participants were asked two questions: a) how hard would it be to get the days you work changed if you wanted to?; b) how hard would it be to get the hours you begin and end work changed if you wanted to? A four-point scale was used to rate both questions ranging from 1 = very easy to 4 = very difficult. Not surprisingly, a higher percentage of operational staff, compared to support staff, find it very difficult to get their working days and working hours changed.

3.3.2 Work Life Balance Culture

Several questions were asked relating to participants’ views about the work-life balance culture of the organisation. Participants were asked to rate statements on a scale of 1 = a great deal to 5 = not at all in relation to how they see the philosophy or beliefs of the organisation, not their own personal views. The overall mean score suggests that the organisation is seen as having a moderately supportive work-life balance culture. The difference in mean score between operational and support staff was significant with support staff perceiving a more supportive culture.

3.3.3 Work Life Balance from a Personal Perspective

Participants were asked about the extent to which their work life impacts negatively and positively on their home life. They were also asked about the extent to which their home life impacts negatively and positively on their work life.

91

13 | P a g e

The highest rated source of conflict is from work to personal life, particularly for operational staff; operational staff rated this type of conflict significantly higher than support staff. This is perhaps to be expected given most operational staff work shifts with little flexibility and support staff enjoy the benefits of flexi time. The average level of conflict from personal life to work was lower for both groups but still rated significantly higher for operational staff than support staff.

In relation to enhancement, both groups reported that their work enhanced their personal life to a moderate degree, whereas their personal life was generally considered to enhance their working life more extensively. Support staff reported significantly higher levels of work enhancing their personal life compared to operational staff.

Staff were also asked whether the FRS could do things to better support their work-life balance. Staff indicated that the fire service could perhaps do more to support work-life balance; this was particularly the case for operational staff. Staff provided a response to the question ‘What could the fire and rescue service do to better support your work life balance?’. These responses provide a good insight into some of the perceived barriers to a better work life balance.

3.3.4 Job Related Rumination

Rumination is where people dwell excessively on problems or negative events. Several questions were asked about the extent to which staff think about work during their personal time. Three aspects were considered: problem solving rumination – “I find solutions to work-related problems in my free time”; detachment rumination – “I make myself switch off from work as soon as I leave”; affective rumination – “I become fatigued by thinking about work during my free time”. Responses were given on a 5-point scale (1 = very seldom or never to 5 = very often or always). Note that affective rumination is negative, detachment is positive, and problem-solving rumination may also be a more positive strategy.

In general, there is some evidence that employees have problems switching off from work, but affective rumination (which is the most damaging type) is fairly low amongst WYFRS staff, although this is rated significantly higher in operational staff than support staff. Additionally support staff rated detachment rumination significantly higher than operational staff, indicating that support staff find it easier than operational staff to switch off from work.

3.4 Feelings About the Job

3.4.1 Job Satisfaction

Questions were asked about levels of job satisfaction. Job satisfaction was rated on a seven-point scale whereby 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree. Levels of job satisfaction were generally high (a group mean of 4.92) but support staff reported significantly higher satisfaction compared to operational staff.

3.4.2 Job Involvement

Job involvement was rated on a six-point scale where 1 = strongly disagree and 6 = strongly agree. Questions were phrased as statements, for example: “the most important things that happen to me involve my job” and “Most of my interests are centred around my job”. Levels of job involvement were moderate for both operational and support staff (group mean of 3.16). There were no significant differences found between operational and support staff.

92

14 | P a g e

3.4.3 Job Related Mood

Levels of job-related mood were examined. This scale assesses the extent to which employees feel anxious and depressed, and enthusiastic or content about their work. A six-point scale was used to assess job-related mood ranging from 1 = never to 6 = all of the time. Higher scores represent more job-related contentment and enthusiasm and lower scores more anxiety and depression.

In general, employees reported more enthusiasm and contentment than depression and anxiety, (mean score of 4.10 for depression/enthusiasm and 4.16 for anxiety/contentment). A significant difference was found on depression-enthusiasm with support staff reporting higher levels of enthusiasm than operational staff.

3.5 Health & lifestyle

3.5.1 Overall health

Levels of overall health were rated on a five-point scale ranging from 1 = poor to 5 = excellent. Self-reported health was generally good (i.e. more than 3.5 on a 5 point scale), with significantly higher levels being reported by operational staff.

3.5.2 Smoking

Just 6% of respondents indicated they smoked and of those, 47% smoked less than 10 per day.

3.5.3 Alcohol Consumption

Eighty-two percent of participants indicated that they drink alcohol. There were significant differences between operational and support staff, with operational staff being more likely to drink alcohol, and to consume more units of alcohol per week. Of those who drank alcohol, 15% of men drank more than the maximum recommended 21 units per week and 22% of women drank more than the maximum recommended 14 units per week.

3.5.4 Body Mass Index (BMI)

Participants’ body mass index (BMI) was calculated. 51% were categorised as overweight and 19% obese. No significant differences were found between operational and support staff in BMI levels.

3.5.5 Sleep

Two aspects of sleep were examined: duration and quality. 59% of participants rated their sleep quality as either “very good” or “fairly good” and 41% as either “fairly bad” or “very bad”. Sleep duration ranged from 2 to 9 hours, with a mean of 6.6 hours. Whilst there was no difference between operational and support staff in terms of sleep duration, operational staff reported that they had significantly poorer sleep quality, compared to support staff.

93

15 | P a g e

4 Conclusions

WYFRS, as an organisation, has not met any of the seven HSE benchmarks for the management of work-related stress, however, has very nearly met two of them; demands and peer support. The categories with the largest well-being gap are ‘control’ and ‘change’, which indicates that these should be prioritised to undertake more work to better understand the issues, with a view to identifying interventions in order to enhance staff wellbeing.

A pattern of differences emerged between operational and support staff with operational staff indicating lower levels of mental health & wellbeing on all except one issue. On the HSE Management Standards, operational staff reporting poorer well-being in all seven areas. Additionally, operational staff did not meet any of the HSE benchmarks; the largest wellbeing gaps for operational staff were in control (a gap of -.83) and being informed about change (a gap of -.54). This trend was also mirrored in the other areas examined such as work life balance and feelings about the job.

Support staff exceeded four of the seven HSE benchmarks (demands, control, peer support, and relationships). The largest wellbeing gap for support staff was in being informed about change (a gap of -.15), however significantly less so than operational staff.

There was a significant difference found in relation to job role & clarity, with support staff indicating far clearer understanding of their role and how it fitted into the wider overall aim of the organisation. This is surprising given the key role operational staff play in both response and prevention and the reasons as to why they feel unclear should be investigated further.

It should be noted that there was only a 25% response rate to the survey. Although this is comparable to the response rate from other fire and rescue services, this low response rate must be taken into account when drawing conclusions from the data. It is possible that the most dissatisfied staff were the most likely to respond to the survey.

In terms of intervention, priority should be given to operational staff, particularly in relation to levels of control, which are lower for Firefighters and Watch Managers compared to other staff, although this is perhaps to be expected given the nature of shift work and station routines. The additional control Station Managers and support managers (grade 9+) report may help protect them from the negative affects of the higher level of demands they also report compared to other staff. Firefighters and Watch Managers also report being the least informed about change and there were also some perceptions of relationship issues (e.g. occasional harassment and bullying), which appear to occur more in these two groups of staff. Overall, 18% of respondents indicated they were sometimes, often or always bullied at work. This compares to 10% in the 2009 survey and is of concern; the industrial action may account for this increase.

The HSE benchmarks are made up form a large number of different organisations including both private and public sector and whilst not a direct comparison, are recommended by the HSE as a general benchmark for all employers to compare themselves against.

More helpfully perhaps, the table below shows WYFRS’s scores alongside the average results of the other FRS’s who took part in the survey. It also shows the breakdown of operational and support staff. It also includes the results from a study of more than 1,700 police officers conducted by Houdmont et al. (2012). Please note that higher scores represent greater wellbeing.

A similar survey was undertaken in WYFRS in 2009. This survey was completed by 1043 (45%) staff compared to the 387 (24%) in the 2015 survey. The results of the 2009 survey are also included in the table below. The results are largely consistent with the results in

94

16 | P a g e

2009 which is encouraging, although with the exception of “control”, are all marginally lower scores. Analysis of the 2009 results identified “change” “role” and “control” as the three priorities, with 2 out of 3 of these are also identified as priorities within the 2015 survey.



Peer support


HSE benchmark

3.29 3.72 3.65 3.89 4.04 4.31 3.24

Average overall scores from other FRS’s

3.21 3.34 3.47 3.74 3.95 4.10 3.02

WYFRS overall

3.25 3.24 3.38 3.80 3.76 4.12 2.84

WYFRS overall (2009)

3.45 3.20 3.67 3.93 4.05 4.28 2.88

WYFRS operational staff

3.18 2.89 3.28 3.72 3.60 4.05 2.70

Average operational staff from other FRS’s

3.15 3.13 3.41 3.68 3.81 4.02 2.88

WYFRS support staff

3.38 3.87 3.58 3.95 4.04 4.21 3.09

Average support staff from other FRS’s

3.33 3.81 3.63 3.86 4.09 4.15 3.33

Police survey 2.90 2.98 3.25 3.60 3.87 4.00 2.45

Several additional stressors were examined that relate to the job context. The highest rated stressor, for the group as a whole, was ‘financial strain due to inadequate pay’, which was rated just above the ‘somewhat bothered anchor’. In general, support staff were less stressed than operational staff.

Not surprisingly, compared to support staff, operational staff perceived their working hours and days to be less flexible. Overall, the organisation is seen as having a moderately supportive work-life balance culture, with more positive perceptions of this culture among support staff. Operational staff tended to perceive a moderate degree of work-life conflict – this was generally lower for support staff, especially in relation to work interfering with personal life. Overall, respondents indicated that the service is moderately supportive of their work-life balance, but perhaps could do a little more in this area. This was particularly the case for operational staff, who were significantly more likely to agree that the FRS could do things to better support their work-life balance.

Some evidence was found that employees may have some problems switching off from work, but affective rumination (the most damaging type of rumination, where people worry about work related issues outside work) is fairly low. However, support staff reported significantly less rumination and more detachment than operational staff, indicating that support staff find it easier than operational staff to switch off from work. The ability to switch off from work is a key quality to ensure wellbeing. Worrying about work during free time can

95

17 | P a g e

have serious implications for health over the long term, as this can impair recovery processes and cause physical and emotional fatigue. Some staff may need advice on how to ‘switch off’. Various strategies such as exercise, meditation, reading etc. can be helpful.

Levels of job satisfaction were generally high but were again higher among support staff. In general, staff reported more enthusiasm and contentment about their work than depression and anxiety.

Self-reported overall health was generally good for both operational and support staff and in this case it was actually higher for operational staff. However, a minority of staff (19%) are consuming more than the recommended number of units of alcohol per week and alcohol consumption is higher among operational staff. Finally, a fairly high proportion of participants (70%) are either overweight or obese.

5 Recommendations

It is recommended that the Employee Engagement Working Group are tasked with undertaking further analysis of the results of the survey and producing recommendations to improve the mental health & wellbeing of WYFRS staff.

96

18 | P a g e

97

Human Resources Activity Report€¦ · 12000 14000 16000 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to date Cert. LT...

Documents

Transcript of Human Resources Activity Report€¦ · 12000 14000 16000 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 to date Cert. LT...