Pressure and CRB checks
December 4, 2008
The horrific case of Baby P and the failures of Haringey Council’s social care services to identify the ongoing physical abuse that had been inflicted on him, leading to his death, has been an extremely prominent news item in the last few weeks. Three members of the council have been suspended, and there have been calls for senior social and care services personnel to resign.
Now, a report that was commissioned by Ed Balls, children’s commissioner and carried out by Ofsted, the Healthcare Commission and HM Inspectorate of Constabulary has found that the process of gaining CRB checks for staff working in social healthcare for the local authority is unclear, and described it as ‘not good practice’. It seems that some staff have been working before their CRB checks have been completed, possibly without supervision. The report also said that the fact that the council relies heavily on agency staff is a problem because children need continuity in the support they receive, which is not provided with different agency staff all the time.
The issue of gaining CRB (Criminal Record Bureau) checks for staff can cause difficulties for some organisations. Many services, such as in social care, should not be provided without first gaining a check on a member of staff, but with major resourcing problems and the fact that a CRB can take weeks to come back, it’s no wonder some organisations feel as though they need to cut corners and let staff work before they are properly checked, because they simply have to provide staff to support the service users. In a previous role I worked for a provider of social care, and contracted employees were not allowed to start work before their CRB check was returned, as well as two satisfactory employment references. However this did cause issues with insufficient numbers of support workers, and this meant that the company was forced to rely heavily on agency workers on a constant basis.
I think the failures of Haringey Council in this case are appalling, but it’s important to remember that social services across country do a fantastic job the on the whole. I think the services are portrayed pretty badly in the media, with news stories always focussing on the negatives and characters on film and TV always portrayed in a really awful way. It’s a difficult job to provide a continuous and consistent service as well as keeping security and safety standards as high as are needed, and I think it would be a good start if the amount of time it takes for a CRB check to be returned could be reduced. Last time I applied for one it was at least three months before I received the paperwork.
Child protection is a constant job for providers of care and support services, and it is necessary for service providers to constantly review their processes and procedures, so that another horrendous case such as Baby P doesn’t happen again. However it needs to be recognised that this is a very difficult job, and more media attention should be given to the successes of support providers as well as the failures.
Dealing with survivor syndrome
December 2, 2008
With more and more large scale redundancies being announced each day, it’s clear what the main challenge for HR practitioners is at the moment and will be in the coming months. But whilst dealing with the redundancy process is hard enough, the challenge does not stop when this process has ended and the employees unfortunate enough to lose their jobs have left the company.
Dubbed ‘survivor guilt’, the main problem HR will have to deal with will be the loss of morale in remaining employees after a redundancy process has taken place. It is claimed by HR experts that this is a big contributor to productivity losses in a time when motivation and high productivity are needed most. Seeing close colleagues leave, and then staying in contact afterwards can leave existing employees emotionally damaged, especially if they know the ex-employee is struggling to find new employment. In addition, if the employer hasn’t been fully open in the time leading up to the redundancies, e.g. saying that no jobs will be lost when it must have been known that there would be, this can lead the survivors to lose trust in the employer going forward, which is another morale and productivity killer.
I was speaking to my GP the other day and he was saying that his workload has increased in recent months due to the increase in stress and depression related illnesses caused by the economic difficulties in the country. Recently experts have found that people who keep their jobs after redundancy processes have taken place are almost as likely to suffer from stress and depression as those who have been made redundant, so a lot needs to be done to protect the mental health of employees who remain in the company after redundancy and restructure exercises have taken place.
One of the key ways to avoid this problem is to approach any possible change processes, including redundancy and restructure, in a completely honest and open way. Whilst secrecy may seem like the appropriate approach initially to avoid panic and de-motivation, in the long run employees will appreciate being given the truth and the opportunity to comment and ask questions as early as possible. Another good idea is to organise coaching and counselling sessions with surviving employees after the redundancies have been made. It’s never going to be easy for anyone to just think ‘oh well’ and move on after the shock of losing a number of colleagues, and employers should not ignore this fact.
If you are going through this process at the moment or have done recently, I’d love to hear form you so leave a comment below.
Get ready for the new code
December 1, 2008
A few weeks ago Business Secretary Lord Mandelson approved the revised ACAS code of practice, which is to be brought in on 6th April 2009, to replace the current code and statutory dispute resolution procedures, which is being repealed next year.
The new code is aimed at being a more straightforward way of dealing with workplace disputes, and will hopefully reduce the amount of disputes reaching the Employment Tribunal, which was also the aim of the statutory procedures. Unfortunately the procedures, introduced in October 2004, have only made things worse by over-complicating the system and meaning that if the procedures aren’t followed to the letter, seemingly fair dismissals can actually be found to be unfair for procedural reasons.
The new code of practice won’t be statutory, but tribunals will use it to assess the process followed in handling a workplace dispute, and if an employer has unreasonably failed to comply with the code, the tribunal will be able to uplift any awards made by up to 25%.
Whilst this is a good move and I’m looking forward to being released from the stressful shackles of the statutory procedures, it’s going to be a big job to ensure everyone involved in workplace disputes is made aware of and trained on the new code of practice. The change in process and legal system will mean that the last four years of case law will be practically worthless and we’ll have to wait and see what new tribunal cases bring to shape and further develop the new code of practice. This is something all employers will need really good legal advice on, and I would strongly urge HR professionals to seek legal support and training in time for the changes in April next year.