WDSC???



It's cheaper to bring in agency staff if and when needed instead of employing permanent staff on proper contracts.

Apparently.
 
WHD said:
It's cheaper to bring in agency staff if and when needed instead of employing permanent staff on proper contracts.

Apparently.
Click to expand...
Short term it is more effective because you can get rid of the backlog then sack them off when it becomes manageable.

Over £7m worth seems like an insane amount though.

It feels like a vicious cycle. Cuts mean you're understaffed, people are over worked, they go off with long term stress, you are even more understaffed.

You hire agency staff to cover the shortfall, they end up costing a bomb longer term because you need to keep them since you were understaffed to start with, you also blew you wad on agency staff so can you fuck afford to hire permanent staff members.
 
"Together for Children began delivering children’s services on behalf of Sunderland City Council in April 2017 and has an active and on-going social worker recruitment programme.
"Seventy-two new permanent members of staff have joined Together for Children since the company launched in April, 44 of these in social care, with another 11 due to start by the end of January.

That sounds/reads like another Gentoo
 
I suppose one of the key questions is how many social workers have they had and how much of the near £8m have they had in wages and how much of the money has been retained by the company?
Just simple maths indicates a huge amount of social workers or the council has been bent over to a massive degree. 50 social workers at say a reasonably high wage of 50k a year each only comes in at £2.5m leaving another £5.5m for backroom staff;)....and I'm guessing sunderland doesn't have 50 social workers!
Also I assume since the top fella has 'resigned' there won't be a massive payoff?
 
Boz33 said:
I suppose one of the key questions is how many social workers have they had and how much of the near £8m have they had in wages and how much of the money has been retained by the company?
Just simple maths indicates a huge amount of social workers or the council has been bent over to a massive degree. 50 social workers at say a reasonably high wage of 50k a year each only comes in at £2.5m leaving another £5.5m for backroom staff;)....and I'm guessing sunderland doesn't have 50 social workers!
Also I assume since the top fella has 'resigned' there won't be a massive payoff?
Click to expand...
I assume those temp workers are on day rates a lot higher than a council social worker.
 
It’s up until April this year, covered a real bad period after the OFSTED, it’s really difficult for LA’s to attract social workers on a permanent basis when they are effectively in special measures. I think next years figures will be better.
 
janey said:
It’s up until April this year, covered a real bad period after the OFSTED, it’s really difficult for LA’s to attract social workers on a permanent basis when they are effectively in special measures. I think next years figures will be better.
Click to expand...
Depends on the pay off for the ex boss Janey?
 
the boot said:
Depends on the pay off for the ex boss Janey?
Click to expand...
Agreed, it was more the agency costs I was referring to

EchoMan said:
Do we know who owns the agency?
Click to expand...
It isn’t one agency, there are loads of Social Work agencies, LA’s advertise for SW and then they are put forward to a central system by their agency. They are interviewed or not/appointed or not.

DisillusionedOldGit said:
Possibly something like ; agency bungs someone £1,000,000, someone awards massively overpriced contract to agency .
Click to expand...
It doesn’t work like that, there are loads of Social Workers from different agencies.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top