1 The levels and cost of sickness absence
1. In 2001-2002 almost 40,000 working days were lost
due to sickness absence in Roads Service and Water Service. This
is an average of 20 days per employee or almost 9% of available
working days. This compares with an average of 12 days in the
industrial Civil Service in Great Britain and comparisons with
a range of public and private sector organisations in Northern
Ireland and Great Britain indicate that both Agencies are at the
higher end of the range.[2]
Benchmarking undertaken by Water and Roads Services confirms this,
indicating much lower levels of absence in comparable organisations.[3]
Absence has reduced somewhat since the C&AG's Report, to an
average of 17 days per employee in 2003-2004, however, at over
three working weeks per person, this is still disgracefully high
and clearly a huge step change in the management of absence is
required to reduce this to an acceptable level.[4]
2. The C&AG has estimated that sickness absence
in Water and Roads Services is costing around £2 million
a year in direct costs alone and reducing absence to the same
level as the industrial Civil Service in Great Britain could save
£840,000 a year. These estimates do not take into account
indirect costs such as overtime, staff time spent in the management
of absence or loss of productivity and the Cabinet Office suggested
that the damage caused through sickness absence is closer to twice
the level indicated by direct costs alone.[5]
3. We were told that the level of medical retirements
in the Northern Ireland Civil Service is comparable to the rest
of the United Kingdom at around five retirements each year per
1000 employees.[6] In contrast
the DRD industrial workforce, with 34 retirements in 2001-2002
among only 2000 staff, has a rate which is three times higher
and which has risen steadily in recent years to a point where
medical retirements account for 60% of all retirements[7].
Medical retirements generate very significant additional costs
to the taxpayer because pensions are paid earlier than normal
and at enhanced rates. The Department of Finance and Personnel
estimate that additional costs of £17.6 million were accrued
due to medical retirements in the Northern Ireland Civil Service
in 2003-2004 alone.[8]
4. It is simply not credible that levels of medical
retirement are so much higher among DRD industrials than the rest
of the population. It seems more likely that the very lucrative
retirement package available, coupled with very poorly applied
controls over sickness absence, have created a situation in which
early retirement on medical grounds is becoming the norm rather
than the exception. It may also be the case that medical retirement
is being used inappropriately to get rid of bad attenders rather
than pursuing dismissal on grounds of inefficiency.[9]
This is expensive both in its own right, due to the high cost
of medical retirement and because of the incentive it provides
to take long periods of sickness absence.
5. The Department is confident that rigorous application
of inefficiency procedures which was absent in the past will result
in a reduction in the level of medical retirements in future and
there is some indication that this is beginning to happen. However,
it is indicative of the Department's failure to address the whole
issue of absence seriously, that it does not know what an acceptable
level of medical retirements would be or when it could be achieved.[10]
We recommend that the Department establishes specific time limited
targets for reducing medical retirements in line with comparable
public sector organisations.
2 C&AG's Report, paras 1.1, 1.8 and Figure 4 Back
3
ibid, para 1.6; Qq 6, 46-47, 135; Ev 20 Back
4
Qq 41-43 Back
5
C&AG's Report, paras 1.12-1.15 Back
6
Q 156 Back
7
C&AG's Report, para 4.22 Back
8
ibid, para 4.23; Q 133; Ev 20 Back
9
Q 156 Back
10
Qq 17-24, 33 Back
| 
