4 Employer engagement
61. Encouraging employers to recruit long-term
unemployed people will be a key factor in improving the job outcome
performance of the Work Programme. We initially received no written
submissions from employers but we were very keen to hear their
views on the Work Programme as a potential recruitment partner.
We approached a number of employers and employers' organisations
which have a track-record of promoting the employment of long-term
and disadvantaged jobseekers. This chapter examines the Work Programme's
effectiveness in engaging with employers and sets out some examples
of best practice.
How willing are employers to
recruit the long-term unemployed?
62. Some witnesses believed that few employers
are willing to consider recruiting long-term jobseekers who may
face challenges in adapting to the workplace.[53]
Papworth Trust, a Work Programme subcontractor in the east of
England, wrote:
A major barrier for our clients is that employers
often seek "ready-made" employees who are proficient
in their role with minimum training, support, cost or perceived
risk to the employer. Extra support or training is viewed as inconvenient,
time consuming and costly.[54]
Similarly, the UK Council on Deafness believed that
deaf and other disabled people face "attitudinal barriers
at work" and mental health organisations highlighted research
by Shaw Trust which found that 40% of employers view employees
with mental health problems as a "significant risk".[55]
Cymorth Cymru also raised concerns about employers' perceptions
of some groups of unemployed people, particularly ex-offenders.[56]
Providers we spoke to in Brent believed that negative media coverage
may have dissuaded some employers from engaging with the Work
Programme.
"Repositioning" employers
63. We sought evidence from the Business Disability
Forum (BDF), an employers' membership organisation, one of whose
aims is to facilitate the recruitment of disabled people. BDF
believes that two key changes are required if the Work Programme
is to effectively support large numbers of long-term unemployed
disabled people into sustained employment. Firstly, employers
must be repositioned from "problem"—people whose
attitudes must be changed—to "valued end user, customer
and potential partner". Secondly the "disability-to-work
supply chain" needs to be streamlined, equipping and supporting
employers and making it easier for them to recruit disabled people
on the basis of their capabilities.[57]
64. Susan Scott-Parker, BDF's Chief Executive
Officer, felt that Work Programme providers were not sufficiently
aware of initiatives such as Access to Work, a DWP-funded scheme
which supports disabled people in work by providing practical
support to overcome work-related obstacles resulting from their
disability. The scheme contributes to costs which go beyond the
"reasonable adjustments" which employers are obliged
to provide under the Equality Act. Access to Work supported 30,780
disabled people in 2011/12, of whom 10,000 were new recipients.[58]
The Government recently announced its intention to "strengthen
and improve" the scheme.[59]
65. BDF argued that it was fundamentally important
that providers understood employers' recruitment processes in
order to facilitate the employment of disadvantaged jobseekers
such as disabled people. Susan Scott-Parker highlighted work BDF
had done with the National Autistic Society, for example:
[...] they brought us 50 CVs, so that we could see
the talent and the qualifications and what they were interested
in, and then we brought a group of companies together that we
knew in the next year or two were likely to have jobs to match.
[...] We learned that the job interview disadvantaged many of
these individuals, and so the members agreed to do work trials.
We have had hundreds of people with Asperger's find work as a
result of bringing the demand from the employer together with
the supply of candidates in a structured and systematic way [...].[60]
66. We also heard evidence from Timpson, the
well-known high street shoe repairing and key-cutting company.
For eight years, Timpson has been running a scheme offering work
experience and jobs to prison-leavers. It works with around 80
prisons, interviewing prisoners with a view to employing them
or offering work experience placements on release. In recent years
the scheme has been supplemented by prison-based Timpson "academies",
in which prisoners can learn the skills required to work in Timpson's
branches. Timpson's charitable foundation also funds pre-release
support, helping prisoners make plans for housing, family support
and a job on release. Timpson currently has 235 prison leavers
in its organisation, 142 of whom are in full-time paid jobs.[61]
Gouy Hamilton-Fisher, Timpson's Head of People Services (HR),
told us that there was a strong business case, as well as a corporate
responsibility case, for recruiting ex-offenders. After he had
helped set up Timpson's prison-leavers scheme, he "could
not believe how blind we had been to a wider recruitment pool."[62]
Work Programme providers' approaches
to employer engagement
67. During our visit to St Mungo's, its employment
services staff told us that establishing good relationships with
employers was sometimes problematic. However, they emphasised
that they had managed to establish effective partnerships with
a number of sympathetic employers. In St Mungo's experience it
was often more productive to approach small and medium-sized businesses
but they also noted that some large retailers, for example Debenhams
and John Lewis, had a good track record of recruiting disadvantaged
jobseekers, including homeless people, and providing opportunities
for career progression.
68. We received relatively little detailed comment
from Work Programme providers on strategies for engaging employers.
Some believed that having more than one prime in each CPA had
led to confusion. For example, Wheatsheaf Trust told us that:
[...] we have put in a considerable amount of work
over the last 5 or 6 years, alongside Jobcentre Plus and the local
authority, to get all the agencies working in the employment and
skills arena to co-operate, particularly in approaches to employers.
Because providers are now in direct competition with each other
for outcome payments and with Jobcentre Plus for the few available
vacancies, this co-ordinated approach is falling apart and employers
are already getting frustrated with a number of multiple approaches
from different agencies chasing their vacancies.[63]
3SC, a consortium of third sector subcontractors,
highlighted instances of positive impact on job outcomes through
primes working together to create regional employer engagement
strategies.[64]
69. Our discussion with local stakeholders in
Brent suggested that primes are not routinely calling on the knowledge
and expertise of local authorities, many of which have close relationships
with local employers. The Director of Regeneration and Major Projects
for Brent Council told us that none of the three primes operating
in his area had contacted him directly for advice on employers'
upcoming recruitment needs, despite the council's track record
of close collaboration with local employers and its own position
as one of Brent's largest employers.
70. A4e believed that the length of the current
Work Programme contracts—seven years in total—would
allow primes to foster stronger links with local employers over
time and to develop an understanding of employers' long-term recruitment
plans. It told us it intended to help Work Programme participants
to gain skills required not just within specific local sectors
but also for specific roles with specific employers.[65]
71. However, the employers we heard evidence
from reported a mixed experience of recruiting from the Work Programme.
Timpson and Transport for London had both had some poor experiences.
For example, Timpson had been looking to recruit people from the
Work Programme but of the 12 people put forward by the provider
only one had proved suitable. The remaining 11 either "did
not arrive for work" and had to be chased up or were "very
poorly prepared". Gouy Hamilton-Fisher's impression was that
eight "had not had any preparation whatsoever". He believed
that this experience demonstrated that Work Programme providers
were not focusing sufficiently on matching suitable jobseekers
to specific vacancies. Susan Scott-Parker's view was that this
experience was common. She felt that too often the providers played
a pure "numbers game", "randomly" pushing
jobseekers towards vacancies in the hope that "a few stick".[66]
72. The most positive example of Work Programme
employer engagement we heard about was Transport for London's
(TfL) systematic engagement with all six primes operating in the
capital. TfL works with its supply chain partners to identify
upcoming job vacancies and the primes then collaborate to provide
suitable candidates from the Work Programme. A single Work Programme
Coordinator (WPC) is funded by the six primes and is "embedded"
within TfL to identify suitable vacancies and to ensure that the
recruitment processes run smoothly. Working closely together in
this way helps the primes to understand fully the business requirements
of TfL's suppliers. The WPC coordinates feedback between TfL,
suppliers and the primes and also monitors candidates' job retention.
TfL started the scheme as a pilot in January 2012. In its first
year of operation, it achieved 112 job starts across 12 TfL suppliers.[67]
Andrea Fozard, TfL's Supplier Skills Project Manager, told us
that the WPC role had been crucial in ironing out early problems,
including candidates being poorly prepared. She believed that
close collaborative working had enabled some of the primes subsequently
to provide "a fantastic service".[68]
73. We believe that providers
should do more to prepare jobseekers for real vacancies and should
desist from simply deluging employers with a random selection
of CVs and poorly prepared candidates. Excellent examples exist
of employers engaging effectively with Work Programme providers,
in particular Transport for London's systematic engagement with
all six primes operating in the capital. We recommend that DWP
and the Employment Related Services Association (ERSA) encourage
approaches such as these.
74. General awareness of
the Work Programme amongst employers appears to be low. We recommend
that DWP work with the welfare-to-work industry to promote the
Work Programme to employers as a potentially effective recruitment
partner and that DWP and ERSA produce a national action plan for
engaging employers in the Work Programme before the end of 2013.
75. At a regional level evidence
suggests that collaborative approaches, where providers work together
to create employer engagement strategies, are most effective.
At a local level, providers should make effective use of the experience
and contacts of local stakeholders, for example by meeting regularly
with local authorities and local business groups such as Chambers
of Commerce, to identify employers' recruitment needs and prepare
Work Programme participants for identified future vacancies.
53 See, for example, Ms M J Canning, Ev w18, para 2 Back
54
Ev w64 Back
55
Ev w18; Ev 137 Back
56
Ev w30 Back
57
Ev 115 Back
58
DWP, Access to Work: Official Statistics, April 2013; See
also, A review to Government by Liz Sayce, Getting in, staying
in and getting on: Disability employment support fit for the future,
June 2011, p 14 Back
59
HC Deb, 19 November 2012, cols 23-26WS Back
60
Q 407 Back
61
Ev 161 Back
62
Q 444 Back
63
Ev 164 Back
64
Ev w82 Back
65
Ev w2 Back
66
Q 407 Back
67
Ev 162 Back
68
Q 447 Back
| 
