Meeting documents

Apologies of absence were received from Mary Baldwin, Tim Butcher and Richard Scott.

To declare any personal or prejudicial interests.

There were no declarations of interest.

Contributors

• Peter Hardy, Chairman of the Examination of the Recruitment Contract Task and Finish Group

Purpose

·   Members of the Task and Finish Group will consider the objectives, both financial and operational as set out in the ‘New Ways of Recruiting Contract’ R03.09

Papers

• Cabinet Member Decision – ‘New Ways of Recruiting Contract’ R03.09

The Chairman of the Task and Finish Group welcomed Members to the meeting. Members considered the Cabinet Member Decision - ‘New Ways of Recruiting Contract’ R03.09.

Contributors

• Peter Hardy, Chairman of the Examination of the Recruitment Contract Task and Finish Group

Purpose

The Chairman of the Task and Finish Group will outline the purpose of the Task and Finish Group, including the background, aims and the reporting process. Members are invited to agree the scope for the review, particularly with a view to defining the anticipated outcomes. Evidence gathering meetings have been planned for October and November. Members may wish to discuss who they would like to attend these and any further written information that they require.

Papers

• Examination of the Recruitment Contract Draft Scoping Document

The Chairman said he had received some written observations from a Member. The observations were as follows:

·         How did the Hays contract turn into a 10 year contract when it was initially a 3 year contract?

·         How many people have been recruited since the start of the contract?

·         How efficient is the contract?

·         The views of the users of the contract should be sought

·         Are the customers satisfied with the contract

·         What is the cost of the contract to the Council

·         What is the saving of the contract to the Council

·         Who monitors the KPIs of the contract.

·         The KPIs are too complicated

·         The staff who were transferred by TUPE – are they still in place or have they been made redundant.

·         The IT was to be put place by Hays – does it work?

The Chairman was asked if the cost of performance and cost would be split between permanent and temporary staff.  The Chairman said he felt this was necessary.  A Member said that it was important to assess the customer’s views in the first instance to see if the contract was operating well for them. It was suggested that meetings with service heads from key departments be arranged. It was hoped that these meetings could be arranged prior to the next meeting of the Task and Finish Group.

Members discussed that there was likely to be a response around the fact that the view of recruitment in 2008 when the contract specification was considered was very different to the current market. Members also discussed how the cost of the contract was made up and queried if there had been an improvement in the process. The Chairman advised that the role of the Task and Finish Group was not to re-write the contract but to see if the contract objectives had been met.

The Chairman highlighted that there is a financial model and said that Members should consider if the projections have been met. A Member commented that the focus should be on performance and if the costings were as they ought to be. In response the Chairman said that Members may want to receive a written report on how the contract is operating. Members discussed the contract and it was commented that the contract is for 10 years but that there are break points in the contract. The next break point is April 2011. It was highlighted that Hays do not receive a management fee but operates under a ‘pay as you go’ type service.

A Member raised concern that if the County Council wanted to save money why did they attach to an agency. It was commented that many people are seeking employment and that there might have been cheaper options. The group was advised that the concept of the modern supply chain management means only payment of one invoice and that this process provides savings. It was commented that one incentive to contract out recruitment may have been if the County Council had struggled to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Contributors

• Peter Hardy, Chairman of the Examination of the Recruitment Contract Task and Finish Group

Purpose

The Chairman of the Task and Finish Group will update Members on findings so far from his own examination of the recruitment contract with Hays.

Papers

• None

This item was discussed under the previous agenda item.

The next meeting of the Task and Finish Group will be on Tuesday 26 October 2010, 10am, Mezzanine Room1, County Hall.

23 November 2010, 10am, Mezzanine Room 1, County Hall.

To resolve to exclude the press and public as the following item is exempt by virtue of Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12a of the Local Government Act 1972 because it contains information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

RESOLVED

That the press and public be excluded for the following item which is exempt by virtue of Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12a of the Local Government Act 1972 because it contains information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

Contributors

• Peter Hardy, Chairman of the Examination of the Recruitment Contract Task and Finish Group

Purpose

Members are invited to consider the confidential appendices to the Cabinet Member Decision, ‘New Ways of Recruiting Contract’, R03.09

Papers

• Appendix 2 ISFT Evaluation Report
• Appendix 2a Finance Evaluation Report
• Appendix 2b
• Appendix 2c ISFT Evaluation scores
• Appendix 3  Resource and Property Implications
• Appendix 4 Summary of Potential Costs

Members considered the confidential appendices from the Cabinet Member Decision - ‘New Ways of Recruiting Contract’ R03.09