Branch Briefing DWP/BB/188/14 gave details of the Group Executive Committee (GEC) demands put to DWP management as part of the Group Campaign Plan. One of the GEC objectives in the talks we are seeking with management is that – “Minimum Expectation Levels in the benefits directorate are suspended pending proper consultation with PCS on benchmarks.” PCS opposition to increased benchmarks/minimum expectation levels is part of the Group Campaign Plan. This briefing gives in interim report and advice to branches.
Benchmark
levels are an average and should be measured as such with the variation in the
complexity of decisions. However there
is a great deal of pressure on individuals on a daily basis. This is increasing
their stress levels by ignoring the fact that decision rates will vary.
Recently
PIP management raised the benchmark for PIP decisions from 3-4 to 7-9 a day.
PCS were already concerned about the pressure on PIP staff before the changes
in benchmarks because of the lack of staff in this area of work.
Management
recently told PCS that these benchmarks were now achievable and that all sites
were producing 7 a day or more. They stated that more streamlining of the
process, more empowerment of decision makers, more support in reaching the
target and the introduction of the new RFD tool made the increased benchmark
possible.
However,
feedback from reps at the recent PIP meeting was that the new RFD tool was
cumbersome and hindered decision making rather than making it faster. IT was
generally regarded as poor.
The
reps also reported that at some offices they were not allowed to count “failed
to attend” decisions as part of the daily benchmark.
Whilst
there have been some improvements to the tools available to staff PCS wish to
monitor how well these tools are working in practice and what problems members
are experiencing. Please let your local
reps know about any issues that you have so they can be raised with management.
Targets v Quality
PCS
remain concerned about the pressure on existing staff and the culture that has
developed seeming to only concentrate on quantity rather than the quality of
the service that we are providing to the public. This does not seem to fit at all with the
Operations wide emphasis on quality.
The
Quality Project has been set up to look at ways to reduce pressure by getting
work right first time, giving full details to the public to reduce mandatory
reconsiderations and appeals and avoiding rework and errors which are more time
consuming than initially spending time getting the work right.
Increasing
pressure on staff does not necessarily lead to increased productivity as the
increase in stress can have a detrimental impact on staff’s health and
well-being.
Members
report constant pressure to meet the targets: pulse points where staff are
informed of output several times a day still take place in some offices. Daily
status reports are issued and frequent performance telekits take place.
Noel
Shanahan made it clear that the targets should not lead to perverse behaviours
which can actually prevent us from providing a quality service.
“We must never let a target stop us from
doing the right thing for our customers. Let’s be clear – we’re not going to
get rid of targets. We’re a delivery organisation, we are in the results
business so we have to have a way of measuring what we do and setting expectations.
There are cases that require more time,
and we shouldn’t be afraid to give that to them. If you think that this is not
happening locally then please speak up through your line management chain.”
In
practise, members feel under such pressure that they have no option but to cut
corners and produce poor quality decisions. We encourage all members to report
undue pressure on them to local reps as well as examples of how targets are
preventing them from providing a quality service to the public.
Band B Benchmarks
At the
recent PIP reps meeting we received feedback that Band B benchmarks varied with
the type of work being undertaken but were also generally regarded as being too
high. Undue pressure on the Customer Service Section was also reported. PCS are
interested in having any feedback on these issues.
Other Feedback
We
would also welcome feedback from Branches about the levels of sickness absence
in the PIP sites and the level of mandatory reconsiderations that are requested
for PIP decisions. Please send any comments to Alison Carass at Group Office.
PCS
will continue to raise all of these issues with Management and strenuously
challenge unfair and unreasonable benchmarks. Members will be consulted on the
outcome of talks.
Alison Carass
Group
Executive Committee
