Staff sickness costing Bucks Council over £350,000 a month

A recent council report revealed absence levels rose over summer, after months of improvement.

The report's finding that staff staff sick days are costing Buckinghamshire Council £378,000 a month were discussed at a recent finance and resources select committee meeting, with members questioning the financial impact of the figure. 

The same document showed sickness absence reached a rolling annual average of 8.23 days per full-time equivalent employee in August.That remained below the council’s target of 8.5 days, but marked an increase after the average stayed below eight days between December 2025 and June 2026.

Corporate director for resources Sarah Murphy-Brookman confirmed the £378,000 sickness absence figure was monthly after councillors sought clarification. Asked whether the figure was monthly or annual, she simply said: “It is a monthly figure.”

The report said the cost represented 2.44 per cent of the council’s total workforce costs.

Committee chairman Cllr Jackson Ng questioned the financial impact, saying: “£378,000 per month is roughly about £4.5 million [a year] that the council seems to be wasting or not saving in relation to staffing costs.”

Murphy-Brookman said the council was not complacent about sickness absence. She explained that reducing sickness absence restored capacity to deliver services. Senior managers examine sickness figures every month, while detailed reviews look at individual cases and identify where action is needed.

The report suggested excessive summer heat partly contributed to the recent increase.

It also highlighted a setback in adult social care after a substantial improvement. Sickness absence there fell from 15.28 days per full-time equivalent employee in January 2025 to 9.68 days in February 2026. However, a subsequent increase of 1.97 days prompted a targeted improvement plan aimed at strengthening managers’ handling of absence cases.

Across the council, revised processes set out clearer timelines for conversations and meetings when employees are off sick. Managers and staff are expected to speak daily during the first week of absence, followed by weekly contact. Reviews should make employees aware of wellbeing support and consider reasonable adjustments to help them return to work. Occupational health referrals are made as soon as possible to provide professional advice on managing longer absences.

Murphy-Brookman said reviews had identified cases where managers had delayed starting formal procedures through what she described as compassionate management. She said a consistent approach was needed so employees were treated equally and fairly.

Councillors also sought clarification about other types of absence, including compassionate leave.

HR service director Vicki Oliver confirmed the report’s absence figures covered sickness, rather than all reasons staff might be away from work.

Members requested further information on those other categories, with Cllr Robert Carington stressing that the £378,000 figure related specifically to sickness absence.