Can anyone clarify how many new matter starts one F/T worker would be expected to open per year for Debt? Would this be the same amount for WB cases or more? We are having some debate in the office on this subject!
Post by Richard Wilkinson on Oct 28, 2010 8:49:11 GMT
Hi Chesterman
This age old question will never leave us i suspect. My perspective is probably the one that no one wants to hear. Populartiy has never been my strong point.....
Whilst you might want to set some minimum standards to enable the organisation to function and balance the books, fundamentally the whole of your organisation needs to strive to do as many as possible whilst having regard to the other standrds that need to be met (SQM, peer review...you know the deal). This will a) provide as much help to as many clients as possible b) help maintain organisational income which in turn helps maintain jobs and thus protects service delivery. The LSC capacities ratios muddied the waters somewhat in my view.
Moreover I am not convinced that having that having targets as matter of routine is the most effective way to deliver services to clients (save in exceptional circumstances where contracts are in big big trouble). I may stand alone a little here- its a much bigger topic than can be fully discussed on here. Of course it maybe neccessary to put individuals on a performance management regime form time to time to support them in focussing on what needs to be done- as its easy to lose site sometimes.
Thats just my take on it. Would be good to here many other perspectives
With no supervisory duties, file reviews or other crud, sorry, essential quality control. I would have used to have said a fully competent debt worker at 240 to 280 pa, and a fully competent benefit worker at 260 to 300pa.
However, in the light of being able to do less short work in welfare benefits as a result of stewardshp reviews, I'd view them now as more equaly so WB in the range of 240 to 280.
once you start asking your LSC workers to do all the other attendant stuff, targets and capacity vary wildly.
I agree with last post what he used to say IE up to 300 WB 240 Debt is about right bearing in mind that cases are now longer with more appeals in WB but the matter starts have not reduced.
Its common sense that experienced case workers will, and should, do more than new ones and that other considerations can change this.
BUT Halloween is near so
Beware the ghost of other peoples LSC ignorance and resource greed. They will pinch your resources for other areas of the organisation making your life much more difficult particularly admin.
Be very tight on proof of income case splitting to avoid the most horrid and feared ghost of finacial stewardship. If you are haunted by this goul you could spend lots of time repairing any damage that it inflicts.
But welcome the ghost of targets and reviews because if these fail your problem of case load will evaporate along with jobs, like a ghost, with your reduced matter allocation.
I was once party to a conversation that other caseworkers should pick up the slack when some case workers did not meet targets. After spraying the person who uttered this comment with coffee and a half eaten fairy cake, i had to differ as to why should someone work 18 hours a day whilst others had their feet oin the dsk throwing paper airoplanes at the bin.
It is one thing to change allocation based on experience, or if someone was ill or such like, but to have a none paying fellow traveller on your contract bus is asking for a fair dodging fine when the LSC inspector gets on board.
