MPs have backed a plan enabling the government to regulate the use of agency staff in local authority children’s services.
The committee scrutinising the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill affirmed the measure, without any dissent, in a debate on the legislation yesterday (28 January).
However, opposition members raised concerns about the provision exacerbating workforce shortages in children’s social care and questioned what the government was doing to attract more people into permanent roles.
What is the government proposing on agency work?
- Clause 18 of the bill would enable the government to make regulations on local authorities’ use of agency workers in children’s social care.
- These may require agency staff to meet specified requirements and make provision about how they may be managed and the terms on which they may be supplied to councils, including the amounts which may be paid.
- The government would have to consult before drawing up the regulations, which would need the positive approval of both Houses of Parliament, though there would be no opportunity to amend them.
- The regulations would replace the rules introduced last year in relation to agency social work, and would go beyond them to cover other groups of children’s social care workers.
- The government has said that the content of the regulations is likely to be similar to that of the rules, though, unlike the current arrangements, would be legally binding.
For the government, minister for school standards Catherine McKinnell said the measure would help tackle “the significant affordability and stability challenges that have arisen from the increase in the use and cost of agency workers in local authority children’s social care in England”.
Rising proportion of locum workers
The proportion of full-time equivalent (FTE) council children’s social workers who were locums rose from 15.5% to 17.8%, from 2021-23, according to Department for Education figures.
The rise coincided with increasing warnings from directors of children’s services about the practices of some agencies.
This included supplying authorities with project teams of agency workers, often managed externally, rather than filling the specific roles councils wanted to be filled, significantly inflating costs.
New rules on use of agency social workers
On the back of this, the previous government introduced rules restricting councils’ use of agency social workers last year; these will be fully in force by October of this year.
The rules include a ban on social workers without three years’ permanent experience taking up an agency post, a requirement that project teams be directly managed by local authorities and a three-month prohibition on staff who had just left a permanent role from taking up an agency position in the same region.
Councils were also tasked with agreeing regional caps on hourly pay for agency staff in different roles.
With the exception of a statutory requirement to supply the DfE with data on their agency usage, the rules have been issued under statutory guidance, meaning councils may deviate from them in exceptional circumstances.
Why government wants to legislate
McKinnell said this was one of the reasons the government planned to put its proposed restrictions on agency use into law.
“Guidance can be departed from in certain circumstances, so we feel introducing regulations on the use of agency workers is appropriate and proportionate.”
She said that by reducing their spend on agency workers, councils would be able to “invest more in services supporting children and families and enhance the offer to permanent employees”.
Though the provisions were not dissented from by the six opposition members on the 17-strong bill committee, both Conservative shadow education minister Neil O’Brien and Liberal Democrat counterpart Munira Wilson raised concerns about aspects of the plans.
Risk of councils being ‘micromanaged’
O’Brien said the bill would allow for ministers to take “very strong” powers to regulate the use of agency staff, enabling them to “micromanage” authorities, including by potentially directly setting pay rates in individual councils
He pointed to the “huge variations” in rates of agency use – which ranged from 0 to 50% in 2023 between council areas – as meaning that “applying the same rules or caps or limits to places facing totally different situations [was] a risky thing to do”.
He also warned that, without addressing the supply of social workers, “crudely trying to cap prices runs the risk of simply leading to more vacancies”.
Tackling root causes of staff choosing agency work
For the Lib Dems, Wilson said she recognised the need to promote a more stable workforce because of the impact on children of multiple changes in social workers. However, echoing O’Brien, she said there was nothing in the bill that would address the reasons why practitioners choose agency work.
“I’d like to hear from the minister whether they have workforce strategy to address the root causes that we have more and more social workers opting for agency contracts, which is neither good for the taxpayer, not good for the child’s experiences.”
In response, McKinnell said that the government recognised that “regulation alone [was] not the answer”, and that it was working with councils to attract and retain staff and provide “positive working environments for all who work in children’s social care”.
She stressed that the legislation would require the government to consult before drawing up the regulations, and it was committed to working with the sector to ensure the measures were “proportionate and effective”.
What’s next for the bill?
The committee will continue to scrutinise the bill in detail, potentially amending it in the process. Given Labour’s majority, such amendments will only pass with the government’s support.
Following the committee stage, the bill will be reconsidered by the whole House of Commons at the report stage, where it can be amended further, and at its third reading, where it will be voted on as a whole.
After that, the bill will pass to the House of Lords for consideration. Should peers revise the legislation, the two houses will need to then agree a common version of the bill, though peers will generally give way to MPs on this.
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole 
Hampshire County Council 
Oxfordshire County Council 
South Gloucestershire Council 
Wokingham Borough Council 
Webinar: building a practice framework with the influence of practitioner voice 
‘They don’t have to retell their story’: building long-lasting relationships with children and young people 
Podcast: returning to social work after becoming a first-time parent 
How managers are inspiring social workers to progress in their careers 
Workforce Insights – showcasing a selection of the sector’s top recruiters 
Facebook
X
LinkedIn
Instagram
What about the young voiceless vulnerable adults that have fallen through the cracks in adult social care now?
Still around but tucked away being supported by untrained agency workers hiding behind a private care provider and funded by LA.My heart broke a while ago.
All vulnerable people should have the right to be treated with respect and dignity by trained and understanding staff.I also think that all care for vulnerable people should be provided by not for profit providers with appropriate levels of accountability and transparency.
I suggest the Directors look at the culture they have created within childtens services, to make going permanent more attractive.
Agency work is not solely about pay, it gives workers flexibilty to get out quick if caseloads too high, lack supervision, heavy handed management, micro managing etc.
I also suggesy Agencies be required keep a shared data base to prevent the few social workers who get poor references switching agency and hiding fact they worked at such-and-such place, having a “career break”
Perhaps it might be reasonable to consider banning the use of agency staff (including doctors) in all health and social care settings and roles – in a phased and publicised way. The public purse is being publicly and significantly robbed. Agency staff will probably not seek alternative careers, so they’re highly likely to remain in the workforce – give reasonable time for the transition and ban private agencies entirely. However, there is a need and scope for a capped-cost agency system, which should be managed and governed at affordable prices set by local or national government.
Part of the problem is that many of these Directors have not worked with actual children and families for many years and it’s very likely that is also the case for many in management. It’s vital that everybody works with children from the top down and then they’ll have an idea about what that work is actually like. Absolutely agree with the three year post qualifying rule but generally I see this as a crude cost cutting measure using cartels of local authorities to arrange lower pay strategies for agency workers who form the core of highly experienced workers in the profession.
Alienating this highly skilled group seems to me to be highly unproductive.
This is the same ADCS that has created over the last decades a toxic performance obsessed culture mired in hierarchy and endless measurement.
In essence social work is a practice and we should all be practitioners extending radical kindness to each other and the vulnerable we work with. Enough of this thinking that endless and pointless meetings and infinite assessments are the answer to anything. As for the agency workers, I guess they’ll just choose to go surfing! Respect to all!
Gosh I’m so glad I’m leaving this profession, agency workers are being scapegoated. Social Workers salary is low, we are always working outside of our ours, we are at risk during home visits, case loads are not manageable, families are far more complex than they have ever been, most environments promote a toxic culture that is based on statistics and not the families we want to support. Getting funding for basic things like a bed or bus pass takes how many forms hoops and negotiations.
Staff wellbeing and happiness is not a priority. I could go on. Shame on the government.
Don’t know where you have been, but social work salaries are definitely NOT low. A PSO in the probation service is only paid £26-29k p.a (and they gave risks going HV too). Social workers do not work at the speed and fast paced capacity that are required of other jobs either, which are on half the salary at £25-7k (know this from experience) Stop bleeting poor you and just get on with the job. As for funding, social workers think money grows on trees. They waste so much money on non essential resources. And some clients know this and manipulate the social worker in order to get ‘free’ things out of them.Social services is a MASSIVE drain of public resources and is quite simply unsustainable. Things have to change. No more time for the idealistic, left wing, wish wsh that, tbh, isn’t all that effective in long term in the real world for these families and wastes a lot of money social workers give little thought about.
I whole hearted agree, if they treated workers better people wouldn’t leave. I became an agency worker after being permanent for 27 years and 7 months. I took constructive dismissal from my then employer because of bullying, intimidation, racism and sexual harassment. I ended up with PTSD dues to work related stress. I took 2 years out to heal then returned as an agency social worker because I felt that it gave me more autonomy however you’re not treated any better because they use and abuse you, give you a bad reference if they’re unhappy with you for any reason.
Why is it that these rules only will apply to social workers and Team Managers.
If you want a stable workforce it should start from the top – if this comes into legislation you’re saying it is fine for a Director/Head of Service to work as interims on £500-800pd where ever they want with no restriction on location or rate, but not a social worker.
It should be one rule for all.
I guess turkey’s don’t vote for Christmas.
Well it’s about time. Let’s not beat about the bush here, most do it for the money and less responsibility. Social workers are paid well enough when directly employed by local authorities, of they are committed to social work, then need to commit to permanent positions. If they’re in it for the money and an easier ride, they can go elsewhere.