Agenda item

To receive and note the briefing.

The SCM introduced the item and informed Members that the number of missed collections continued to decline with steady improvement seen week on week, except for the Christmas period when disruptions were expected. He added that Christmas issues were primarily related to collection crews not being contracted to work weekends, though this was being discussed as part of ongoing contract negotiations. It was noted that following the catch-up weeks, collections had returned to pre-Christmas levels, but improvement was still needed to reach the desired level of performance. The SCM stated that at present weekly missed collections stood at approximately 120, though it was hoped that this could be reduced to the pre-changeover performance below 100. He added that support vehicles remained in place and would stay until the service was stable, with further performance measures including weekly debriefs and potential sanctions being considered for continued poor performance. It was noted that supervisors were also assisting crews to address repeat missed collections.

Questions and Discussion

       i.          Cllr J Toye asked if there were many bins that were consistently missed, to which the SCM replied that there had been repeat misses, but additional measures put in place with supervisors had significantly reduced this number.

      ii.          Cllr V Holliday asked how recently the issues had been addressed, as she had been advised of repeat misses up to two weeks prior to the meeting. The SCM replied that the new processes had been implemented following the Christmas catch-up period, though some missed collections were still in the process of being addressed. He added that over the coming weeks missed collections could be expected to continue to fall as improvement measures took effect. Cllr V Holliday noted that total missed bin numbers had varied from 77 to 186, which appeared significant. The SCM replied that the most recent figure was 132, whilst the DFC noted that some degree of missed bins could be expected as these were counted as bins not collected on their scheduled day, though the significant majority would be resolved the following day. He added that there were some concerns about missed collections not being resolved within the rectification period, but the level of response was improving and was within the parameters of expected performance. 

     iii.          Cllr C Cushing raised concerns that improvements were still required five months after implementation, and asked whether there was an expected completion date to reach pre-changeover levels of performance. The DFC replied that he expected this level of performance now, and continued to push to achieve this, as there was no reason it could not be done within the next few weeks. He added that the desire had been to achieve this within twelve weeks of the changeover, and officers would maintain the necessary level of pressure until this was achieved. Cllr C Cushing asked what additional actions would be taken to achieve this, to which the DFC replied that at their own expense Serco had applied significant additional resource, and possible sanctions as part of the performance improvement plan was a further step that had not previously been utilised.

    iv.          Cllr J Rest shared a letter from a resident who had suffered as a result of eight missed bin collections and was seeking assistance. He added that the 48 hour resolution window had been missed twice and it was likely that this was not an issue unique to Fakenham, which usually had a good service. The SCM replied that road changes had caused some issues, and it may be that they required further optimisation to deliver expected service levels. He added that supervisors would be sent to resolve issues with any repeat misses with maps provided to collection crews to help resolve persistent issues.

      v.          Cllr S Butikofer asked how performance in North Norfolk compared to other authorities on the contract. The SCM stated that Kings Lynn had a much lower number of missed bins, though the change from their previous operating model had been much smaller than North Norfolk’s at only 15-20%. He added that Breckland’s missed collection were slightly lower than North Norfolk’s, but higher than Kings Lynn’s. It was noted that changeover in Breckland had taken place six months prior and King Lynn’s four months prior to North Norfolk’s, which meant that both had been settling for longer which may partly explain improved performance. Cllr S Butikofer accepted that the other authorities were different and changes had taken place earlier, but asked whether there were any lessons learnt from other District’s that could be implemented in North Norfolk. The SCM replied that collections were very different for both Kings Lynn and Breckland, though some process had been brought across and communication had taken place with the Kings Lynn contract manager to help improve processes. He added that workplace relations were different in Kings Lynn to Breckland and North Norfolk, which had a moderate impact on service delivery. Cllr S Butikofer stated that at the last Serco briefing she had been assured that working conditions were the same across all authorities on the contract, and asked whether this was still the case. The SCM replied that they had all been offered the same pay deal at the same time which Kings Lynn had accepted, but both Breckland and North Norfolk had rejected the offer with an updated offer now being considered. It was noted that a further contractual difference required Kings Lynn staff to work catch-up days on Saturday if required, but this had not been agreed elsewhere. The SCM stated that there may be other minor differences for those that had recently joined the service, compared to long-standing staff. He added that in terms of pay, sickness and holiday entitlement, this should be the same across all authorities.

    vi.          Cllr H Blathwayt referred to increased service demands throughout the summer and asked whether officers were confident that the increased workload would not cause a detriment to residents. The DFC stated that there an increased service demand was expected in summer, but this should not present a major issue as Serco would take this into account when resourcing the contract. He added that some issues were unavoidable, such as restricted access caused by visitors parking vehicles on narrow streets. Cllr H Blathwayt stated that collections were at their quietest during February and March, and issues seen now would only be exacerbated during busier periods. The DFC replied that maintaining service levels was a contractual requirement and if required, Serco would have to provide additional resource.

   vii.          Cllr T Adams stated that he was pleased to see a moderate reduction in the number of missed collections, taking into account those that could not be counted. He added that despite this the current performance levels were still not satisfactory, and more efforts were required to return to pre-changeover service levels. Cllr T Adams asked if any indication of when this would be achieved could be given, as it was possible that performance related deductions may need to be considered. The SCM replied that he had set a target of 60 missed collection per week, which would equate to approximately 50 per 100k which was considered good performance by many authorities. He added that a new reporting system was in development to improve the speed of reporting, and it was hoped that expected performance levels could be achieved by the end of February.

  viii.          Cllr N Pearce asked why the same bins were being missed, to which the SCM replied that in some cases missed bins would be allocated to support crews to rectify, however support staff were in some cases unfamiliar with collection areas. He added that this process had now been changed with normal collection crews returning to missed collections themselves. The DFC noted that in most cases missed collections were caused by a lack of knowledge or poor performance, and Serco were actively seeking to address both issues.

    ix.          Cllr V Holliday referred to bin returns and noted that she was aware of instances where bins had been left blocking narrow lanes. The DFC replied that it was a contractual requirement for bins to be returned to their collection point or the edge of curtilage, and if this was not the case these could be reported for rectification. He added that assisted bins were treated differently as the bins would be returned to their collection point on the property.

      x.          Cllr P Heinrich noted that he had received no complaints with the service in his ward, though he was aware that some residents with assisted collection had to place notices on their property to remind crews. The SCM stated that there had been an increased focus on assisted collections with reminders set on collection vehicles and printed maps for loading staff. He added that the expectation was that no assisted collections should be missed.

    xi.          The Chairman referred to the GAP analysis of contractual obligations and sought an update on progress. The DFC stated that officers had agreed a number of items that could be implemented by different means, or discounted if they no longer presented added value to the contract. He added that a delivery timetable had been agreed in principle for the remaining actions, subject to the minor amendment of errors. The DFC stated that overall Serco were close to resolving the gaps left in the contract and a realistic timetable was in place for full implementation by November 2023. It was suggested in response to the Chairman that a final update on the GAP analysis could be provided nearer that time.

   xii.          The Chairman referred to the introduction of battery collections and noted that some Parishes felt that they had not been properly informed of the collection details, and sought clarification. The SCM stated that battery collections had started in February with information shared on social media. He added that batteries could be placed in small bags and collected every week if placed next to bins. It was noted that small electrical item connections would begin shortly with information provided on bin leaflets, though the introduction would be phased across the District to avoid overwhelming collection crews. The Chairman noted that if the promotion of battery collections had been placed solely on social media, this would put many residents who did not use these services or the internet at a disadvantage. The DFC replied that there had been a degree of phasing with battery collections as collection crews had reached their capacity quickly in the first few weeks, but now the service was live communications could be improved to share the information more widely. He added that waste electrical equipment would be the same and had to be rolled-out in stages to ensure that collection crews would not be overwhelmed. It was noted that social media would be used less to promote the waste electrical item collections to provide more control over the phasing.

  xiii.          Cllr N Lloyd stated that he was supportive of slow roll-outs of battery and waste electrical item collections to avoid overwhelming the collection crews. He added that he was proud that these collections could be offered as it supported the Council’s environmental aims and improved the safety and efficiency of waste processing. On missed collections he stated that he was frustrated with ongoing issues but was confident that they would be resolved in due course, with over 99% of bins collected as expected. The Chairman stated that it was important to ensure that residents were informed of the phased roll-out so that it was properly understood across the District.

RESOLVED

1.     To receive and note the briefing.