No abstract

Restorative justice is an approach that aims to replace hurt by healing in the understanding that the perpetrators of pain are also victims of the incident themselves. In 2016, Mersey Care, an NHS community and mental health trust in the Liverpool region, implemented restorative justice (or what it termed a 'Just and Learning Culture') to fundamentally change its responses to incidents, patient harm, and complaints against staff. Although qualitative benefits from this implementation seemed obvious, it was also thought relevant to identify the economic effects of restorative justice. Through interviews with Mersey Care staff and collecting data pertaining to costs, suspensions, and absenteeism, an economic model of restorative justice was created. We found that the introduction of restorative justice has coincided with many qualitative improvements for staff, such as a reduction in suspensions and dismissals, increase in the reporting of adverse events, increase in the number of staff that feel encouraged to seek support and a slowing down of the upward trend in absence due to illness. It also improved staff retention. The economic benefits of restorative justice appear significant. After corrections for inflation, acquisitions and anomalies, we found that the salary costs averaged over two fiscal years were reduced by £ 4 million per year, coinciding with the introduction of a just and learning culture in 2016. In addition, Mersey Care reaped around £ 1 million in saved legal and termination expenses. We conservatively attribute half of these savings to the introduction of a just and learning culture itself, and the other half to non-related factors. Using this assumption, we estimate the total economic benefit of restorative justice in the case of Mersey Care NHS Foundation Trust to be about £ 2.5 million or approximately 1% of the total costs and 2% of the labour costs.

No abstract

No abstract

ObjectiveThis study investigates the distribution of the workforce of one large National Health Service (NHS) employer in relation to socioeconomic deprivation and how sickness absence rates varied across these levels of deprivation.DesignShare of the working age population that was employed at the NHS organisation mapped by area deprivation. The study used negative binomial regression models to investigate the extent to which wage level, occupational group and area deprivation were associated with sickness absence among employees.SettingThe study used electronic staff records (2018–2019) of a large NHS organisation in the North West of England.ResultsIn the most deprived areas, an additional person per 1000 working age population were employed at this NHS organisation compared with the most affluent areas. Employees from the most deprived quintile had 1.41 (95% CI 1.16 to 1.70) times the higher sickness rates than the employees from the least deprived quintile, when adjusting for age and sex. These differences were largely explained by differences in wage levels and occupation groups, with the lowest wage employees having 2.5 (95% CI 1.87 to 3.42) times the sickness absence rate as the highest wage group and the nursing and midwifery employees having 1.8 (95% CI 1.50 to 2.24) times the sickness absence rate as the administrative and clerical group.ConclusionThis large NHS organisation employed people disproportionately from deprived areas. They were considerably more likely to experience sickness absence compared with people from affluent areas. This appears to be because they were more likely to be in lower wage employment and employed in nursing and nursing assistant. Workplace health policies need to target these workers, adapting to their needs while enabling improvements in their working conditions, pay and career progression.