Sickness rates among Craven District Council employees have hit a five-year high.

Up to the end of March, each employee averaged 12.61 days off sick.

Nationally, the average number of sick days taken by public sector workers – as reported by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development – was 9.7. It was 6.4 in the private sector.

At Craven, which employs around 248 people, a total of 3,129.5 days were lost to the council and there was a 52 per cent increase in the number of days lost due to long-term absence.

More than 43 per cent of long-term illness involved back and muscular problems for waste management staff, while more than 27 per cent of those on long-term sick were off due to stress and anxiety.

Since 2005, the council has set itself an annual target for the number of sick days per employee. It has ranged from 9.30 days in 2005/06 to nine days in 2009/10.

But it has only once hit the target – in 2008/09 when the average number of sick days was 9.08 against a target of 11.50.

At the council’s overview and scrutiny committee, councillors were told procedures had been put in place to improve sickness rates and help the long-term sick back into work.

It was also revealed that, since the introduction earlier this year of alternate weekly rubbish collections, there had been fewer days off sick due to muscle complaints.

Samia Hussain, head of human resources, said line managers had been given training to support those off sick and staff had been given access to “well-being activities”.

Staff had been encouraged to use the gym and fitness facilities at Craven Pool and recognition letters were sent to those with good attendance.

She said 43 per cent of long-term absence was due to muscular problems and since the introduction of alternate weekly rubbish collections that had improved, although there was no evidence to suggest it had been as a direct result.

She said it had been an “extremely unfortunate year” for council staff and the increase in sickness had been due to some “‘very unfortunate circumstances”.

“Any level of intervention while managing these cases would not have assisted in reducing the majority of long-term sickness absence,” she said.

Councillors asked whether waste management workers were observed to make sure they were following correct work practices designed to avoid back and muscular problems.

They also asked whether the impact of staff restructuring had resulted in people being off work with stress and whether any of those had ended up being made redundant.

Coun Polly English criticised the report as “bland”.

“I would like to see one similar to the police authority, which lists the illnesses and how many days have been taken off for each one,” she said.

“I would also like to see more information about the number of staff off with anxiety, stress and depression.”

She also wanted to see figures for waste management staff off with problems caused by lifting blue bags full of paper and cardboard.

“We have lost a lot of staff as a result of the restructuring. We have got rid of a third of the stressed as a result of what has happened. I would like to see an overall picture,” said Coun English.

Coun Pat Fairbank said waste management staff did a good job, but asked if they were being observed to make sure they were carrying items properly.

“They can’t complain about a bad back or neck if they are not doing the job the way they are supposed to,” she said.

“I would like to know where the inspectors are and why they are not checking them. They can’t go out inspecting if they are busy doing their paperwork.”

Assistant chief executive Paul Ellis said there were two inspectors who checked the work of waste collection staff and both he and chief executive Paul Shevlin had also attended rounds. “They do a very good job,” he said.

Coun Fairbank responded that she was not knocking the staff, but just wanted to make sure they were doing their job properly.