Commons recruitment spend rises, shows FOI data
20 July 2012
The total recruitment spend at the House of Commons in 2011-12 was £672k, a rise of just over 10% on last year’s total and significantly higher than the £435k spent in 2009-10.
Fri, 20 Jul 2012
The total recruitment spend at the House of Commons in 2011-12 was £672k, a rise of just over 10% on last year’s total and significantly higher than the £435k spent in 2009-10.
This is according to information obtained through a freedom of information (FOI) request by recruitment software provider Bullhorn.It shows that staff costs were down from £244k to £198k, while recruitment advertising costs dropped by more than half from £127 to £57k.
The rise was accounted for by a large rise in ‘other recruitment costs’, which includes the cost of contracting recruitment agencies, criminal record bureau (CRB) checks and travel and subsistence claims for those attending an interview.
However, the response to Bullhorn’s further request as to what exactly this £417k ‘other costs’, up from £238k last year, consisted of was that “specific breakdown of the figure is not held as it is not possible to disaggregate all the costs”.
The total recruitment spend at the House of Commons in 2011-12 was £672k, a rise of just over 10% on last year’s total and significantly higher than the £435k spent in 2009-10.
This is according to information obtained through a freedom of information (FOI) request by recruitment software provider Bullhorn.It shows that staff costs were down from £244k to £198k, while recruitment advertising costs dropped by more than half from £127 to £57k.
The rise was accounted for by a large rise in ‘other recruitment costs’, which includes the cost of contracting recruitment agencies, criminal record bureau (CRB) checks and travel and subsistence claims for those attending an interview.
However, the response to Bullhorn’s further request as to what exactly this £417k ‘other costs’, up from £238k last year, consisted of was that “specific breakdown of the figure is not held as it is not possible to disaggregate all the costs”.
