Employees in the North-East most at risk of health problems

Katie Jacobs , 28 Apr 2015 – HR Magazine

Employees in the north-east of England are most at risk of health problems, with 31% of the workforce at risk of developing conditions, according to analysis by insurer Vitality Health.

Vitality Health analysed lifestyle, behavioural and clinical risk factors for nearly 25,000 employees from 82 companies across the UK. It looked at areas such as diet, weight, smoking, exercise and mental health.

According to the findings, 45% of employees in the North-East don’t do enough physical activity, 29% have elevated blood pressure, 28% have a high body mass index (BMI) and 26% drink too much alcohol. Almost a quarter (22%) of employees in this region exhibit four or more health risk factors.

The UK’s healthiest workers are in London, with 24% at risk of a health issue and only 9% facing four or more risk factors. But there are still areas for improvement, as 28% of the capital’s employees need to exercise more and 12% need to reduce their BMIs.

Worryingly, the research found that 87% of British workers have a ‘health age’, which is on average three years and 10 months older than their actual age.

Greg Levine, director of corporate healthcare at VitalityHealth, said: “Health and wellbeing are playing an increasingly important role in how businesses maximise the productivity and happiness of their workforces.

“Clearly there are some areas across the UK where companies need to do more, but if businesses are able to develop a culture in which wellness programmes are integrated into day-to-day life, the benefits for both employees and the company itself will be quickly realised as productivity is improved and the cost of absenteeism is reduced.”

The Workers of England Union supports the formation of the English Trades Union Congress (ETUC) in line with the Scottish Trades Union Council (STUC) and Wales Trades Union Congress (WTUC)

South Tyneside faces massive cuts due to unfair funding for English Councils
2012/2013 public spending per head in the UK as a whole was – £8,788
Per head of population (2012/2013) HM Treasury, Public Expenditure Statistical Analysis 2014

· England: Average spending per head was £8,529 (3% below the UK average)
· Scotland: Average spending per head was £10,152 (16% above the UK average)
· Wales: Average spending per head was £9,709 (10% above the UK average)
· Northern Ireland: Average spending per head was £10,876 (24% above the UK average)
· North East: Average spending per head was £9,419 (UK average £8,788)

The population of South Tyneside, according to the 2010 mid Census, is 153,700. North East population is 2,597,000

· Tyneside Population 153,700
· South Tyneside £1,350,715,600.00 (based UK average)
· South Tyneside £1,447,700,300.00 (based on per head in North East)
· Difference = -£96,984,700.00 less spending money
· South Tyneside £1,560,362,400.00 (if sending was on an equal footing with Scotland)
· Difference = £112,662,100.00 more spending money

· North East 2,597,000
· North East £22,822,436,000.00 (based UK average)
· North East £24,461,143,000.00 (based on per head in North East)
· Difference = -£1,638,707,000.00 less spending money
· North East £26,364,744,000.00 (if sending was on an equal footing with Scotland)
· Difference = £1,903,601,000.00 more spending money

The impact on England and her Counties of keeping and protecting the Barnett formula spending for Scotland

“If annual public spending per head in North East was equal with how much is spent on the people of Scotland, we would see almost £2bn more tax money spent in the North East each year. The amount of money would be more than enough to ease austerity pressures.
North East is 2nd only to London on most spent per head in England and are above the UK average which means that over spending in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is not just impacting on England as a whole but directly on public spending per head in South Tyneside and the North East.

This means the Barnett formula, something the 3 main political party leaders vowed to keep and protect for Scotland, directly puts financial pressures on organisations all across England and especially in South Tyneside and the North East. As the NHS and Council services in England continue in their struggle to balance the books due to underfunding, taxpayers will continue to experience poorer services while Scotland is protected.

The ‘vow’ made before the Scottish independence vote has highlighted how unfair the current spending is per head for the people of England. Instead of vowing to protect the Barnett formula for Scotland, the 3 main party political leaders should have been calling for it to be overhauled or scrapped. Unfortunately for England, these party leaders promised Scotland that the Barnett Formula, will continue. The formula is worked out partly by the population of each of the UK nations and partly on which powers those nations have had devolved to them, such as health and education.

“The reality is easy to see, with the North East facing financial pressures which include…
I do not know the financial pressure points in South Tyneside and the North East but you mentioned the NHS / hospitals “

“To Clarify”
The government’s Treasury figures show spending per head in the the North East is just £9,419 per person each year, compared to the UK average of £8,788 per person (or £10,152 per head in Scotland). Apart from the London all other English regions are lower, which puts paid to the suggestion the South of England enjoys better funding than elsewhere in the country. “

Spending in England should be calculated not through the Barnett Formula, but according to need. If that was the case then South Tyneside and the North East would be significantly better off. To highlight this, if the extra £733 which people in Scotland receive each year was added to the current spending per head for the 2,597,000 people in the North East, that would add up to approximately £2Billion more public spending for the area.

I realise that this is only a very simple analysis, but it does highlight how unfair the Barnett formula is. It also dispels the myth that the UK countries are treated equally as the figures clearly show the favourable treatment of Scotland. This is especially difficult to stomach in England as her counties are facing considerable pressures on our public services.

“Why an English Government is urgently needed”
Eddie Bone, Campaign Director for the Workers of England Union stated ‘An English Government with an English First Minister could be working hard in the lead up to the general election in order to redress this imbalance – so that the people of England are well-served in both local representation as well as national. An English manifesto is urgently needed so that the people of England can argue that a fair share of the money they give as taxpayers is spent of their services’.”

The idea of making City Regions is not the answer either. Why should cities be given more powers while the rest of England is left to fend for themselves? City Regions would not help South Tyneside and the North East as the county has many rural areas which would be disadvantaged.

Bradford faces massive cuts due to unfair funding for English Councils

2012/2013 public spending per head in the UK as a whole was £8,788
Per head of population (2012/2013) HM Treasury, Public Expenditure Statistical Analysis 2014
· England: Average spending per head was £8,529 (3% below the UK average)
· Scotland: Average spending per head was £10,152 (16% above the UK average)
· Wales: Average spending per head was £9,709 (10% above the UK average)
· Northern Ireland: Average spending per head was £10,876 (24% above the UK average)
· Yorkshire and the Humber: £8,610 (UK average £8,788)
The population of Bradford, according to the 2011 Census, is 522,452. Yorkshire and the Humber population is 5,284,000 (2011 census)

Bradford (population 522,452)
· Bradford: £4,591,308,176 (based UK average)
· Bradford: £4,498,311,720 (based on per head in Yorkshire and the Humber)
· Difference = £92,999,456 more spending money
· Bradford: £5,303,932,704 (if sending was on an equal footing with Scotland)
· Difference = £805,620,984 more spending money

Yorkshire and the Humber (population 5,284,000)
Yorkshire and the Humber: 5,284,000 x £8,788 = £46,435,792,000 (based UK average)
Yorkshire and the Humber: 5,284,000 x £8,610 = £45,495,240,000 (based on per head in Yorkshire and the Humber)
Difference = £ 940,552,000 (more spending money)
Yorkshire and the Humber: 5,284,000 x £10,152 = £53,643,168,000 (if spending was on an equal footing with Scotland)
Difference =£8,147,928,000 ( more spending money)

The impact on England and her Counties of keeping and protecting the Barnett formula spending for Scotland
If annual public spending per head in Yorkshire and the Humber was equal with how much is spent on the people of Scotland, we would see almost £8bn more tax money spent in the Yorkshire and the Humber each year. The amount of money would be more than enough to ease austerity pressures.

Yorkshire and the Humber also comes below the UK average which means that over spending in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is not just impacting on England as a whole but directly on public spending per head in Bradford and Yorkshire and the Humber.

This means the Barnett formula, something the 3 main political party leaders vowed to keep and protect for Scotland, directly puts financial pressures on organisations all across England and especially in Bradford and Yorkshire and the Humber. As the NHS and Council services in England continue in their struggle to balance the books due to underfunding, taxpayers will continue to experience poorer services while Scotland is protected.

The reality is easy to see, with Yorkshire and the Humber facing financial pressures which include…
I do not know the financial pressure points in Yorkshire and the Humber /Bradford but you mentioned the NHS / hospitals

To Clarify
The government’s Treasury figures show spending per head in the Yorkshire and the Humber is just £8,610 per person each year, compared to the UK average of £8,788 per person (or £10,152 per head in Scotland). Apart from the North East, North West and London all other English regions are lower, which puts paid to the suggestion the South of England enjoys better funding than elsewhere in the country.

Spending in England should be calculated not through the Barnett Formula, but according to need. If that was the case then Bradford and Yorkshire and the Humber would be significantly better off. To highlight this, if the extra £1,542 which people in Scotland receive each year was added to the current spending per head for the 5,284,000 people in Yorkshire and the Humber, that would add up to approximately £8.15Billion more public spending for the county.

Why an English Government is urgently needed
Eddie Bone, Campaign Director for the Workers of England Union stated ‘An English Government with an English First Minister could be working hard in the lead up to the general election in order to redress this imbalance – so that the people of England are well-served in both local representation as well as national. An English manifesto is urgently needed so that the people of England can argue that a fair share of the money they give as taxpayers is spent of their services’.
The idea of making City Regions is not the answer either. Why should cities be given more powers while the rest of England is left to fend for themselves? City Regions would not help Bradford and Yorkshire and the Humber as the county has many rural areas which would be disadvantaged.