Scottish census shambles

Well, an enquiry might be a good idea.

On Saturday, Angus Robertson, the government's constitution secretary, acknowledged there were "lessons to be learned".
"Why is it that there are people who believe they have been uninformed or are underinformed about the fact that the census is taking place, despite the fact that every household has been written to on numerous occasions during the census period?" he asked.

On the doorstep, I was surprised by how many people said that they only open mail addressed to them personally; anything addressed to "The Householder" goes straight in the bin.

I spoke to many people who denied having received any of the letters, and then, when I said "They were addressed to "The Householder" said "That explains it! They'd have been binned unopened."

There were also a few people who had a stack of assorted unopened mail, and when they went through it, there were the census letters. Again, they said they only opened mail addressed to them personally immediately, anything else got added to the "look at it sometime in the future pile".

I don't how how the numbers of jobs advertised compared with last time, but of the enumerator jobs advertised, most remained unfilled. In my area only approx 20% of enumerator posts were filled. I gather the situation was similar throughout Scotland.

Small bonuses were being offered after the census had started to anyone who could recruit a friend/ neighbour / their cat. (Only £25, if I remember correctly).

There were boxes of unused kit; smartphones ready for non-existent enumerators etc etc.

With regards to the number of staff, I believe ScotGov thought they would need less as the vast majority of people would complete it online. I wonder how many paper copies were sent out compared to the predicted number

Upgraded from a shambles to a fiasco:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-61637371

'Asked why so many households had failed to fill it in, Prof Paterson said it was not clear and an inquiry should investigate.'

Gosh, why on earth would people not bother their arses to fill in a survey that asked questions based on vague feelings rather than actual real facts? I can't think.

No idea why it’ll cost as much as £10m but they had employed people to manage responses, etc on fixed term contracts and apparently many of them aren’t willing or able to extend their contract to handle the extended deadline and work.

It will have been hard to recruit for that many hours on a 10 week contract. I think that’s probably why - means people won’t have been able to do that on top of their usual role and wouldn’t have appealed to retired people looking for casual work. 10 hours a week would have been more popular I suspect.

Re where they were advertised. Good question. I was actively looking for something that would tide me over till my hours increased as my main job recovered from lockdown. So I found it on a job website - can't remember which one. I think I saw it advertised in more than one site, but all online.

Apparently in 2011, when the enumerator jobs were just 10 hours a week, they were advertised in libraries etc, aimed at fit retired people, parents of young children etc.

I could be wrong, but I think they were aiming to make enumerating less like casual work this time. Possibly because last time it was paper based, but this time it's online and enumerators have to have some computer literacy. They were trying to employ fewer people, working longer hours.

Where were jobs advertised?

Domesticated Zombie, any ideas why the jobs weren't attractive?

Enumerators were offered £12.52 an hour, 25 hours a week, ten week contract, extremely flexible hours - enumerators can decide when we want to work our hours between 8am and 8pm, and which days we want to work. We just have to have clocked up 25 hours by the end of the week.

We were subsequently offered up to 12 hours a week overtime, on the same rate, but that wouldn't have influenced anyone as it only happened once everyone was in place.

I work part time. My hours dropped due to Covid, and I thought this would tide me over till things picked up. The flexibility meant that I could work round my existing part time job. Unfortunately I couldn't benefit from the overtime offered.

It's been ideal for me, but obviously only a third of the posts were filled. Why wasn't it attractive to more people?

"“The SNP government couldn’t have made a bigger mess of this if they tried — and it all stems from their refusal to keep the Scottish census in sync with that of the other home nations, as the Scottish Conservatives urged them to.”

Being out-of-sync may well have contributed, but the inability to fill the necessary posts seems to me to be to be the main issue. The census has been grossly understaffed.

I'm just an enumerator so I might not be seeing the bigger picture, but my impression is that if all posts had been filled, we'd have delivered a successful census.

The original deadline was Sunday, May 1. At the moment 79.8% of households have returned, with paper returns posted last week still to be dealt with. So without an extension, we'd have achieved 80%.

"The Daily Telegraph previously reported that 1,250 field staff were hired for this Scottish census compared with 7,000 in 2011. It had originally been said that between 3,000 and 4,000 workers would be taken on to carry out home visits."

This.

The 7,000 in 2011 were on 10 hour a week contracts. This time they tried to recruit up to 4000 on 25 hour a week contracts.

I don't know why the posts could not be filled. Too short a contract? 25 hours a week too much to take on for e.g. students with exams coming up, whereas in 2011 10 hours a week was do-able?

Frankly, given the fact that it's been done with only a third of the enumerators required, I'm surprised its not more of a shambles than it is. Covid also meant that quite a few people have been off for a week during the 10 week period - in line with every other business or occupation in the country.

I don't know if it's fair to describe it as a "staff exodus" People had a fixed term contract, had plans for what they would do after the contract ended and aren't accepting the new extension. It's "not staying on" rather than "leaving."

"Sarah Boyack, Labour’s spokeswoman on the constitution, said she had been told staff have struggled with IT problems and that people who were brought in to analyse data have ended up being dispatched to collect information."

Non-enumerators were told that overtime enumerating was available. Not sure that qualifies as being "dispatched to collect information." Enumerators on 25 hour a week contracts have also been allowed to work overtime, if they want.

So how does Sturgeon explain the results in England and Wales, including the engagement in areas like Tower Hamlets?

www.finance-ni.gov.uk/news/census-2021-results-schedule-announced

England’s census had a 97% return rate last year, although the deadline was pushed back for some institution settings. Office for National Statistics data showed England’s highest rates of return for digital forms were from its poorest and most ethnically diverse council areas: Tower Hamlets and Newham in London both had a 97% online reply rate

My understanding at the outset was that the social demographics were going to be directly addressed (although I'm just an enumerator, not management, so not privy to all the details.)

However, the census was grossly understaffed. As I've said before, it proved impossible to fill the census posts. In my area, only 20% of enumerator posts were filled.

If it was the same in Glasgow, then plans to directly address the social demographics may have been affected. I'm not in Glasgow, so I don't know. But I do know there's been a lot of changes made to allow for the understaffing.

I don't know what went wrong with the recruitment process. Possibly the contract was too short-term (10 weeks) to appeal to those looking for work, but the hours (25 hours per week) were too long for those who had traditionally worked as enumerators, the recently retired, students etc.

At the moment it's not going to be accurate because of the patches of low return rate.

I think the intention of the extension may be to try to close that gap. The media are broad-brush reporting that "a quarter of Scots fail to respond" etc, but it's a lot more nuanced than that. Within the areas which have exceeded 80% there are pockets which have exceeded 90% returns. Presumably within the low response areas of below 75% there are pockets which have resulted in very low returns.

There's a strong correlation between affluent areas and areas of high returns.

*City of Glasgow

No idea why it's costing £10 million, but it has to come with some cost - the people working on it have to be paid.

The figures are patchy over Scotland, which suggests to me it's not a trust issue per se. Of the 32 areas, as of yesterday, 1 was over 85%, 16 were between 80-85%, 11 were between 75-80% and 4 were 70-75%

City is Glasgow is one of the bottom four, which is pulling the Scottish average (78.8%) down considerably.

I'm in one of the 80-85% areas, so I can't comment on what's happening in the areas with poorer returns.

The big problem, it seems to me, is that the areas with relatively high returns tend to be the wealthier areas, so the resultant data will suggest that Scotland is better off, better housed, healthier etc than it actually is.

The ferries is a disgrace. Just like the Gupta steel

its almost impossible to get a booking on a ferry. Let alone take a car. People ar3 having to fly to get to som3 of the islands

census failure I don’t know why the government need to know my sexuality.. intrusive and same with the gender question
I thought it was meant to be on a certain night as to who was in your house ?