What Fair Work Means in Adult Social Care Commissioning
Fair work has moved from a policy aspiration to a measurable commissioning requirement in adult social care. Commissioners increasingly assess not just what services deliver, but how providers treat, support and retain the workforce delivering them. Within social value frameworks, fair work now sits alongside quality, safeguarding and sustainability as a core test of provider maturity.
This article sits within the Fair Work, Pay, Progression & Responsible Employment knowledge hub and connects directly to wider social value expectations shaping public sector procurement.
Understanding what commissioners actually mean by “fair work” — and how they assess it — is essential for providers seeking to evidence credibility rather than aspiration.
How commissioners define fair work in social care
In adult social care commissioning, fair work is not defined by a single policy or wage benchmark. Instead, commissioners view it as a combination of employment practices that promote stability, dignity, progression and sustainability across the workforce.
Typically, this includes:
- Fair and transparent pay structures
- Predictable working patterns and secure contracts
- Access to training, supervision and progression
- Safe staffing levels and manageable workloads
- Responsible use of agency and temporary staffing
Commissioners assess these elements not in isolation, but through their impact on continuity of care, risk management and service resilience.
Operational example 1: Pay transparency linked to commissioning confidence
A supported living provider delivering complex autism services introduced a transparent pay framework across all roles. The framework set out clear hourly rates, enhanced payments for specialist competencies, and defined progression steps linked to qualifications and practice development.
Day to day, this meant staff understood how their pay was determined, how they could progress, and what was required to move into senior or specialist roles. Managers used the framework during supervision to link performance, development plans and reward.
When the service underwent a commissioning review following market uplift negotiations, the provider was able to evidence stable staffing, low vacancy rates and reduced agency reliance. Commissioners explicitly linked these outcomes to the provider’s fair work approach, strengthening confidence in long-term sustainability.
Why fair work is linked to quality and outcomes
Commissioners increasingly recognise that poor employment practice creates operational risk. High turnover, burnout and reliance on agency staff undermine continuity, increase safeguarding risk and place pressure on already stretched systems.
Fair work, by contrast, supports:
- Consistent staffing relationships for people using services
- Retention of skilled and experienced practitioners
- Lower incident rates linked to unfamiliar or unsupported staff
- Stronger leadership presence and governance oversight
As a result, fair work is now assessed as a quality enabler rather than a separate ethical concern.
Operational example 2: Secure contracts and predictable rotas
A domiciliary care provider operating across rural areas moved away from widespread zero-hours contracts following commissioner feedback. The provider introduced minimum-hours contracts supported by rota planning four weeks in advance.
In practice, this reduced last-minute shift changes, improved staff income security and allowed workers to plan childcare and travel more effectively. Managers reported improved attendance and reduced sickness absence.
Commissioners monitoring contract performance noted improved call completion rates and fewer missed visits. The employment change was explicitly referenced during contract review meetings as evidence of responsible employment practice.
Fair work as a test of organisational maturity
Commissioners do not expect providers to eliminate all workforce challenges. Instead, they look for evidence that organisations understand their employment risks and actively manage them.
This includes:
- Clear workforce strategies aligned to commissioning demand
- Active monitoring of turnover, vacancy and agency use
- Escalation routes when staffing pressures impact quality
- Board or senior oversight of employment practice
Providers that treat fair work as governance infrastructure, rather than a marketing message, are viewed as more credible delivery partners.
Operational example 3: Training access as fair work in practice
A learning disability service embedded protected training time within staff rotas rather than expecting learning to be completed unpaid. All staff received regular supervision and access to accredited training linked to role expectations.
On a day-to-day basis, this reduced training backlog and improved confidence in managing behaviours that challenge. Staff feedback showed higher engagement and a clearer understanding of organisational investment in their development.
During inspection, the service was able to demonstrate how training access supported safe practice, reduced restrictive interventions and improved outcomes. Employment practice was directly linked to quality evidence.
Commissioner expectation
Commissioners expect providers to demonstrate fair work through operational evidence, not statements of intent. This includes showing how employment practices support retention, continuity and service resilience, and how risks are identified and managed.
Regulator / Inspector expectation
Inspectors expect employment practice to support safe, effective and well-led services. Poor staffing stability, unsupported workers or unmanaged workload pressures are treated as indicators of governance weakness and potential quality failure.
Fair work, in this context, is inseparable from inspection outcomes.