Absence Management – Overcoming The “Sickie” Culture in Britain

By Carrie Hayton

In 2009, absenteeism cost the UK economy over £12 billion. In the same year, the average cost of absence, per employee, was estimated at £692 or 7.4 days lost every year. In these straightened times, managing absenteeism must surely be a high priority for any business wishing to reduce costs and increase productivity.

The Causes of Absence

Absence management is inevitably a controversial area – employers have a duty of care for their employees and no reasonable employer wishes to force staff to attend the workplace if they are genuinely sick. Nevertheless, anecdotal evidence suggests absences may not always be related to real illness, and in some organisations or departments, a culture of absence is endemic.

Many researchers have considered this issue and it appears that the most effective way to understand what causes absence is to identify what influences it.

One of the best known pieces of research on these influences was conducted by Rhodes and Steers in 1978 and still has resonance today:

Key Influences on Employee Attendance

Rhodes and Steers and many subsequent researchers have found that the employee’s level of motivation, as well as their ability to attend, are key influences on attendance; that is to say – the work situation such as the scope and role of the job, the leadership style of the boss, the relationships with co-workers all affect motivation, but if there are pressing family problems or repeated health issues, or it is simply difficult to make the journey to the designated place of work, employees may not attend as regularly as the business would wish.

Other key influences are outside the organisation’s scope and include an employee’s personal characteristics such as their education, their tenure in the role, their age, sex and family size. In other words, a well educated, long-standing older male employee with few family ties may be likely to have better attendance levels than a young female or a working mother with many carer responsibilities. Indeed, many organisations have recognised the need to include “Family Friendly” policies in their range of tools to fight absenteeism, including part-time and flexible working hours to accommodate the variety of demands on today’s workers. Some have even made a virtue of employing the older worker, most famously B&Q, recognising the higher attendance and loyalty levels research has shown exist amongst older workers.

Nevertheless, if employers are to attract and retain a variety of staff, a range of approaches to this difficult issue clearly need to be adopted.

Which approach to take: The Carrot or the Stick?

There are said to be three possible approaches to managing absence. The Punitive Approach is the most widely used by organisations in the UK. It involves the use of disciplinary procedures that are consistent, reasonable and lawful in dealing with employees who fail to report for or remain on duty. Failure to report for work usually comprises lateness, no-show without calling in, unjustified absence and excessive absence.

Organisational responses include salary deductions, refusal to pay statutory sick pay, and ultimately, dismissal. The shortcomings of taking a punitive approach, however, appear to be the alienation and withdrawal of commitment by employees – even those who are not regularly absent.

An alternative might be the Attendance Incentive Approach which aims to reward employees for attendance through bonuses, extra holiday and profit sharing schemes. However, motivation is a complex issue; this approach requires a good range of incentives to appeal to all employees. The incentive approach has also been criticised as unfair, since it punishes employees who are really ill or forces sick people to come to work to avoid missing out on the benefits on offer.

Perhaps the most sophisticated approach is that of Prevention. This approach advocates investigating and addressing the root causes of absence and not just the symptoms; e.g. if job satisfaction is an issue, line managers may consider job enrichment and more variety of tasks for staff in their teams. Research into this approach appears to show real benefits of buy-in and engagement by employees.

Returning to work

The most consistent message in the research on absence management appears to be the value of the “Return to Work” interview and consistent application of the sickness absence policy by line management. Taking time to talk to employees in your team, particularly when they have been away for a period of sickness absence, has been shown to be very effective. The benefits appear to be many, including employees feeling noticed and cared for, plans for re-integration being formulated together, as well as a clear reduction in absence, as those “taking a sickie” are reluctant to face such an interview.

It’s official – work is good for you!

In 2008, Dame Carol Black, then the UK’s national director for health and work, produced a report on the health of the workforce, “Working for a Healthier Tomorrow”. The report showed evidence that work improves people’s physical and mental health and helps them make a faster recovery. And yet the findings also showed that “much of the current approach to the treatment of people of working age, including the sickness certification process, reflects an assumption that illness is incompatible with being at work”.

The New “Fit Note”

Dame Carol's report precipitated the implementation of the new “Fit Note” introduced earlier this year. This replaces the old system of “Sick Notes”, provided by GPs. GPs will now be required to state whether someone is fit for some work or unable to work at all. If the GP decides the person is fit for some work, the form provides tick boxes for either a phased return to work, altered hours, amended duties or workplace adaptations. There is also a space for the GP’s comments, including a more detailed explanation of the effect of the patient’s condition on their ability to perform functions. This information could be included on the old forms, but now the layout encourages it.

The aim of the Fit Note is, in large part, to encourage a speedier return to work. And surely anything which requires managers to discuss re-integration into the workforce sooner, rather than later, can only be a good thing – for employers and employees alike.

This article was written by Carrie Hayton MA MChIPD, an MSB Associate and part-time lecturer at Kingston Business School