Innovative ways to reduce absenteeism: Some French companies pay a bonus to staff with excellent records

It's now the coughs and sniffles season in London, with many businesses bracing themselves for a depleted workforce over the winter months. Britain’s economy is one of the worst affected when it comes to employees taking time off due to ill health – whether genuine or “sickies”. Statistics from PwC have estimated that sick days cost UK businesses £29bn a year and British workers take four times more sick days than rival economies. Recent statistics also reveal that a quarter of employees in London have taken time off due to stress.

 

Intermittent employee sickness absence is a real problem for many employers. This has resulted in some businesses operating “absence management programmes” (“AMP”), in effect a disciplinary procedure through which regularly absent employees are processed. After a specified number of intermittent days of absence, employees get put through each stage, ending up in dismissal if they do not improve their absence level sufficiently. 

 

The problem with AMPs is that they are automatic and rarely tend to take account of individual circumstances. The outcome can sometimes be harsh and they are often seen as an escalator to the exit door. They may also give rise to potential disability discrimination claims, where the AMP does not make reasonable adjustments for employees suffering from a disability. For example, diabetics take much longer to recover from viral infections than others. Although stress itself is not a disability, many of its symptoms may be. AMPs, although a blunt instrument, have been shown to reduce absence levels; but they risk creating a sense of unfairness and can give rise to legal claims if operated too mechanically.

 

In the US, employees often do not have an annual sick leave allocation, but instead have a paid time off annual allowance quaintly called “personal time” – which covers a wide range of absences (including sickness). Interestingly, the US has a much lower level of intermittent absence and the personal time allowance is budgeted into the company’s running costs. This approach has not taken much hold in the UK, due to our long tradition of specifying sick pay entitlements in employment contracts. But some US companies here do operate the personal time allowance approach in the background.

 

In France, some companies have started paying a monthly or quarterly bonus to employees with an excellent attendance level. To some, however, this feels a bit like giving into blackmail. Other companies (including in the UK) have taken absence levels into account when determining annual bonuses. 

 

Many organisations have people who habitually take intermittent days off – their work colleagues know who they are! But there is a fairness point here. Those at work expect their employers to take action to stop those of their colleagues who abuse the system and leave them to do their absent colleagues’ work in addition to their own.

 

In the end, addressing a growing employee absence problem involves both carrot and stick. Employers need to come up with effective ideas to resolve the issue. There are a number of things which might work – depending on the culture of the organisation. These include:

 

Introducing a programme like personal time to deal with wider absence needs, including intermittent sickness;

 

Consider reducing the amount of sick leave allowance which is “guaranteed”, with additional sick leave being left to discretion – to cater for particular situations;

 

Take absence levels into account when awarding annual bonuses;

 

Fix salary levels so that full salary is only paid to those employees who attain a specified level of attendance (it is better doing it this way than a monthly bonus);

 

Consider whether the introduction of more homeworking will help reduce absence levels.