The Work Clinic

I agree with the keep it practical line of comment. However, I am not too certain what you are saying Paul in terms of what you actually do to reduce it. I see you comment on your frustration of absence figures and you have a moan about not managing it and whose job it is but in my view little else. Business people want practical solutions as well as practical problems.

Absence management is often made difficult when in fact if managers are proactive is needn't be.

HR along with the line should develop a policy that includes review dates for absence (equivalent to disciplinary warnings), proactive return to work practices, quick off the mark long term absence management and not be so afraid to terminate on the grounds of capability if the reasonable procedure has been followed.

That might just make a few of those that forget to come in on Mondays or Fridays to think twice who are the thorns in the side of business people.

As an occupational health adviser I find all of the above comments interesting. I understand Paul's frustration with huge figures and have found that just looking at an organisation's figures is sufficient. I work with HR in various businesses as part of a team, in turn working with line managers to raise awareness of the benefits of OH to both employees and managers alike.

Raising the profile of OH by talking round and setting up health intitiatives also has a benefit in that people get to know you and see you as approachable and knowledgeable.

HR can't manage absence, neither can OH. It is only really successful when a team work together and only if there is buy in from the business at all levels. For this there has to be excellent communication. Pippa James B Med sci (Hons) Director Healtheffects.

I do agree that absence management needs to keep a practical approach and often does get passed to HR in problem cases. Our Employee Assistance Programme (Amian) specialises in helping SME's get staff back into work and to be supported to seek assistance. Often smaller companies don't have an HR or OH department. The reality is that staff absent from work cost the company money, directly and indirectly and sometimes it does need outside help that staff feel thay can approach on a solution focused basis.

We also assist companies to have procedures in place to manage those staff who maybe use the system, but also looking at why they maybe doing so, it often masks an underlying problem that we can help them to solve.

Outside assistance can often be the answer. Thus helping to reduce turnover, absence and the costs of re-training and covering for absence, often hidden costs that soon add up.

Thanks for your comments and I made no attempt in this blog to write even more practical advice as it would duplicate lots of the work that has gone before.

If you are interested in practical help take a wander through the links for plenty of practical help...
http://www.ihc.co.uk/articles/medical_insurance.html

and with a top 10 tips
http://www.ihc.co.uk/articles/Payroll_Professional-Healthy_returns-October_2006.pdf

I have for a long time worked as the individual responsible for the HR function in small companies, as well as a period as the personnel officer in a very large organisation.

Although I have always sought the 'right' way of doing things, using the latest ideas etc, I sometimes just want to break out and say, "if you don't come in to work, you don't get paid". I'd bet the absence would be cut in half..........oh but to dream!!

Just a little addition to my last comment while I'm in that land where it's the company that's protected for a change and I'm allowed to dream.........

What if employees (and I speak as one), had to take out their own income protection insurance policies that covered against absences? This would take absence out of HR - or business control - and down to the individuals work ethic.

The more time they take off, the higher their premium goes, therefore the less time they take off.

Hi Bill,

You dream of a pleasant land but one where a lot of very succesful companies have trodden before.

Most of the mobile phone companies use lots of self-employed people. In a recent marketing meeting the four people I observed were all self-employed task orientated and dealing with Formula 1 sponsorship! If they are sick they don't get paid. They have to buy their own income protection insurance...as a slight side they would be mad as critical illness insurance is more likely to claim against and it pays out bigger and faster...and they have to buy their own car, lunch etc etc.

Income protection insurance pays out after 6 months of absence and only if you are genuinely ill. Setting up a new benfits programme why would that need insuring - just keep the person on payroll and manage it accordingly until they are fit to return to work...but then you get me going on about another pet subject.

So it is possible to have your cake and eat it. The solution proposed just produces an HR challenge to manage the self-employed!

Sickness absence should be managed within the organisation with the exception of long term illness matters where an external company doctor should be used to provide a medical report.

I am not a fan of employee assistance programmes as in my opinion these expensive bodies can encourage staff to go off sick. This is not good for business. In my view E.A.Ps are an expensive overhead. I don't go with all this so called airy fairy argument that they bring staff back to work early.

Being proactive is the key. Just manage it and follow a procedure that lets you fire lazy employees that play the company sick pay system. And that argument comes from myself as someone that has never lost a tribunal for dismissing someone on the grounds of capability.

My fave on this was when I was a personnel manager (remember being one of them?) in the Highlands of Scotland. Every time we got a little fall of snow we'd get loads of people taking a sick day or claiming to be blocked in their homes. Funny thing was that everyone on the management team always seemed to make it into the office even on the most snowy day! Says a lot about motivation and engagement....

Just to let you know that I do live in the real work and that yesterday I was just dreaming a little.

I truly believe that the absence problem comes down to the recruitment process. We are all built differently, and there are some who see the place of work as somewhere that you try to put in as little as possible and take out as much out as you can.

If strict controls were put in place on ensuring that references were taken up, and further enquiries made on the type of person you are bringing into your company, I believe there wouldn't be as big a problem.

I have experience of arguing against bringing someone in who had a very poor attendance record. I lost the argument to someone senior who thought that other qualities outweighed that point. We then went down the road of having real problems of being short staffed in a small organisation when that individual chose not to turn up on any given day.

I do have great sympathy with those who are genuinely poorly, but cannot abide those with a certain attitude to life and no work ethic, no pride in what they do or how others might see them. Stepping off soap box............

Recruitment can hold the key to looking at behaviour and if the "performance" during interviews is just that or the "real deal".

Having absence criteria along with all the other criteria is the best way forward and adopted by the high street banks unanimously. They recruit regularly and heavily and have perfected the art. If the behaviour over time is ingrained a job change is unlikely going to be the catalyst for sudden attendance from an absentee. We need to draw a line so that the head and the heart make the right personnel decisions.

Employees are different from the old days. They are more wealthy, skilled, intellectual, educated and travelled. We can't hope that bringing a technique or process back to life after 20 years, without change, will work in today's environment.

Perhaps the lawyer who suggested obtaining a report on an employee with dyslexia up for promotion had in mind the recent case in the Employment Appeal Tribunal of Paterson v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis UKEAT/0635/06, 23 July 2007.

Although not obviously a medical condition, dyslexia is accepted as capable of amounting to a disability under the DDA. In the Paterson case, an extrememly capable police officer who had been promoted to Chief Inspector claimed that he had been discriminated against as part of the promotion assessment for the role of Superintendent, on the basis that insufficient adjustments had been made for his dyslexia. This was even though he had only discovered his dyslexia in 2006, already well into a successful career involving significant amounts of paperwork.

The EAT found that, based on the medical evidence, Mr Paterson's dyslexia did have a substantial adverse effect on his ability to carry out day-to-day activities, which included assessments and examinations.

Perhaps the lawyer who suggested obtaining a report on an employee with dyslexia up for promotion had in mind the recent case in the Employment Appeal Tribunal of Paterson v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis UKEAT/0635/06, 23 July 2007.

Although not obviously a medical condition, dyslexia is accepted as capable of amounting to a disability under the DDA. In the Paterson case, an extrememly capable police officer who had been promoted to Chief Inspector claimed that he had been discriminated against as part of the promotion assessment for the role of Superintendent, on the basis that insufficient adjustments had been made for his dyslexia. This was even though he had only discovered his dyslexia in 2006, already well into a successful career involving significant amounts of paperwork.

The EAT found that, based on the medical evidence, Mr Paterson's dyslexia did have a substantial adverse effect on his ability to carry out day-to-day activities, which included assessments and examinations.

I have never known anyone 'throw a sicky' in a job they enjoyed.

Maybe Mr Millers contact with EAP's have been airy fairy, however From our company viewpoint a good EAP will save your company money and time, staff with real problems can access help and real solutions.
All staff will have emotional and health problems during working life either themselves directly or direct family. Bringing these problems to work or not being able to access support usually means reduced productivity and sickness absence. Amian EAP is cost effective, helps with sickness absence reduction and offers access to trauma response, mediation and health care support. Finally, yes it helps prevent litigation.
Amanda K Smith Clinical Director. 01204 41818f