With Employee Assistance Programme provider Health Assured under investigation over claims that calls from vulnerable workers were not handled properly, Tobba Vigfusdottir looks at why the EAP model does not always work and offers an alternative.
With Gen-Z mental health suffering, thousands of adults under 25 are not looking for work in the UK. The ailing mental and physical health of those in the workforce isn’t looking much better either; with 50% of workers under 40 experiencing burnout, according to Deloitte.
Unsurprisingly, the resulting absenteeism, lower productivity and high turnover is becoming a major issue for employers. Altogether, declining wellbeing is estimated to cost the private sector £46bn and the public sector more than £10bn. Something has to change, and fast.
Employee assistance programmes
Employee assistance programmes, or EAPs, should be stepping up to support workers. A feature of the employee mental health landscape since the 1930s, EAPs typically operate as 24/7 email or phone-based intervention programmes offering employees access to short-term counselling or therapy to provide care in the event of a serious incident. Unfortunately, despite their intended purpose, EAPs often fall short in providing the swift and effective support they promise. In reality, they often serve as a perfunctory “check-in-the-box” provision from a bygone era.
The EAP model no longer works
The problems lie in the model itself which reduces cost by reducing usage. Businesses are charged a set fee by EAPs every year. Regardless of an increase in usage, the employer does not pay more. This means that programmes are designed and service operators are trained in a way that prioritises cost-efficiency over prompt and effective support, often resulting in the provision of minimal or no quality care. The typical triage procedure is slow and too heavily influenced by the broken business model, resulting in poor quality of care or none at all.
Combine these systematic barriers with the stigma surrounding mental health and you truly have a recipe for silent suffering. The resulting reluctance to seek help has led employees to completely disregard EAPs, with a typical engagement rate of 1.8%, according to the Reward and Employee Benefits Association.
For those who do manage to access therapy, the freedom to choose a preferred practitioner is rarely an option. Regardless of the specificity of an employee’s problems, workers are essentially assigned a therapist at random. While employees may require the help of a specialised practitioner well-versed in dealing with addiction or grief, neurodiversity or menopause, for instance, this level of personalised care is rarely a reality. When an employee chooses the right kind of help, they are taking charge of their health. EAPs are supposed to help but are not encouraging the personal decision to get better.
EAPs are supposed to help but are not encouraging the personal decision to get better.”
At the core of the issue is the fact that employers choose EAP solutions in a similar way to purchasing insurance, opting for lower costs over comprehensive coverage. The EAP industry itself acknowledges these shortcomings, recognising that although nobody wanted this outcome, it has become the reality.
What would work better?
So how do we fix this rapidly escalating mental health crisis? The answer lies in looking at places that are more successfully handling the rise in mental health challenges.
In the Nordic countries, there is no equivalent to EAPs. Instead, the Nordic social model prioritises equal access to care, with all operational bodies (the companies, the state and the health systems) supporting access – ensuring nobody falls through the cracks. No company can argue that employee wellbeing is none of their business because it directly impacts their bottom line.
This is why I was shocked when the exact nature of EAPs was first brought to my attention. They appeared to discourage those in need of care from seeking help, while merely creating the illusion of support. This realisation motivated us to found Kara Connect, to simplify access to high-quality wellbeing support. Unlike EAPs, our custom wellbeing hubs are designed to provide companies with a comprehensive solution to employee wellbeing. The main difference is that the wellbeing hub model is designed to increase, not decrease, access to practitioners.
A personalised approach to employee wellbeing would also be more beneficial to workers and organisations alike. For instance, when a wellbeing solution is first provided to a company, it should be required that each employee completes an anonymous survey. This way, wellbeing providers can tailor packages from various services to suit the specific needs of each workplace.
For instance, in a younger workplace, there might be a demand for practitioners specialising in mental health support, social media addiction or substance abuse. Conversely, in a company with an older female demographic, there could be more interest in therapies relating to burnout or menopause.
The freedom to choose your practitioner, without jumping through several hoops or involving a manager, needs to become the norm.”
Ultimately, choice and confidentiality should be made central to workplace wellbeing platforms. The freedom to choose your practitioner, without jumping through several hoops or involving a manager, needs to become the norm. This can be achieved through a personalised wellbeing hub model, designed solely for the end user that offers a wide selection of practitioners. Not only will this increase privacy, a major concern often deterring workers with mental health problems from seeking help, but will also decrease managerial responsibilities.
Moreover, while EAPs may gatekeep access to professional help to cut costs, the wellbeing hub model empowers users by providing rapid access to an entire network of practitioners. It is entirely counterproductive if an employee calls up seeking assistance and is fobbed off with “breathing exercises”, or worse, does not receive any form of support at all.
For a workplace wellbeing solution to work, employees need to feel confident that they are accessing meaningful care. This can only be achieved by providing a network of professionals with outstanding qualifications, who are thoroughly evaluated and seamlessly integrated into a private platform. With many organisations having a global workforce, services must be provided in multiple languages.
Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance
Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday
Employers need to pay more attention to the shortcomings of the EAP model; only through the holistic approach of an integrated care system where the employee can choose the right kind of help for them, will workplace wellbeing improve. Companies that understand this will build a strong workplace culture that will ultimately improve their bottom line.
Latest HR job opportunities on Personnel Today
Browse more human resources jobs
