Annual survey report 2012
in partnership with
2012
ABSENCE
MANAGEMENT
2012
CONTENTS
FOREWORD2
ABOUT US
4
SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS
5
RATES OF EMPLOYEE ABSENCE
9
THE COST OF ABSENCE
15
OCCUPATIONAL SICK PAY
17
CAUSES OF ABSENCE
20
WORK-RELATED STRESS
25
MANAGING ABSENCE
29
THE IMPACT OF GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES ON ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
35
EMPLOYEE WELL-BEING
37
EMPLOYEE ABSENCE AND THE ECONOMIC CLIMATE
46
BACKGROUND TO THE SURVEY
51
FURTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION
54
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS55
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
CONCLUSIONS48
1
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
FOREWORD
Welcome to the thirteenth edition of our Absence
likely to be taking steps to address it. However,
Management survey report in partnership with
there is still further progress needed and, with
Simplyhealth. As in previous years, we provide
noted increases in presenteeism and stress
useful benchmarking data for organisations on
remaining the most common cause of long-term
absence levels and the cost and causes of absence as
absence for the second year running, there is an
well as a focus on employee well-being. In addition,
even stronger case for action.
we report on the questions we asked about the
impact of government initiatives on absence
Overall, a proactive approach to managing
management, and we continue to track the effect
absence, which includes effective training,
of the economic climate on employee absence.
involvement and support for line managers
remains critical for success. Furthermore, regularly
This survey report highlights some of the
reviewing the current and future suitability of
challenges organisations are both currently facing
absence and well-being approaches is particularly
and are anticipating over the coming 12 months.
vital, as well as creative thinking around how to
With the economic challenges facing the UK,
maintain a focus on key issues when budgets are
fragile labour markets and ongoing budget cuts,
cut or frozen.
2012 remains an uncertain time. For example, we
find that a significant number of organisations
A good example of an organisation taking such an
(two-fifths of public sector and one-fifth of private
approach, the Northern Ireland Police Service, is
sector organisations) are planning redundancies,
featured as a case study in the report. In particular,
which puts a further strain on the workforce.
we look at how they have actively increased staff
engagement and well-being, enabling individuals
This year we see noticeable decreases in public
to better manage their personal well-being needs.
and private sector absence levels. But we must air
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
2
caution before celebrating lower absence levels
Sickness absence is also a significant focus
because this year also sees a continued increase in
for policy-makers. November 2011 saw the
presenteeism – people continuing to attend work
publication of the recommendations from the
when they are not well – which can have negative
2011 government-commissioned sickness absence
effects for both the individual and the organisation.
review (jointly chaired by David Frost and Dame
We also find increases in stress and mental health
Carol Black).
problems. Despite decreasing absence levels, it
is imperative to continue to manage absence
In addition, in this report we examine
effectively, focusing on employee well-being and
organisations’ views on the review’s
being proactive to address any early warning signs.
recommendation for an Independent Assessment
Service to manage long-term sickness absence
What is encouraging, however, is that
more effectively, as well as on some of the other
organisations are becoming more mindful of the
government initiatives introduced over the last
issue of presenteeism, with almost two-thirds
few years.
taking steps to discourage it. In addition, twothirds of those employers who have identified
Dr Jill Miller
stress as one of the top five causes of absence are
Research Adviser, CIPD
2012
Simplyhealth is delighted to be partnering with
Last year saw stress become the number one cause
the CIPD for a third year to bring you the Absence
of workplace absence for the first time, and this
Management survey report. We believe that
year it persists.
health is the most important thing of all and that
employer health and well-being strategies play a
In contrast, it’s good to see well-being strategies
fundamental role in the management of absence
increasing amongst businesses year on year. This
and presenteeism. The survey offers us, as people
means that there is focus on doing what’s best for
managers, insights to inform our own approaches
employees and improving business health. The
as well as shows us how we can encourage
vital role of line managers cannot be disputed.
employees to take more responsibility for their
Early detection of health issues and ensuring
own health and well-being.
the correct support is in place helps people with
health problems stay in or return to work.
It’s fair to say that the double-dip recession is
impacting business health as well as employee
With well-being strategies and absence
well-being, with presenteeism on the rise. The
management being high on the agenda for
link between presenteeism and mental health
government, there is still more to do; over a
problems is unsurprising, especially with continued
quarter of businesses still do not have a well-
job insecurity and rising workloads. People are
being strategy in place. It’s our mission to help
also still facing financial challenges with pay rises
individuals, families, employers and the wider
few and far between.
community manage their health.
Helen Dickinson
People Director, Simplyhealth
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
3
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
ABOUT US
CIPD
Simplyhealth
The CIPD is the world’s largest chartered HR
At Simplyhealth we focus on healthcare so
and development professional body. We’re a
individuals and businesses can rely on us for our
globally recognised body with more than 135,000
specialist knowledge. We’ve been helping people
members across 120 countries – including 84,000
access affordable healthcare for nearly 140 years. We
professional members.
now cover almost 4 million people with health plans
and more than 20,000 companies choose us as their
Our members include the next generation of
healthcare provider. Our corporate clients include
HR professionals and many of the world’s most
Astra-Zeneca, British Airways, the Co-operative,
influential senior HR leaders from world-class
John Lewis Partnership, Royal Mail, Tesco, Yorkshire
organisations.
Building Society and William Hill. We are the experts’
choice too; we provide cover for all the major
We set global standards for best practice in HR and
hospital groups in the UK.
its specialisms. It’s our aim to support and develop
professional capability: shaping thinking, leading
We offer private medical insurance, health cash
best practice and building HR’s profile in business.
plans, dental plans and self-funded health plans to
help people with their everyday health and get cover
cipd.co.uk
for the unexpected.
We’re committed to delivering exceptional personal
customer service and go out of our way to do the
right thing, not the easy thing. The Institute of
Customer Services recognises that our customer
services team is world class, and we have achieved its
sought-after ServiceMark accreditation.
We also care about our communities and last year
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
4
donated £1.6 million to local causes and national
charities.
simplyhealth.co.uk
2012
SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS
This report sets out the findings of the CIPD’s thirteenth national
survey of absence management trends, policy and practice. The
analysis is based on replies from 667 organisations across the UK
employing a total of 1.7 million employees.
Absence levels
Length of absence
Most organisations, particularly in the public sector,
Two-thirds of working time lost to absence is
record their annual employee absence rate.
accounted for by short-term absences of up to seven
days. A fifth is attributed to long-term absences
The average level of employee absence has fallen
(four weeks or more).
compared with last year from 7.7 days to 6.8 per
employee per year. The private services and public
Length of absence varies across sectors. A higher
sector report the largest reductions. There is,
proportion of absence in the public sector is due to
however, high variation across organisations, with
long-term absences of four weeks or longer.
some reporting extremely high levels of absence.
Smaller organisations are more likely to attribute
Public sector absence has fallen to the lowest level
a higher proportion of their absence to short-term
recorded for this sector since we recorded absence
leave compared with larger organisations.
levels by sector in 2002, with a figure of 7.9 days per
employee per year.
Cost of absence
Less than half of employers monitor the cost of
On average, public and non-profit employees have
absence. The public sector and larger organisations
approximately two days more absence per year than
are most likely to do so.
their private sector counterparts. Manual workers
have one more day absence, on average, than
The average annual cost of employee absence per
non-manual workers. Absence levels also tend to
employee varies considerably across organisations,
increase with organisation size.
partly because they include different costs in their
Overall, more organisations report that their
absence per employee is less than last year and back
absence levels have decreased (41%) compared with
to levels reported in 2010 (2012 median: £600; 2011
the previous year than say it has increased (27%).
median: £673; 2010 median: £600).
One-third report it has remained the same.
The public and non-profit sectors report higher costs
The majority of respondents, particularly in
of absence per employee than the private sector.
organisations with high levels of absence, believe it
There is, however, a clear drop in the median cost of
is possible to reduce absence.
absence per employee this year in the public sector,
which is not observed in the other sectors.
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
calculations. On average, the reported cost of
5
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
Occupational sick pay
likely to rank mental ill health and musculoskeletal
Most employers surveyed (81%) provide
injuries among its top five causes of long-term
occupational sick pay to all employees. A further
absence.
10% provide it to some employees depending on
their level in the organisation or the nature of
Work-related stress
their role.
Two-fifths of employers overall (52% in the public
sector) report that stress-related absence has
There is considerable variation in how long
increased over the past year.
organisations provide occupational sick pay to an
employee (with at least one year’s service) who is on
The most common cause of stress, as in previous
long-term sick leave. Public sector employers provide
years, is workload. This year, however, it appears
full pay and then reduced pay for significantly
to be even more of an issue.
longer than employers from other sectors.
Other top causes of stress at work include
One in ten organisations have increased or
management style, non-work factors such as
extended their occupational sick pay over the past
relationships and family, relationships at work and
12 months and a similar proportion have decreased
considerable organisational change/restructuring.
or restricted it.
Considerable organisational change/restructuring
Causes of absence
and job insecurity are more commonly ranked in
Minor illnesses (such as colds, flu, stomach upsets,
the top causes of stress in the public sector than in
headaches and migraines) are by far the most
the private.
common cause of short-term absence.
Three-fifths of organisations are taking steps
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
6
Musculoskeletal injuries, back pain and stress are the
to identify and reduce stress in the workplace.
next most common causes of short-term absence.
Nevertheless, more than a quarter (27%) of
Stress is more common for non-manual workers,
organisations that report stress is one of the top
while musculoskeletal injuries and back pain are
five causes of absence are not taking any steps to
more common for manual workers.
address it.
Fewer employers rank absences not due to genuine
Just over a quarter of employers report they
ill health among their top five most common causes
have increased their focus on stress management
of short-term absence compared with last year.
over the past 12 months. As in previous years,
Non-genuine absence is reportedly most common in
public services employers are most likely to
private services organisations.
be proactively managing stress; however, the
proportion doing so has fallen in comparison
The most common causes of long-term absence
with previous years.
are stress, acute medical conditions (for example
stroke, heart attack and cancer), mental ill
Popular methods to identify and reduce workplace
health, musculoskeletal injuries and back pain.
stress include staff surveys, training for managers/
Musculoskeletal injuries and back pain are
staff and flexible working options/improved work–
particularly common for manual workers while stress
life balance.
is more common for non-manual workers.
Managing absence
Stress is particularly common in the public and
Almost all organisations surveyed have a written
non-profit sectors. The public sector is also more
absence/attendance management policy.
2012
Half have introduced changes to some aspect of
it has helped to reduce absence levels, possibly
their approach in the last year, with public sector
because only one in ten think it is being used
organisations most likely to have made changes.
effectively by GPs.
Overall, just under half of employers have a target
Half of employers report that the fit note prompts
in place for reducing employee absence, although
conversations about absence/health between staff
this rises to 69% in the public sector.
and line managers and just under a third that it
helps line managers to manage absence.
The most common methods used to manage
interviews, trigger mechanisms to review
Impact of the abolition of the Default
Retirement Age (DRA) on absence
attendance, giving sickness absence information
Very few organisations report that the abolition
to line managers and disciplinary procedures for
of the DRA has had an impact on absence levels. A
unacceptable absence. These are also seen to be
quarter of organisations have, however, increased
the most effective methods.
their use of flexible working practices as a result
short-term absence are return-to-work
of the abolition.
The most common methods used to manage
long-term absence, return-to-work interviews
Employee well-being
and occupational health involvement, are also
There has been a gradual increase over the past
reported to be the most effective, as was the case
few years in the proportion of organisations with
last year.
an employee well-being strategy. More than half
of organisations now have one in place.
Line managers take primary responsibility
for managing short-term absence in 70% of
The most commonly provided well-being benefits
organisations overall, rising to 87% in the public
are access to counselling services and employee
sector. They take responsibility for managing
assistance programmes, but the benefits provided
long-term absence in 53% of organisations overall
vary considerably across sectors.
(74% of the public sector). Not all organisations,
however, train managers in absence-handling and
As in previous years, the public sector is most
fewer provide them with tailored support.
likely to promote well-being through benefits to
facilitate healthy lifestyles. The private sector is
Private sector employers are much more likely to
more likely to provide insurance for employees.
restrict sick pay than the public sector. They are
also more likely to offer private medical insurance
Nearly half of organisations report their well-
and attendance bonuses or incentives.
being spend has not changed compared with
the last financial year. Just under a fifth of
organisations report their well-being spend
a range of methods aimed at promoting good
has increased. Similar changes are anticipated
health and flexibility. They are also more likely
in 2013.
to report that attendance is driven by the board,
although this is only the case for 28% of the public
In little change from last year, less than a quarter
sector (10% of the private).
of respondents report their organisations evaluate
the impact of their well-being spend.
The Statement of Fitness to Work
The vast majority of organisations across all sectors
have used the ‘fit note’, but just one in ten believe
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
Public sector employers are more likely to use
7
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
Employee absence and the recession
Nearly two-thirds of employers who have noticed
Two-fifths of public sector organisations and at
an increase in presenteeism in the last 12 months
least a fifth of organisations from other sectors
are taking steps to discourage it.
report they will be making redundancies over
the next six months. Overall, just a third of the
Less than a third of organisations (30%) report
organisations surveyed report they won’t be
they have increased their focus on employee
making any redundancies.
well-being and health promotion as a result of the
economic context.
Nearly a third of organisations report an increase
in people coming to work ill in the last 12
months and more than two-fifths had noted an
increase in reported mental health problems.
Both of these issues have increased compared
with previous years and are more common in
organisations that are anticipating redundancies
in the next six months.
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
8
2012
RATES OF EMPLOYEE ABSENCE
Average absence rates have improved compared with previous
years, with greatest average reductions in the private services
and public sector. At the organisation level, however, there
is considerable variation: while two-fifths report absence has
decreased over the past year, a quarter report that it has increased.
Most organisations (82%) record their annual
Sector variations
employee absence rate, recognising its impact on
This year absence levels have dropped
business success (2011: 81%). In line with previous
considerably in the public sector, continuing the
years’ findings, public sector organisations are
downward trend observed last year (2012: 7.9
most likely to record this information and private
days per employee; 2011: 9.1 days; 2010: 9.6 days;
services the least (public sector: 94%; private
2009: 9.7 days). In fact, this year public sector
services: 73%; manufacturing and production and
absence has fallen to the lowest level since we
non-profits: 86%).1
recorded absence levels by sector in 2002.
There is considerable variation in reported levels
This reduction has brought public sector absence
of absence, with a few organisations reporting
levels just below that of the non-profit sector,
very high absence levels, as was the case last
although they remain considerably higher than
year. In order to avoid a few extreme cases
in the private sector (Table 2).
2
skewing the results, we report the 5% trimmed
mean (Table 1).3 The figures suggest that, on
The private services sector also reports a
average, absence has declined compared with
considerable decrease in average absence levels
last year by one day per employee.
this year to 5.7 days per employee, reversing
Table 1: Average level of employee absence, all employees
Average working time lost per year
(%)
Average number of days lost per
employee per year
Standard
deviation
Mean
5% trimmed
mean
Standard
deviation
Mean
2012: all employees
3.0
3.3
3.4
6.8
7.5
7.7
2011: all employees
3.4
3.5
3.8
7.7
8.0
8.7
2010: all employees
3.2
1.9
3.4
7.4
4.3
7.7
Base: 498 (2012); 403 (2011); 429 (2010)
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
5% trimmed
mean4
9
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
the trend which saw it rise from 6.4 days per
have the highest levels of absence. In the private
employee in 2009 to 6.6 days in 2010, to 7.1 days
services sector, call centres have a high average
last year. It is now at a similarly low level to the
level of absence, as we’ve found in previous
manufacturing and production sector, which
years.
reports little change compared with last year.
Manual and non-manual absence levels
Table 3 shows that there is also considerable
Average absence levels suggest that while
variation within sectors, although the small
absence has fallen for non-manual workers (2012:
number of respondents in each industry means
4.7 days per employee per year; 2011: 5.5. days)
differences should be treated with caution. Non-
there has been no change compared with last
profit care services and public sector education
year for manual workers. Manual employees had
and health organisations reported particularly
one more day of absence on average than non-
high average absence levels (although there is
manual employees.5
considerable variation in absence levels for the
education sector). This suggests that it is frontline public and non-profit organisations that
Table 2: Average level of employee absence, by sector for all, manual and non-manual employees
Average working time
lost per year (%)
Number of
respondents
5%
trimmed
mean
Standard
deviation
86
2.6
Private sector services
195
Public services
Average number of days lost
per employee per year
Mean
5%
trimmed
mean
Standard
deviation
Mean
1.6
2.8
6.0
3.6
6.5
2.5
2.7
2.9
5.7
6.1
6.6
145
3.5
4.5
3.9
7.9
10.2
9.0
All employees
Manufacturing and
production
Non-profit organisations
72
3.6
3.4
4.1
8.2
7.7
9.3
498
3.0
3.3
3.4
6.8
7.5
7.7
Manufacturing and
production
35
2.9
1.7
3.1
6.7
3.8
7.1
Private sector services
29
2.1
1.8
2.2
4.9
4.0
5.0
Public services
13
2.0
2.3
2.1
4.5
5.3
4.9
7
2.7
2.1
2.8
6.2
4.8
6.3
84
2.5
1.9
2.6
5.7
4.3
5.9
Manufacturing and
production
33
1.2
1.0
1.3
2.7
2.2
2.9
Private sector services
42
2.2
3.2
2.7
5.1
7.3
6.2
Public services
19
3.5
1.5
3.5
7.9
3.5
7.9
13
1.9
0.8
1.8
4.2
1.9
4.2
107
2.0
2.3
2.3
4.7
5.3
5.3
Total
Manual employees
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
10
Non-profit organisations
Total
Non-manual employees
Non-profit organisations
Total
2012
Table 3: Average level of employee absence, all employees by sector breakdowns
Average
working
time lost
per year
(%)
Number of 5% trimmed
respondents
mean
Manufacturing
and production
Private sector
services
Average
days lost
per year
Mean
5% trimmed
mean
Mean
1
n/a*
1.7
n/a*
3.8
Chemicals, oils and
pharmaceuticals
9
2.4
2.5
5.6
5.8
Construction
8
2.2
2.2
5.0
5.0
Electricity, gas and water
1
n/a*
3.8
n/a*
8.7
Engineering, electronics
and metals
22
2.5
2.7
5.7
6.1
Food, drink and tobacco
13
3.3
3.5
7.4
8.0
General manufacturing
9
3.2
3.2
7.2
7.3
Mining and quarrying
1
n/a*
3.2
n/a*
7.3
Paper and printing
4
2.5
2.4
5.6
5.6
Textiles
4
1.7
1.7
3.8
3.8
Other manufacturing/
production
14
3.1
3.2
7.1
7.3
Professional services
(accountancy,
advertising, consultancy,
legal, etc)
28
1.9
2.5
4.4
5.7
Finance, insurance and
real estate
28
2.2
2.3
5.1
5.2
5
2.4
2.4
5.5
5.4
IT services
2.5
2.8
5.7
6.3
8
4.1
4.2
9.3
9.7
Media (broadcasting and
publishing, etc)
3
n/a*
1.6
n/a*
3.7
Retail and wholesale
15
2.7
3.0
6.2
6.8
Transport, distribution
and storage
21
3.2
3.6
7.3
8.2
7
1.8
1.8
4.1
4.1
Other private services
64
2.7
3.2
6.2
7.2
Central government
13
3.3
3.3
7.6
7.5
Education
26
4.1
5.8
9.3
13.2
Health
24
4.1
4.1
9.4
9.3
Local government
52
3.5
3.6
8.0
8.1
Other public services
30
3.2
3.2
7.3
7.3
Care services
14
5.4
5.9
12.2
13.4
Charity services
17
3.6
4.2
8.1
9.6
Housing association
25
3.6
4.0
8.2
9.1
Other voluntary
16
2.4
2.5
5.5
5.8
* It is not meaningful to calculate the 5% trimmed mean with a low number of respondents.
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
16
Call centres
Communications
Non-profit
organisations
Average
days lost
per year
Agriculture and forestry
Hotels, catering and
leisure
Public services
Average
working
time lost
per year
(%)
11
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
The effect of workforce size
due to sampling differences between regions; for
Larger organisations tend to have higher levels
example, organisations reporting for the whole of
of absence than smaller ones (Table 4).6 People
the UK have a lower than average absence level,
may be deterred from taking absence in smaller
but these organisations are mostly from the private
organisations because they tend to work in
services sector (which has the lowest absence levels)
smaller teams and consequently absence is
and very few are from the public sector (where
more disruptive and noticeable. It is unlikely,
absence tends to be higher). The small sample sizes
however, that this is the only explanation.
do not allow us to separate out whether differences
Larger organisations (and the public sector) tend
are due to region, sector or size.
to offer more generous sick pay schemes (see
may have a greater incentive to return to work.
Changes in levels of absence within
organisations
Differences in sick pay schemes, together with
The above findings suggest that overall absence
organisational culture and absence policies, may
has reduced compared with last year, particularly in
help explain why absence tends to be higher in
the private services and public sector. Respondents
the public sector than the private, regardless of
were also asked about changes within their own
size (Table 5).7
organisations compared with the previous year.
Occupational sick pay), without which employees
Overall two-fifths report a decrease in their levels of
Regional breakdown
absence, while just over a quarter report an increase
There are regional differences in absence levels
(Table 7), suggesting considerable variation in
(Table 6).8 Some of these differences are likely to be
organisations’ experiences.
Table 4: The effect of workforce size
Average working time
lost per year (%)
Number of
respondents
5%
trimmed
mean
Standard
deviation
5%
trimmed
mean
Standard
deviation
29
2.4
3.6
5.5
8.1
50–249
158
2.5
1.8
5.7
4.1
250–999
No. of UK employees
1–49
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
12
Average number of
days lost per employee
per year (days)
161
3.1
4.9
7.0
11.2
1,000–4,999
90
3.6
2.2
8.1
5.0
5,000+
51
3.6
1.7
8.1
3.9
Table 5: The effect of workforce size on absence levels, by sector
Average number of days lost per employee per year
(5% trimmed mean)
No. of UK employees
Manufacturing
and production
Private sector
services
Public services
Non-profit
organisations
1–49
n/a*(3)
5.1 (16)
5.1 (5)
50–249
6.2 (35)
4.6 (78)
6.2 (16)
7.8 (29)
250–999
5.7 (38)
6.5 (49)
8.2 (46)
7.9 (28)
1,000–4,999
7.3 (7)
7.8 (29)
8.1 (44)
12.1 (10)
– (0)
7.7 (17)
8.6 (34)
– (0)
5,000+
12.3 (5)
Number of respondents shown in brackets
2012
Table 6: Average level of absence, by region
Average working time
lost per year (%)
Average number of days lost
per employee per year (days)
Number of
respondents
5% trimmed
mean
Standard
deviation
5% trimmed
mean
Standard
deviation
East Anglia
20
2.9
2.98
6.6
6.80
East Midlands
26
3.1
1.16
7.0
2.64
West Midlands
29
3.0
1.63
6.7
3.73
North-east of England
15
2.9
0.95
6.7
2.16
North-west of England
36
3.7
2.19
8.4
5.00
South-west of England
39
3.0
3.52
6.8
8.03
Yorkshire and Humberside
29
4.1
9.68
9.3
22.07
South-east of England
(excluding London)
61
2.8
1.37
6.4
3.13
London
51
2.6
3.04
6.0
6.94
Scotland
49
3.5
2.79
8.0
6.36
Wales
18
3.8
1.05
8.6
2.39
1
n/a
–
120
2.6
2.34
Northern Ireland
Whole of UK
–
–
6.0
5.35
This variation is noted within all sectors (Table 7),
know). The sectors with highest absence levels,
although private services are least likely to report
the public and voluntary sectors, are most likely
changes in levels of absence.9 It is encouraging that
to believe they can reduce absence levels further
in the non-profit sector, where average absence
(public: 85%; non-profit: 78%; private sector: 72%).10
levels are highest (Table 2), more than twice as many
Larger organisations are also more likely to believe
organisations report a decrease in absence than
they can reduce absence.11 Nevertheless, while
report an increase. Nevertheless, absence clearly
organisations with higher absence levels are more
remains a challenging issue for many organisations.
likely to believe they can reduce absence levels, the
majority (61%) of those with very low absence levels
Three-quarters of employers believe it is possible to
(fewer than three days on average per employee per
further reduce employee absence (76%). Only 12%
year) also believe they can further reduce absence.
do not think it is possible (11% report they don’t
Increased
Decreased
Stayed the same
All
27
41
32
Manufacturing and production
32
48
20
Private sector services
24
32
43
Public services
30
50
20
Non-profit organisations
21
45
34
Base: 631
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
Table 7: Changes in levels of absence within organisations compared with the previous year (%)
13
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
Lengthy absence
compared with nearly three-quarters in the private
There has been very little change in the length of
services sector.12 A higher proportion of absence in
employee absences over the past few years. Overall,
the public sector is due to long-term absences of
nearly two-thirds of working time lost to absence
four weeks or longer (Table 8).
is accounted for by short-term absences of up to
seven days. A fifth of absence is attributed to long-
Length of absence is also related to workforce size in
term absence (four weeks or more), while 16% is
the private services and public sectors, with smaller
attributed to absences of between eight days and
organisations attributing more of their absence to
four weeks (Table 8).
short-term leave than larger organisations.13 This
relationship is not significant in manufacturing
Our findings also show, as in previous years, that
and production or the non-profit sector, where the
there are significant sector differences. Just over
size range of organisations that responded to the
half of absence in the public sector is short term,
question is more limited.
Table 8: The average proportion of sickness absence attributed to short-, medium- and long-term
absence, by workforce size and industry sector
Number of
respondents
Up to seven days
(%)
Eight days up to
four weeks (%)
Four weeks or
longer (%)
372
64
16
19
Manual employees
65
63
17
20
Non-manual employees
87
68
15
17
64
61
18
21
171
72
14
15
Public services
85
54
20
26
Non-profit organisations
52
61
17
21
All employees
Industry sector
Manufacturing and production
Private sector services
Number of UK employees
1–49
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
14
17
79
9
12
50–249
122
70
14
16
250–999
124
62
16
21
1,000–4,999
68
60
19
21
5,000+
35
52
24
24
2012
THE COST OF ABSENCE
The average annual absence costs per employee have
decreased compared with last year, although they vary
considerably across organisations. Less than half of employers
monitor the cost of absence.
Monitoring the cost of employee absence can
calculations (see Table 11). The prevalence of some
help organisations identify the cost-benefits
extremely high figures also raises the possibility that
of investing in better absence management
some respondents misread the question and report
practices. Less than half of organisations surveyed
absence costs for the whole organisation rather than
report they do this, showing little change from
per employee. The median figures are therefore
previous years (2012: 40%; 2011: 42%; 2010: 45%;
considered to be most valid and are reported on.
2009: 41%). Larger organisations, and those in
the public sector, are significantly more likely to
On average, the reported cost of absence per
monitor the cost (Table 9).
employee is less than last year and back to levels
14
reported in 2010 (2012 median: £600; 2011 median:
A total of 124 respondents reported their average
£673; 2010 median: £600). As we have found in
annual cost of absence per employee per year. There
previous years, this overall figure masks considerable
is considerable variation in the figures reported
differences across sectors. As usual the public and
(Table 10). This is at least partly due to our findings
non-profit sectors report higher costs of absence
that organisations include different costs in their
per employee than the private sector. This is likely
Table 9: Proportion of organisations that monitor the cost of employee absence (%)
Does your organisation monitor the cost of
employee absence?
Yes
No
Don’t know
40
49
11
Manufacturing and production
32
59
9
Private sector services
37
55
8
Public services
50
36
14
Non-profit organisations
40
47
12
1–49
32
58
11
50–249
37
53
9
250–999
33
59
9
1,000–4,999
48
38
14
5,000+
63
21
16
All organisations
Industry sector
Base: 667
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
Number of UK employees
15
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
to reflect their more generous sick pay schemes (see
There is, however, a clear drop in the median cost of
Table 12) and also our findings that in these sectors
absence per employee this year in the public sector
a higher proportion of absence is long term (Table 8)
(Figure 1). The reduction in absence levels in this
and consequently more costly to the business.
sector reported above (Absence levels) may help
explain the reduction in costs.
Table 10: Average annual cost of absence per employee per year
Cost (£) per employee per year
Number of
respondents
Median
124
600
1,187
0
4,389,173
Manufacturing and production
25
456
971
0
80,000
Private sector services
54
513
861
0
52,000
Public services
24
647
721
220
20,000
Non-profit organisations
21
700
44,975
0
4,389,173
All
5% trimmed
mean
All employees
Figure 1: Median cost (£) of
absence per employee per year, by sector
2012
2011
2010
Manufacturing and production
2012
2011
2010
Maximum
600
673
600
456
444
400
Private sector services
2012
2011
2010
513
446
600
Public services
2012
2011
2010
647
800
889
Non-profit organisations
2012
2011
2010
700
743
600
(£) 0
200
400
600
800
1,000
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
Table 11: Criteria included in calculation of average cost of employee absence per employee (%)
All
respondents
Manufacturing
and production
Private sector
services
Public
services
Voluntary, community
and not-for-profit
Occupational sick pay
79
83
76
73
90
Statutory sick pay
69
87
67
50
75
Temporary cover
25
39
24
18
20
Additional overtime costs
21
35
18
18
15
Lost production or service
provision
22
17
27
23
15
7
4
4
14
10
Other
Base: 114
16
Minimum
2012
OCCUPATIONAL SICK PAY
Most organisations provide occupational sick pay, although
schemes are most common and generous in the public sector.
Three-quarters of public sector employers provide full pay for
more than 20 weeks compared with less than a third of the
private and non-profit sectors.
The provision and cover of occupational sick pay
At the lower end, 8% pay the full rate for one to
schemes appears to have changed little since we
three weeks and most of these do not continue
last asked these questions in 2010. Most employers
to pay at a reduced rate (Table 13). At the more
surveyed (81%) provide occupational sick pay
generous end of the scale, two-fifths provide
to all employees. A further 10% provide it to
full pay to employees on long-term sick leave for
some employees depending on their level in the
between 21 and 30 weeks and over three-quarters
organisation or the nature of their role. Only a
of these then continue to pay a reduced rate for
minority (3%) do not provide occupational sick pay
a further 21–30 weeks. Only a small proportion of
to any employees. Regardless of size, public sector
organisations (3%) provide full pay for absences of
employers are most likely to provide occupational
more than 30 weeks.
sick pay to all employees (92%) and private sector
employers the least (74%, non-profits: 89%).15
Public sector employers are by far the most
generous when it comes to how long they will
Where occupational sick pay is provided, it
provide absent employees with full and reduced
usually covers the first three days of absence
pay (Table 12). The median number of weeks
(90%), particularly in public sector and non-profit
that public sector organisations provide full
organisations (public sector: 96%; non-profit
and reduced pay is at least double that of the
sector: 91%; private sector: 86%).16 The majority
other sectors. Three-quarters of public sector
of sick pay schemes across all sectors provide
employers provide full pay for more than 20
payment at the same level as employees’ full
weeks compared with less than a third of the
wage or salary (96% overall).
private and non-profit sectors. About a third of
manufacturing and production organisations and
non-profit organisations and two-fifths of private
organisations provide occupational sick pay to an
sector services provide full pay for fewer than
employee (with at least one year’s service) who is
eight weeks compared with just 15% of public
on long-term sick leave (Table 12). There is also a
sector organisations.
significant relationship between the number of
weeks organisations pay at the full rate and how
There is also a relationship between size of
long they pay at a reduced rate, such that the more
organisation and the number of weeks that
generous they are with one, the more generous
occupational sick pay is provided, with larger
they are with the other.
organisations being more generous.
17
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
There is considerable variation in how long
17
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
Table 12: Number of weeks that organisations will provide occupational sick pay to an employee (with
at least one year’s service) who is on long-term sick leave
Number of weeks (%)
0
1–3
4–7
8–12
13–20
21–30
31+
Mean
Standard
deviation
Median
All respondents
1
8
22
15
11
39
3
16.2
13.5
13.0
Manufacturing and
production
0
13
22
11
24
23
6
16.1
15.9
13.0
Private sector
services
3
13
25
18
13
25
3
13.6
13.8
10.0
Public services
0
1
14
7
1
74
2
22.0
11.5
26.0
Non-profit
organisations
0
2
29
29
8
32
0
13.6
9.1
9.5
All respondents
13
3
13
14
11
42
3
15.4
11.1
13.0
Manufacturing and
production
33
4
12
4
25
19
4
10.3
10.1
9.0
Private sector
services
24
6
15
14
12
23
6
11.4
11.7
8.0
Public services
–
1
9
9
3
76
2
21.9
8.5
26.0
Non-profit
organisations
4
1
16
33
12
32
1
13.9
9.0
12.0
Full rate
Reduced rate
Base: 561
Table 13: Number of weeks organisations pay sick pay at a reduced rate, by number of weeks paid at
full rate (%)
Number of weeks paid at reduced rate (%)
0
1–3
4–7
8–12
13–20
21–30
31+
Number of weeks paid at
full rate (%)
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
18
0 (9)
44
11
11
11
11
–
11
1–3 weeks (45)
64
20
4
4
2
2
2
4–7 weeks (124)
46
2
36
12
2
1
1
8–12 weeks (86)
43
1
3
45
3
1
2
13–20 weeks (63)
40
–
–
2
51
3
5
21–30 weeks (217)
19
–
–
–
2
77
1
31+ weeks (17)
76
–
–
–
–
6
18
Number of respondents shown in brackets.
2012
Changes to occupational sick pay
arrangements
While twice as many anticipate decreases over the
Most organisations, regardless of size or sector,
proportions are small and most expect no change
report that their occupational sick pay schemes have
(77%), a similar outlook to the last 12 months. A
not changed over the past 12 months (79%). One
minority anticipate their schemes will be extended
in ten report they have increased (7%) or extended
to more employees (2%) or restricted to certain
their schemes to more employees (2%) over the
categories of employees (3%). There are no
last year and a similar proportion report their
significant differences across sectors.
next 12 months (12%) than increases (6%), the
occupational sick pay has decreased (9%) or been
restricted to certain categories of employees (3%).
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
19
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
CAUSES OF ABSENCE
Minor illness, including colds, flu, stomach upsets, headaches
and migraines, is the most common cause of short-term
absence by far. The most common causes of long-term
absence are stress, acute medical conditions, mental ill health,
musculoskeletal injuries and back pain.
Most organisations, regardless of sector or size,
upsets, headaches and migraines (Table 14).
collect information on the causes of employee
Musculoskeletal injuries, back pain and stress
absence (2012: 88%; 2011: 84%; 2010: 86%).
are also common causes of short-term absence,
Respondents were asked to rank the five most
although, as in previous years, musculoskeletal
common causes of short- and long-term absence,
injuries and back pain are more common causes of
for both manual and non-manual workers.
absence for manual workers, while stress is more
common for non-manual workers.
Short-term absence
The main causes of short-term absence (four
A third of organisations report that home/family
weeks or less) are very similar to previous years’
responsibilities are in the top five most common
findings for both manual and non-manual
causes of absence. Demographic changes to the
workers. By far the most common cause is
population mean that an increasing proportion of
minor illness, including colds, flu, stomach
the workforce have responsibilities as carers and
Table 14: Common causes of short-term absence (%)
Most common cause
Manual
Non-manual
Manual
Non-manual
83
87
98
99
Musculoskeletal injuries (for example neck strains and
repetitive strain injury, but excluding back pain)
8
2
63
52
Back pain
4
1
56
46
Stress
3
9
48
56
Recurring medical conditions (for example asthma,
angina and allergies)
0
0
37
42
Home/family responsibilities
2
0
33
32
Mental ill health (for example clinical depression
and anxiety)
2
1
29
30
Injuries/accidents not related to work
1
0
19
22
Acute medical conditions (for example stroke,
heart attack and cancer)
0
0
19
18
Pregnancy-related absence (not maternity leave)
0
0
9
15
Work-related injuries/accidents
0
0
21
6
Drink- or drug-related conditions
0
0
2
1
Other absences not due to genuine ill health
1
0
17
16
Minor illness (for example colds/flu, stomach upsets,
headaches and migraines)
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
Base: Manual: 370; Non-manual: 429
20
In top 5 most
common causes
2012
organisations will need to address this through
particularly for non-manual workers (Tables 15
appropriate, and flexible, working arrangements.
and 16). The public sector is also more likely
than the private to report that musculoskeletal
Despite health and safety legislation, a fifth of
injuries are a common cause of absence, as we
organisations report that work-related injuries
found last year. Moreover, the proportion of the
and accidents are a common cause of absence for
public sector that reports musculoskeletal injuries
manual workers. This clearly demonstrates the need
are a common cause of short-term absence has
for organisations to monitor the causes of absence in
increased for both manual (2012: 85%; 2011: 72%)
order to identify and address potential issues.
and non-manual workers (2012: 77%; 2011: 65%).
On a more positive note, the findings indicate a
In contrast, the public sector is less likely than the
slight decline in the proportion of respondents
private to rank home/family responsibilities and
ranking absences not due to genuine ill health
illegitimate absences not due to genuine ill health
among their most common causes of short-term
among their top causes of absence. Moreover,
absence, at least for manual workers (manual
fewer public sector organisations report that
workers 2012: 17%; 2011: 21%; 2010: 23%; non-
home/family responsibilities are a common cause
manual workers 2012: 16%; 2011: 21%; 2010: 17%).
of absence this year compared with last (manual:
2012: 10%; 2011: 27%; non-manual: 2012: 13%;
Sector differences
2011: 24%). This may be attributed to an increased
In line with findings from previous years, stress
predominance of musculoskeletal injuries as a
and mental ill health are more common causes
cause of absence but it may partly reflect the
of absence in the public sector than the private,
typically better flexible working practices offered
Table 15: Top five most common causes of short-term absence for manual workers, by sector (%)
All
Manufacturing Private sector
Non-profit
organisations and production
services
Public services organisations
98
98
98
95
100
Musculoskeletal injuries (for example
neck strains and repetitive strain injury,
but excluding back pain)
63
60
55
85
57
Back pain
56
55
55
63
51
Stress
48
37
47
59
55
Recurring medical conditions (for
example asthma, angina and allergies)
37
41
36
39
27
Home/family responsibilities
33
42
36
10
39
Mental ill health (for example clinical
depression and anxiety)
29
24
28
33
39
Work-related injuries/accidents
21
25
20
18
18
Injuries/accidents not related to work
19
25
22
9
14
Acute medical conditions (for example
stroke, heart attack and cancer)
19
23
18
18
16
Pregnancy-related absence (not
maternity leave)
9
2
11
8
16
Drink- or drug-related conditions
2
2
4
0
2
17
22
19
10
16
Other absences not due to genuine ill
health
Base: 372
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
Minor illness (for example colds/
flu, stomach upsets, headaches and
migraines)
21
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
by public sector employers (see Tables 25 and 27)
Long-term absence
or be a consequence of employees being more
The most common causes of long-term absence
reluctant to take illegitimate absence in light of all
(four weeks or more) among manual and
the cuts and redundancies in this sector.
non-manual workers are stress, acute medical
conditions (for example stroke, heart attack
While illegitimate absence and that due to home/
and cancer), mental ill health, musculoskeletal
family responsibilities remains most common
injuries (for example neck strains and repetitive
in the private sector, both have reduced in the
strain injury) and back pain (Table 17). Back pain
private services sector compared with last year.
is particularly common for manual workers while
Two-fifths of private services organisations report
stress is somewhat more common for non-manual
that home/family responsibilities are a common
workers. These findings show very little change
cause of absence for non-manual workers this
from last year.
year compared with over half last year. A third
report this is a common cause for manual workers
Sector differences
compared with nearly half last year. Similarly, less
Sector differences are similar to last year. The
than a fifth of private services employers report
public (and, with regards to manual workers,
that illegitimate absence is common for manual
non-profit) sector is most likely to report stress is
or non-manual workers this year compared with
a common cause of long-term absence (as well as
three in ten last year.
short-term absence) compared with organisations
in the private sector (Tables 18 and 19). The public
sector is also most likely to report mental ill health
is a common cause of long-term absence.
Table 16: Top five most common causes of short-term absence for non-manual workers, by sector (%)
All
Manufacturing Private sector
Non-profit
organisations and production
services
Public services organisations
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
Minor illness (for example colds/
flu, stomach upsets, headaches and
migraines)
99
100
99
96
100
Stress
56
44
54
71
53
Musculoskeletal injuries (for example
neck strains and repetitive strain injury,
but excluding back pain)
52
31
46
77
58
Back pain
46
36
46
53
50
Recurring medical conditions (for
example asthma, angina and allergies)
42
49
38
45
40
Home/family responsibilities
32
43
39
13
29
Mental ill health (for example clinical
depression and anxiety)
30
23
27
41
31
Injuries/accidents not related to work
22
25
28
13
16
Acute medical conditions (for example
stroke, heart attack and cancer)
18
21
16
15
23
Other absences not due to genuine ill
health
16
23
17
10
13
Pregnancy-related absence (not
maternity leave)
15
11
20
11
11
Work-related injuries/accidents
6
14
4
3
5
Drink- or drug-related conditions
1
1
1
0
5
Base: 430
22
2012
Table 17: Common causes of long-term absence (%)
Most common cause
In top 5 most
common causes
Manual
Non-manual
Manual
Non-manual
Stress
21
30
60
66
Acute medical conditions (for example stroke, heart
attack and cancer)
21
28
62
66
Mental ill health (for example clinical depression and
anxiety)
16
14
50
51
Musculoskeletal injuries (for example neck strains and
repetitive strain injury, but excluding back pain)
17
9
53
48
Back pain
9
5
50
39
Recurring medical conditions (for example asthma,
angina and allergies)
4
5
29
30
Injuries/accidents not related to work
5
5
25
26
Minor illness (for example colds/flu, stomach upsets,
headaches and migraines)
4
3
12
14
Pregnancy-related absence (not maternity leave)
1
0
7
12
Other absences not due to genuine ill health
1
1
7
10
Home/family responsibilities
1
1
9
9
Work-related injuries/accidents
2
0
21
5
Drink- or drug-related conditions
0
0
2
2
Base: manual: 366; non-manual: 399
Table 18: Top five most common causes of long-term absence for manual workers, by sector (%)
All
Manufacturing Private sector
Non-profit
organisations and production
services
Public services organisations
62
67
61
62
54
Stress
60
41
60
74
75
Musculoskeletal injuries (for example
neck strains and repetitive strain injury,
but excluding back pain)
53
51
42
75
54
Back pain
50
52
45
55
50
Mental ill health (for example clinical
depression and anxiety)
50
38
51
58
56
Recurring medical conditions (for
example asthma, angina and allergies)
29
33
30
26
23
Injuries/accidents not related to work
25
32
23
18
31
Work-related injuries/accidents
21
27
21
12
23
Minor illness (for example colds/
flu, stomach upsets, headaches and
migraines)
12
12
9
17
17
Home/family responsibilities
9
7
13
4
8
Other absences not due to genuine ill
health
7
4
8
7
13
Pregnancy-related absence (not
maternity leave)
7
3
9
11
2
Drink- or drug-related conditions
2
2
2
1
6
Base: 366
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
Acute medical conditions (for example
stroke, heart attack and cancer)
23
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
Table 19: Top five most common causes of long-term absence for non-manual workers, by sector (%)
All
Manufacturing Private sector
Non-profit
organisations and production
services
Public services organisations
Stress
66
51
64
79
65
Acute medical conditions (for example
stroke, heart attack and cancer)
66
67
66
69
58
Mental ill health (for example clinical
depression and anxiety)
51
33
52
61
53
Musculoskeletal injuries (for example
neck strains and repetitive strain injury,
but excluding back pain)
48
46
38
70
43
Back pain
39
42
33
48
37
Recurring medical conditions (for
example asthma, angina and allergies)
30
29
32
29
30
Injuries/accidents not related to work
26
30
23
20
37
Minor illness (for example colds/
flu, stomach upsets, headaches and
migraines)
14
12
11
18
22
Pregnancy-related absence (not
maternity leave)
12
13
14
9
12
Other absences not due to genuine ill
health
10
4
8
8
22
Home/family responsibilities
9
12
10
5
8
Work-related injuries/accidents
5
9
4
5
7
Drink- or drug-related conditions
2
0
2
1
5
Base: 399
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
24
2012
WORK-RELATED STRESS
Two-fifths of organisations report an increase in stress-related
absence over the past year, rising to half of the public sector. The
top causes of stress at work are workloads, management styles and
relationships (both at and outside work). Three-fifths of organisations
are taking steps to identify and reduce workplace stress.
Two-fifths of respondents report that stress-
taken into account. Larger organisations (public
related absence has increased over the past
and private) are more likely to report stress-
year for all employees generally, while one-fifth
related absence has increased for both employees
report it has increased for senior management
generally and for senior management.21
(Tables 20A and 20B). The real figures could be
higher, particularly for senior managers, as some
Causes of stress at work
respondents report they do not know. Only a
Identifying the main causes of stress is the first step
minority of organisations report that stress-
to addressing the issues. Respondents were asked
related absence has decreased.
to rank the top three causes of at-work stress.
Workload is ranked the most common cause, as in
Public sector organisations are most likely to
previous years. This year, however, it appears to be
report that stress-related absence has increased for
even more of an issue (Table 21), with 57% ranking
all employees generally.20 Sector differences for
it in the top three causes of stress compared with
senior management are not significant once the
48% in 2011 and 51% in 2010. The increase is
different proportions of ‘don’t know’ responses are
noted in all sectors except non-profits.
Table 20A: Proportion of respondents reporting increases or decreases in stress-related absence for all
employees generally over the past year (%)
Increased
Stayed the same
Decreased
Don't know
40
39
10
11
Manufacturing and
production
32
49
11
7
Private sector services
38
42
8
12
Public services
52
24
11
13
Non-profit
organisations
30
44
16
10
1–49
23
49
9
20
50–249
28
47
14
11
250–999
39
42
11
8
1,000–4,999
55
25
5
15
5,000+
65
20
5
11
All employees generally
Sector
Base: 638
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
Workforce size
25
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
Table 20B: Proportion of respondents reporting increases or decreases in stress-related absence for
senior management over the past year (%)
Increased
Stayed the same
Decreased
Don't know
18
56
6
20
Manufacturing and
production
13
70
6
12
Private sector services
19
56
5
20
Public services
21
49
4
26
Non-profit
organisations
17
53
12
18
1–49
14
57
9
20
50–249
12
64
8
17
250–999
14
68
6
12
1,000–4,999
25
37
4
34
5,000+
39
28
2
31
Senior management
(including the executive
team or equivalent)
Sector
Workforce size
Base: 638
Table 21: The causes of stress at work (top three causes, % of respondents)
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
26
All
Manufacturing
Private sector
Public
Non-profit
respondents
and production
services
services
organisations
Workloads/volume of work
57
51
60
60
49
Management style
36
31
40
30
41
Non-work factors – relationships/family
32
44
31
27
29
Relationships at work
32
33
26
36
42
Considerable organisational change/
restructuring
31
20
23
50
28
Non-work factors – personal illness/health
issues
18
20
20
17
15
Pressure to meet targets
18
20
23
14
8
Lack of employee support from line
managers
14
10
16
12
16
Job insecurity
14
8
11
22
15
Poorly managed organisational change/
restructuring
13
9
9
18
15
Non-work factors – financial concerns
11
19
11
7
7
Long hours
10
12
13
4
11
Lack of control over how work is carried out
7
9
7
6
7
Lack of consultation
3
7
3
3
1
Lack of training
3
1
4
3
0
Poorly designed jobs/poorly designed roles
3
1
3
3
4
Other
2
0
2
3
5
Base: 624
2012
As last year, management style, non-work factors
Nevertheless, over a quarter (27%) of organisations
such as relationships and family, relationships at
that report stress is one of the top five causes of
work and considerable organisational change/
absence are not taking any steps to address it.
restructuring are also frequently ranked among the
Furthermore, there is no relationship between
top causes (Table 21).
whether organisations have noted an increase in
stress-related absence and whether they are taking
Non-work relationships and family is less frequently
steps to identify and reduce stress, raising concerns
reported to be a top cause of stress in the private
that many organisations are failing to respond to
services sector compared with previous years (2012:
information about the causes of absence.
31%; 2011: 41%; 2010: 55%) although it remains a
top cause of stress for 44% of manufacturing and
Public sector employers are more likely to be
production organisations.
proactively managing stress (public: 71%; private:
51%)24 and more likely than the private sector to
Considerable organisational change/restructuring
report they have increased their focus on stress
and job insecurity are more commonly ranked
management for the workforce as a whole over
among the top causes of stress in the public sector
the last 12 months (public: 36%; private: 23%).25
than in the private. This is likely to reflect the
Nevertheless, the proportion of public sector
ongoing, widespread changes and budget cuts in this
organisations that are taking steps to identify and
sector. One-fifth of the public sector also reports that
reduce stress fell considerably last year and remains
poorly managed organisational change/restructuring
at a similarly low level this year (2012: 71%;
is a top cause of stress. This suggests that change
2011: 69%; 2010: 81%; 2009: 85%; 2008: 84%).
and restructuring could be better managed in a
The widespread public sector reforms and budget
significant proportion of public sector organisations.
cuts may have resulted in changed priorities
and focus for some organisations in this sector.
Managing stress
Nevertheless, ensuring the well-being of employees
In findings very similar to last year, three out of five
is particularly paramount at times of significant
respondents (58%) report that their organisations
change if talent is to be retained and short- and
are taking steps to identify and reduce stress in
long-term productivity protected.
the workplace. Just under a third (31%) are not
Organisations use a range of methods to identify
know if their organisations are taking specific
and reduce stress in the workplace (Table 22). The
steps or not. Just over a quarter (27%) report they
most popular approaches include staff surveys,
have increased their focus on stress management
risk assessments/stress audits and flexible working
over the past 12 months for the workforce as a
options/improved work–life balance. As we’ve
whole, while 18% report they have increased their
found in previous years, the public sector is most
focus for those in senior management positions.
proactive in its efforts to manage stress and it is
Only a very small minority (2%) report they have
more likely than other sectors to use the majority of
decreased their focus on stress.
the methods we listed (see Table 22).
Organisations that identify stress as one of the
In previous years nearly two-thirds of organisations
top five causes of long- or short-term absence are
that attempt to identify and reduce stress have
more likely to be taking steps to address it than
used training for managers/staff to do so. This year
organisations in which stress is less of an issue for
we attempted to clarify the type of training, and
absence (65% compared with 45%). They are
the employees targeted, through the inclusion
also twice as likely to have increased their focus on
of more-specific options. Overall, a third report
stress over the past 12 months.
using stress management training for employees,
22
23
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
doing anything to reduce stress, while 10% don’t
27
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
Table 22: Methods used to identify and reduce stress in the workplace (% of employers)
All
Manufacturing Private sector
respondents and production
services
Public
services
Non-profit
organisations
Staff surveys
70
57
62
84
73
Risk assessments/stress audits
65
56
56
81
63
Flexible working options/improved
work–life balance
65
41
57
81
71
Employee assistance programme
53
46
53
54
54
Greater involvement of occupational
health specialists
49
48
35
64
54
Written stress policy/guidance
48
31
42
62
47
Stress management training for
employees, regardless of their level
32
20
23
47
31
Health and Safety Executive's stress
management standards
30
19
19
47
34
Changes in work organisation
22
19
22
23
20
Focus groups
19
17
19
22
12
Training aimed at building personal
resilience (such as coping techniques,
cognitive behaviour therapy, positive
psychology courses) for employees
regardless of their level
18
7
14
26
20
Specific programmes to help those
in senior management positions
(including the executive team or
equivalent) manage stress
17
17
13
21
20
Specific programmes to help those
in senior management positions
(including the executive team or
equivalent) build resilience
7
11
4
9
7
Other
3
6
2
2
5
Base: 379
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
28
regardless of their level (although this is most
Overall there is little change compared with
popular in the public sector), while one in six
previous years, although the non-profit sector
use specific programmes to help those in senior
reports greater involvement of occupational health
positions manage stress. A quarter of the public
specialists (2012: 54%; 2011: 38%; 2010: 37%).
sector uses training aimed at building personal
resilience (such as coping techniques, cognitive
behaviour therapy, positive psychology courses)
for employees regardless of their level, although
this is less popular in the private sector. Only a few
organisations report they use this sort of training
specifically for senior managers (Table 22).
2012
MANAGING ABSENCE
The most common methods used to manage short-term absence
are return-to-work interviews, trigger mechanisms to review
attendance, giving sickness absence information to line managers
and disciplinary procedures for unacceptable absence. The
most common methods used to manage long-term absence are
return-to-work interviews, occupational health involvement,
giving sickness absence information to line managers and risk
assessments to aid return to work.
Absence management policy
The most common change is the introduction of a
Almost all organisations surveyed (95%), regardless
new or revised absence management policy (Table
of sector, have a written absence/attendance
23). Introducing or revising monitoring procedures
management policy. Half have introduced changes
is the second most common change, although this
to some aspect of their approach to absence
is less common than last year in the private sector
management in the last year, with public sector
(2012: 35%; 2011: 51%), perhaps because some
organisations somewhat more likely to have made
organisations adjusted monitoring procedures to
changes (56% compared with 45% of private and
their satisfaction then.
non-profit sector organisations).26
Table 23: Changes made to employee absence management in the last year (% of employers who have
made changes)
All
respondents
Manufacturing
and
Private sector
production
services
Public
services
Non-profit
organisations
51
47
47
54
63
Introduced or revised monitoring
procedures
42
32
36
52
48
Reinforced existing employee absence
policy
37
28
33
48
38
Absence rate has become a key
performance indicator
23
30
21
23
25
Involved occupational health
professionals
21
26
22
13
30
Introduced Bradford points or another
trigger system
21
21
22
18
25
Introduced or revised attendance
strategy
20
13
20
25
18
Introduced return-to-work interviews
19
13
26
10
23
Introduced or revised well-being benefits
17
4
18
20
23
3
9
1
5
3
11
6
12
13
13
Introduced an attendance incentive
scheme
Other (please specify)
Base: 315
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
Introduced a new or revised absence
management policy
29
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
Table 24: Organisations that have a target for reducing absence, by sector (%)
Does your organisation have a target for reducing
employee absence?
Yes
No
Don't know
All
44
51
5
Manufacturing and production
47
51
2
Private sector services
29
67
5
Public services
69
24
7
Non-profit sector
40
56
5
Base: 663
As last year, just over two-fifths of employers have
and flexibility: providing leave for family
a target in place for reducing employee absence.
circumstances, flexible working, stress counselling,
Public services organisations are more likely than
health promotion, occupational health
employers from other sectors, and private services
involvement and, moreover, they are more likely
less likely, to have an absence target (Table 24).
to report that attendance is driven by the board.
Larger organisations are also more likely to have a
Last year we reported a drop in stress counselling
target for reducing absence.
in the public sector. This year the level is back up
27
28
to that of 2010 (2012: 70%; 2011: 60%; 2010: 72%)
Managing short-term absence
despite our findings above (Work-related stress)
The most popular approaches used to manage
that fewer public sector organisations are taking
short-term absence have changed little over
steps to identify and reduce stress.
the past few years. Most commonly used by
the majority of organisations are return-to-
As we’ve found in previous years, private sector
work interviews, trigger mechanisms to review
employers are more likely to offer private
attendance, giving sickness absence information
medical insurance and attendance bonuses or
to line managers and disciplinary procedures for
incentives than the public sector. They are also
unacceptable absence (Table 25).
much more likely to restrict sick pay. The same
sector differences were observed in approaches to
Line managers take primary responsibility
managing long-term absence (Table 27).
for managing short-term absence in 70% of
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
30
public sector. Three-fifths of employers report
Most effective approaches for managing
short-term absence
that managers are trained in absence-handling
Employers were asked to rank the top three most
(81% of the public sector), although less than a
effective approaches for managing short-term
quarter of the private sector and just under half
absence from the list in Table 25. The findings are
of the public sector provide them with continued
very similar to last year. Return-to-work interviews
tailored support (for example online support, care
and trigger mechanisms to review attendance
conference with HR).
are most commonly cited among the top three
organisations overall, rising to 87% in the
most effective methods by employers from all
On the whole the public sector takes a more
sectors, followed by disciplinary procedures
proactive approach to managing short-term
for unacceptable absence (particularly in the
absence. They are more likely to use a range
manufacturing and production sector) (Table 26).
of methods aimed at promoting good health
2012
Giving sickness absence information to line
particularly effective in the private sector, where it is
managers and training managers in absence-
most commonly used.
handling are also commonly ranked among
organisations’ most effective methods, the latter
Methods to promote well-being, flexible working
particularly in the public sector, where this is
and aid return to work/rehabilitation are less
most common. Restricting sick pay is seen to be
commonly ranked among organisations’ most
Table 25: Approaches used to manage short-term absence (% of respondents)
All
Manufacturing Private sector
respondents and production
services
Public
services
Non-profit
organisations
90
91
85
97
93
Trigger mechanisms to review attendance
84
86
78
93
78
Sickness absence information given to line
managers
83
87
75
91
86
Disciplinary procedures for unacceptable
absence
77
87
75
74
74
Line managers take primary responsibility
for managing absence
70
56
64
87
70
Leave for family circumstances
69
57
63
82
76
Managers are trained in absence-handling
62
61
49
81
65
Occupational health involvement
56
61
41
75
58
Flexible working
53
29
47
71
60
Employee assistance programmes
50
45
49
53
51
Changes to working patterns or
environment
50
37
40
68
59
Capability procedure
48
32
42
66
53
Absence rate is a key performance
indicator
44
57
32
58
41
Stress counselling
43
31
31
70
44
Restricting sick pay
43
58
53
23
34
Health promotion
41
31
32
62
38
Well-being benefits
36
28
36
43
34
Tailored support for line managers (for
example online support, care conference
with HR)
30
24
21
48
26
Offering private medical insurance
26
32
42
6
11
Risk assessment to aid return to work
after long-term absence
26
26
21
35
26
Employees’ absence records taken into
account when considering promotion
21
25
21
21
16
Rehabilitation programme
18
28
11
28
10
Attendance record is a recruitment
criterion
14
12
12
21
14
Nominated absence case manager/
management team
14
6
10
28
11
Attendance driven by board
14
8
10
28
8
Attendance bonuses or incentives
13
20
17
5
7
Base: 650
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
Return-to-work interviews
31
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
effective methods. Clearly these can play an
interviews, occupational health involvement
important role in avoiding and reducing absence but,
and giving sickness absence information to line
when it comes to short-term absence, organisations
managers are the most commonly used approaches
clearly attach most importance to reviewing and
for managing long-term absence, followed by
monitoring and disciplining where appropriate.
risk assessments to aid return to work and trigger
mechanisms to review attendance (Table 27).
Managing long-term absence
The methods used to manage long-term absence
As might be expected, occupational health
are very similar to last year. Return-to-work
involvement, risk assessments to aid return to work,
Table 26: Most effective approaches for managing short-term absence (% of respondents citing as one
of top three most effective methods)
All
Manufacturing Private sector
respondents and production
services
Non-profit
organisations
Return-to-work interviews
65
72
66
58
68
Trigger mechanisms to review
attendance
58
60
53
66
59
Disciplinary procedures for
unacceptable absence
27
44
26
24
15
Sickness absence information given to
line managers
20
8
19
26
28
Managers are trained in absencehandling
20
17
17
28
17
Restricting sick pay
17
29
25
2
5
Line managers take primary
responsibility for managing absence
16
9
15
21
20
Occupational health involvement
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
13
13
9
20
12
Leave for family circumstances
6
5
5
3
11
Capability procedure
5
1
6
7
6
Flexible working
4
2
3
5
9
Absence rate is a key performance
indicator
4
2
5
4
2
Attendance bonuses or incentives
4
9
4
1
0
Employee assistance programmes
3
2
4
2
4
Tailored support for line managers
(for example online support, care
conference with HR)
3
1
2
6
2
Changes to working patterns or
environment
3
3
2
3
5
Nominated absence case manager/
management team
3
0
2
5
5
Stress counselling
2
1
2
1
1
Well-being benefits
2
2
1
1
2
Offering private medical insurance
2
3
2
1
0
Attendance driven by board
1
0
1
3
1
Rehabilitation programme
1
1
–
0
4
Employees’ absence records taken into
account when considering promotion
1
0
2
0
0
Base: 579
32
Public
services
2012
rehabilitation programmes and changes to working
In line with findings on managing short-term
patterns or environment are more commonly
absence, the public sector are more likely than
used for long-term absence than for short term,
their private sector counterparts to use most
as are capability procedures and flexible working.
of the methods listed for managing long-term
In contrast, disciplinary procedures and leave for
absence. They are less likely, however, to restrict
family circumstances are more commonly used to
sick pay or offer private medical insurance than
manage short-term absence.
the private sector (Table 27).
Table 27: Approaches used to manage long-term absence (% of respondents)
All
Manufacturing Private sector
respondents and production
services
Public
services
Non-profit
organisations
85
90
79
92
88
Occupational health involvement
80
80
69
93
85
Sickness absence information given to
line managers
76
80
65
89
78
Risk assessment to aid return to work
after long-term absence
75
79
68
83
73
Trigger mechanisms to review attendance
69
69
57
87
67
Changes to working patterns or
environment
65
55
59
78
73
Flexible working
65
46
59
80
76
Capability procedure
60
53
51
74
68
Managers are trained in absence-handling
58
53
44
81
59
Disciplinary procedures for
unacceptable absence
56
64
50
63
53
Line managers take primary
responsibility for managing absence
53
34
44
74
58
Employee assistance programmes
50
46
49
55
51
Stress counselling
48
34
36
75
50
Restricting sick pay
44
51
50
34
39
Leave for family circumstances
43
33
37
52
53
Rehabilitation programme
42
59
35
50
26
Absence rate is a key performance
indicator
41
50
27
58
40
Health promotion
39
32
29
61
38
Tailored support for line managers
(for example online support, care
conference with HR)
38
36
29
54
35
Well-being benefits
35
29
35
42
33
Offering private medical insurance
28
34
45
5
13
Nominated absence case manager/
management team
24
16
19
41
17
Employees’ absence records taken into
account when considering promotion
18
22
14
22
16
Attendance driven by board
14
8
9
28
9
Attendance record is a recruitment
criterion
12
9
7
20
14
9
17
9
5
7
Attendance bonuses or incentives
Base: 632
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
Return-to-work interviews
33
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
Most effective approaches for managing longterm absence
Despite the high prevalence of stress-related absence,
The two most commonly used methods for
of organisations use stress counselling to manage
managing long-term absence – the involvement
long-term absence, only 5% consider this is one of
of occupational health professionals and return-
their top three approaches for managing long-term
to-work interviews – are also considered to be
absence. Other approaches, including occupational
among the most effective approaches (Table 28).
health involvement, return-to-work interviews,
Trigger mechanisms to review attendance are also
trigger mechanisms and changes to working patterns
commonly considered to be effective for managing
or environment, may be seen to be more effective
long-term, as well as short-term, absence.
at combating stress and aiding appropriate return to
reported above, and the findings in Table 27 that half
work compared with counselling.
Table 28: Most effective approaches for managing long-term absence (% of respondents citing as one
of top three most effective methods)
All
Manufacturing Private sector
organisations and production
services
Non-profit
organisations
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
Occupational health involvement
56
63
46
66
63
Return-to-work interviews
24
31
24
19
23
Trigger mechanisms to review attendance
24
21
20
30
25
Changes to working patterns or
environment
17
13
20
17
17
Capability procedure
17
19
16
17
20
Managers are trained in absence-handling
16
14
13
23
15
Rehabilitation programme
15
26
16
10
5
Restricting sick pay
13
16
18
6
7
Risk assessment to aid return to work
after long-term absence
12
15
11
11
15
Line managers take primary
responsibility for managing absence
11
4
9
16
12
Flexible working
11
7
12
7
17
Nominated absence case manager/
management team
9
5
8
15
7
Employee assistance programmes
9
7
11
7
9
Sickness absence information given to
line managers
8
4
9
8
14
Tailored support for line managers
(for example online support, care
conference with HR)
8
6
7
13
7
Disciplinary procedures for
unacceptable absence
8
12
5
12
7
Offering private medical insurance
6
6
11
0
1
Stress counselling
5
1
5
7
5
Well-being benefits
2
4
3
1
0
Absence rate is a key performance
indicator
2
3
2
2
1
Attendance bonuses or incentives
2
2
2
1
1
Attendance driven by board
1
0
–
3
1
Base: 565
34
Public
services
2012
THE IMPACT OF GOVERNMENT
INITIATIVES ON ABSENCE
MANAGEMENT
The Statement of Fitness to Work
use has increased compared with last year (2011:
The Statement of Fitness to Work, or ‘fit note’,
54%).
replaced the ‘sick note’ in April 2010. The new fit
note allows GPs to categorise employees as ‘may be
Two years after its introduction, most employers,
fit for work’, as well as ‘unfit for work’, and its aim is
regardless of sector or organisational size, remain
to encourage more employees with health problems
unconvinced regarding the impact of the fit note
to agree with their employer a phased return to
on absence levels. In very little change from last
work (such as reduced hours or the use of varied
year, just one in ten report it has helped to reduce
duties) as part of their rehabilitation and recovery.
absence levels, possibly because only one in ten
The vast majority of organisations across all sectors
believe it is being used effectively by GPs (Figure 2).
(2012: 93%; 2011: 87%) have used the fit note in
Nevertheless, half of employers report that the fit
their organisations. Smaller organisations of fewer
note prompts conversations about absence/health
than 50 employees are least likely to have used the
between staff and line managers and just under a
fit note (68%), but even amongst this category its
third that it helps line managers to manage absence.
Figure 2: Perceived benefits of the fit note
10
The fit note has helped to reduce
absence levels in my organisation.
74
16
10
The fit note is being used
effectively by GPs.
75
15
29
60
12
Disagree
53
The fit note prompts conversations
about absence/health between
staff and line managers.
Don’t know
38
8
0
Base: 616
Agree
20
40
60
Percentage
80
100
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
The fit note helps line managers
to manage absence.
35
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
Impact of the abolition of the Default
Retirement Age (DRA) on absence
management
The establishment of an Independent
Assessment Service
From April 2011 employers were no longer able to
government-commissioned sickness absence review
serve employees with a notice of retirement. Last
(jointly chaired by David Frost and Dame Carol Black)
year we asked employers whether they believe
is for a new Independent Assessment Service that
this would have an impact on their absence levels.
employers and GPs can refer long-term sickness
While the majority (76%) thought it would have
absence cases to for bespoke advice.
One of the recommendations from the 2011
no impact, a quarter (23%) expected it would
result in higher absence levels, perhaps associating
Two-fifths of organisations believe such a service
an older workforce with increased health issues.
would be beneficial in helping them manage long-
This year, now that the act is under way, we asked
term sickness absence more effectively. A quarter
what impact has actually resulted. Only a very
do not believe it will help while a further quarter
small minority (4%) report that absence levels have
are undecided and 9% report it is not applicable to
increased as a result of the abolition of the DRA,
them as they do not have an issue with long-term
while 95% report that it has had no impact.
absence. Smaller organisations are more likely to
report it is not applicable as they have no long-term
The abolition of the DRA has also had little impact
absence issues. Once this factor is accounted for,
in terms of increasing organisations’ focus on well-
there are no significant sector or size differences in
being. Only 9% report that they have increased their
organisations’ responses.
focus on well-being provision as a result of the Act
(82% hadn’t, 9% didn’t know). A higher proportion
(24%) have increased their use of flexible working
practices as a result of the abolition.
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
36
2012
EMPLOYEE WELL-BEING
There has been a gradual increase over the past few years in
the proportion of organisations with an employee well-being
strategy in place. The most common benefits provided are access
to counselling services and employee assistance programmes, but
the benefits provided vary considerably across sectors.
The proportion of organisations with an employee
walking/pedometer initiatives. The private sector
well-being strategy (or similar) has increased
are more likely to provide insurance for employees,
gradually over the last few years (2012: 55%;
including healthcare cash plans, private medical
2011: 46%; 2010: 46%; 2009: 33%; 2008: 30%).
insurance, long-term disability/permanent health
The increase has been observed across all sectors,
insurance/income protection, critical illness
although the public sector is most likely to have a
insurance, dental insurance, personal accident
strategy in place (public sector: 73%; private sector:
insurance and group income protection.
47%; non-profits: 50%). Larger organisations are
30
also more likely to have a strategy.31
Most benefits on offer are available to all
employees, particularly in the public sector. There
Well-being benefits
are, however, a few notable exceptions in the
Most organisations surveyed provide one or
private sector. For example, 81% of manufacturing
more well-being benefit to all employees, even
and production organisations offer private medical
if they don’t have a specific well-being strategy
insurance to employees, but more than two-
(Table 29). Access to counselling services (65%)
thirds of these offer it only to certain employees
and employee assistance programmes (56%) are
depending on grade or seniority. Health screening,
most common. Stop smoking support, subsidised
critical illness insurance and long-term disability/
gym membership, health screening and advice on
permanent health insurance/income protection
healthy eating are also offered to all employees
benefits are also dependent on grade or seniority
by about a third of organisations.
in nearly one-fifth of private sector organisations
(Table 29).
The benefits on offer, however, vary considerably
across sectors. The public sector are more likely to
promote well-being through benefits such as access
advice on healthy eating, access to physiotherapy,
subsidised gym membership, in-house gyms and
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
to counselling services, stop smoking support,
37
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
Table 29: Employee well-being benefits provided by employers (% of respondents)
All
organisations
Manufacturing
and
production
Private
sector
services
Public
services
Non-profit
organisations
Access to counselling service
All employees
65
55
53
83
79
2
2
2
2
0
56
52
58
54
58
2
3
2
1
2
36
31
24
58
37
1
1
0
1
0
35
28
34
45
30
3
4
3
1
1
All employees
32
37
27
39
26
Depends on grade/seniority
11
17
14
3
7
31
26
24
47
26
0
0
0
0
0
28
44
27
17
37
3
0
5
2
0
28
37
22
38
19
0
0
0
0
0
26
24
17
44
19
2
2
2
1
0
All employees
25
24
41
5
12
Depends on grade/seniority
29
57
39
6
11
All employees
22
28
31
8
12
Depends on grade/seniority
11
18
16
2
2
16
9
10
34
11
0
0
1
0
0
All employees
16
19
26
4
6
Depends on grade/seniority
12
18
19
3
5
Depends on grade/seniority
Employee assistance programme
All employees
Depends on grade/seniority
Stop smoking support
All employees
Depends on grade/seniority
Subsidised gym membership
All employees
Depends on grade/seniority
Health screening
Advice on healthy eating
All employees
Depends on grade/seniority
Healthcare cash plans
All employees
Depends on grade/seniority
Healthy canteen options
All employees
Depends on grade/seniority
Access to physiotherapy
All employees
Depends on grade/seniority
Private medical insurance
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
38
Long-term disability/permanent health
insurance/income protection
Walking/pedometer initiatives
All employees
Depends on grade/seniority
Critical illness insurance
continued
2012
Table 29 (continued): Employee well-being benefits provided by employers (% of respondents)
All
organisations
Manufacturing
and
production
Private
sector
services
Public
services
Non-profit
organisations
16
20
22
4
14
5
8
7
3
0
15
17
14
14
16
1
3
1
1
0
13
5
10
24
11
1
2
1
0
0
13
16
23
1
4
5
5
8
1
1
12
10
10
13
16
0
1
0
0
0
12
13
16
4
14
1
2
2
0
0
All employees
8
10
14
2
4
Depends on grade/seniority
2
5
2
0
0
All employees
7
9
5
11
2
Depends on grade/seniority
0
0
0
0
0
Dental insurance
All employees
Depends on grade/seniority
Self-funded health plans
All employees
Depends on grade/seniority
In-house gym
All employees
Depends on grade/seniority
Group income protection
All employees
Depends on grade/seniority
On-site massages
All employees
Depends on grade/seniority
Free fresh fruit
All employees
Depends on grade/seniority
Personal accident insurance
Personalised healthy living programmes
for employees
Base: 595
Predictions for 2013 are strongly related to well-
Nearly half of organisations report that their
being spend this year such that organisations that
well-being spend has not changed compared
have seen increases expect further increases and
with the last financial year. Just under a fifth
those that have seen decreases anticipate more of
of organisations (18%) report it has increased
the same (Table 30).
and, while only a small proportion report it has
decreased, over a quarter don’t know (Table 30).
In little change from last year, less than a quarter
of organisations evaluate the impact of their well-
Small organisations with fewer than 50 employees
being spend (23%). Half report they don’t (52%),
are most likely to report an increase in well-being
while a further quarter (24%) don’t know.
spend (31% compared with 18% overall). Public
32
sector organisations are least likely to report
increases in well-being spend.33
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
Well-being spend
39
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
Table 30: Changes to well-being spend this year and next (% of respondents)
All
organisations
Manufacturing
and
production
Private
sector
services
Public
services
Non-profit
organisations
Compared with the
last financial year, did
your organisation’s
well-being spend this
year…?
Increase
18
20
22
11
14
Decrease
8
59
44
39
58
In 2013, do you
predict that your
organisation’s wellbeing spend will…?
Stay the same
47
3
8
12
7
Don't know
27
19
25
38
21
Increase
20
33
23
11
12
Decrease
7
45
51
39
68
Stay the same
49
5
5
17
1
Don't know
24
17
22
34
19
Base: 641
Organisations that evaluate their well-being spend
generally conclude that investing in well-being
are significantly more likely to have increased
is worthwhile. Further evidence to support this
their spend this year (44% compared with 16%).
comes from our findings that organisations with
They are also more likely to predict it will increase
a well-being strategy are more likely to report
in 2013 (35% compared with 22%). This confirms
absence has reduced over the past year (47%)
our findings from previous years and appears
compared with those who don’t have a well-being
to imply that evaluations of well-being spend
strategy (35%).37
35
36
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
40
2012
Case study: Engaging staff with employee well-being at the Police
Service of Northern Ireland
The Police Service is one of Northern Ireland’s largest employers, with 7,156 police officers and 2,512
police staff. PSNI Deputy Chief Constable Judith Gillespie, PSNI’s Well-being Champion, outlines:
‘The Chief Constable’s vision of personal, professional and protective policing needs to
be reflected in how we lead and manage our officers and staff. Employee well-being and
engagement must not only be a priority in supporting this vision but are essential components of
the quality of the service we deliver. By investing in health and well-being we are investing in the
creation of the finest personal, professional and protective police service in the world – delivered
by officers and staff who are fully engaged with our values and also happy, healthy and here.’
A strategic well-being group was established in 2007 to lead on a programme of work focused
on embedding a culture of well-being into the organisation and truly engaging staff with it.
The primary objectives of this project were to:
• reduce levels of sickness absence and organisational stress
• increase staff engagement and well-being
• enable individuals to better manage their personal well-being needs.
Top-level sponsorship of the project
One of the key success factors for PSNI was having commitment at the highest level to
eliminate barriers to change. In 2007 the deputy chief constable established a strategic wellbeing working group with strategic leads from HR, well-being, health and safety, learning and
development, people development, diversity, media and PR and representation from the Police
Federation of Northern Ireland and police staff unions. The group is highly committed and
makes sure that all officers and staff have a voice at strategic level.
The group’s role is to:
•
•
•
•
provide strategic direction by establishing objectives and timescales
create a well-being brand covering all aspects of CIPD-identified well-being domains
develop the well-being hub (a website to host all well-being information)
plan a programme of PSNI-wide well-being initiatives and activities through the introduction
of local well-being teams
• review project effectiveness.
Developing effective partnerships internally and externally
The local well-being teams are encouraged to develop a good understanding of the needs of
employees in their locality to then be able to identify gaps within current support services. For
example, do employees have to: commute long distances; work unsociable hours; deal with conflict
or emotionally intense work? Are employees typically on their feet most of the day, sitting at a desk,
mobile and in the field, or a combination of the above? Local teams are given access to the absence
statistics for their area as well as staff survey results to help them to identify key health-related
indicators to target (for example musculoskeletal conditions, heart disease, stress/depression, cancers).
Partnerships have been established with a number of external organisations. Representatives
from the University of Ulster provide expertise at different stages of the project through their
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
Local teams have been established, led by district/departmental commanders/heads, their
HR team and local occupational health staff. Each local team consists of volunteers from
throughout the area, both police officers and staff, who are supported by the strategic group
to organise and run events which are tailored to the specific needs of their locality. As well as
planning their own activity for their area, they share plans across PSNI, working together on
common areas to increase impact and efficiency.
41
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
formal research and also assist with conducting research and analysing information for local
teams. They were responsible for developing a well-being toolkit and a well-being hub as part
of the overall programme of work.
The well-being hub is the central communication channel and backbone to the well-being
strategy. It is an interactive online tool providing health and well-being information to
employees. For example, there is a section about common illness and health complaints,
directing employees to useful resources. There is also a finance health check and links to other
information to encourage people to manage their own health and well-being. Individual wellbeing teams have a dedicated section of the well-being hub, where they can advertise activities
and events they are running. They can download photographs onto this section of the site as
well, making it an effective PR tool. Employees can access the well-being hub by logging onto a
computer at work or at home.
The project team has also formed links with Business in the Community’s well-being area and
has established the PSNI Cancer Support Association from working closely with ‘critical friends’
in Macmillan Cancer Support (NI) and the Northern Ireland Cancer Network (NICaN).
The well-being programme itself
The first steps of the programme included identifying key health and well-being issues that
needed to be addressed. A well-being survey was issued to all employees and the findings
used to inform and prioritise initiatives in the programme. The well-being group consulted
government policy on well-being, including Dame Carol Black’s report and the HSE Standards
in Work-related Stress to devise policy and guide planned activity. In addition, the PSNI media
and PR team developed a media plan to encourage employee participation in initiatives and to
communicate the programme of work both internally and externally.
The programme of work is extensive; here are just a few examples of the initiatives under way
at PSNI.
Health patrol lifestyle and active
The in-house nursing team and physical training instructors deliver lifestyle guidance to
individuals at the request of their department manager. For example, they measure body
mass, cholesterol and blood pressure and then provide some lifestyle guidance about what an
individual can do to improve their health. In addition, staff are able to have a one-to-one with
a physical training instructor who can put together a 12-week training programme, specific to
their needs. Half-way through the 12-week programme, the instructor provides feedback and
further motivation if needed. At the end of the 12 weeks, the progress is evaluated and health
and fitness measurements compared against those taken at the start of the 12 weeks.
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
42
Cycle-to-work scheme
This scheme has been very successful, with uptake being markedly greater than predicted. Since
the scheme was launched in 2009, more than 2,300 bicycles have been issued. This government
initiative means employers can supply bikes to employees completely tax free. The employee
registers for the scheme, signs a contract, and selects a bike through the approved supplier. The
bike is supplied VAT free, and is paid for in 12 monthly deductions from gross salary. Therefore
the employee does not pay tax or National Insurance on the amount deducted. This means that
a bike retailing at £1,000 would cost the employee around £550 (for a basic rate taxpayer),
payable over 12 months. The IT and supporting systems for the scheme were developed inhouse at no extra cost to the organisation.
2012
Line management training
The project encourages cultural change by enabling and empowering line managers to manage
their own well-being and that of their team. Line managers were given time, support and
training to eliminate barriers, such as in taking on new responsibilities. The project delivered
face-to-face training to 1,200 line managers over 18 months, ensuring they were able to:
• directly refer members of their team to occupational health professionals, rather than going
through HR
• provide appropriate support for people to be able to stay in work if they have health issues,
such as through making adjustments to the work environment or job role.
Training focuses on the purpose of, and the core services provided by, occupational health, to
ensure line managers have a good working knowledge of what the occupational health team
does. They also need to understand their role in the process as a line manager, and the key pieces
of information they need to collate at the referral stage about the employee, the role and the
work environment. It is also important for managers to understand the organisation’s attendance
management policies and the levels of personal responsibilty required by all parties in the
management of attendance. The training programme examines how management style, team
culture, communication and building a level of trust impacts on absence and return to work.
Line managers are encouraged to have good-quality conversations with employees as soon
as they notice early warning signs of issues, before they become a real problem. Identifying
potential issues at an early stage is preferable to waiting for something to become a problem
and then having a lengthy referral process via HR. Line managers are trained on how to have
these difficult and often sensitive conversations. It is therefore important to ensure that
line managers understand what they can and can’t do in managing absence and promoting
well-being. This training has been carried out internally by the occupational health team in
partnership with district trainers.
Critical incident stress management
It is essential that provision is in place for employees who experience psychological trauma as
a result of dealing with critical incidents, for example cases involving multiple loss of life or
a threat to their own life. An extra support network of peer support officers has been put in
place, in addition to the services provided by occupational health. These peer support officers
are police officers and police staff members who are trained to hold group debriefs with the
people who have been involved with such critical incidents.
Having this network gives individuals the opportunity to speak to other people who
were involved in the incident and to have a chat about ‘how you are feeling’, rather than
medicalising issues that don’t have to be medicalised. Research has demonstrated the benefits
of the peer support route before an occupational health intervention and this approach means
people can still go to occupational health if they need to.
If people have an accident or onset of a musculoskeletal condition which leads to difficulty
functioning in the workplace, they can have rapid access to a course of physiotherapy. There
is often a few weeks’ wait for physiotherapy treatment through the primary care route, but
through this scheme employees can make an appointment within three days of applying.
Research into the cost-benefits of this approach has demonstrated a 7:1 return on investment.
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
Physiotherapy provision
43
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
Evaluating the impact of the well-being programme
Evaluation of impact is considered a priority area at PSNI. The well-being group has worked
with the Northern Ireland Policing Board to include well-being as a key performance indicator
in the annual policing plans, against which success can be measured.
In addition, a number of other indicators have been identified to evaluate the impact of the
project, including sickness absence figures, employee surveys (including a cultural audit and the
Health and Safety Executive’s stress audit), programme and event take-up rates and exercise
participation levels. Since 2009, more than 17 multifaceted well-being initiatives have been
introduced at strategic, management and individual level throughout PSNI, resulting in the
reduction in sickness absence in the 2009–10 financial year to the lowest levels of any Northern
Ireland public sector organisation.
The data collected is mainly quantitative, such as from employee surveys and the calculation of
take-up rates of specific initiatives. However, qualitative information is also used, such as in the
form of nurses’ and the OH team’s anecdotal evidence gathered out in the field.
Data collection has focused on:
• The scale of initiatives: 27 bespoke well-being seminars have been delivered, 1,316 health
patrol lifestyle assessments, almost 800 circuit, weight management and back care classes,
3 ‘Action Cancer’ big bus visits, 1,200 first line managers trained to manage their own wellbeing and that of their team.
• Take-up of initiatives: there have been 12,771 user hits to date on the well-being hub.
More than 2,000 bicycles have been issued as part of the cycle-to-work scheme and 95% of
available health patrol lifestyle appointments are being used.
• The effectiveness of initiatives: 90% of those who used rapid access physiotherapy found it
effective, with a cost–benefit analysis revealing a £7 return for every £1 spent on providing
this service. Seventy-six per cent of those absent from work who used the employee support
facilities found it effective in helping them get back to work and, similarly, 80% of those
who used phased return-to-work provisions found the process helpful in returning to work
from absence. In the employee survey, 81% of respondents said they found the domestic
leave policy effective and 61% said they found the maternity/paternity policy effective.
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
44
Evaluating the impact of initiatives has helped to identify further action needed as well as
make the case for expansion in some areas. For example, the success of the existing Cancer
Support Association has prompted development of the project to include training a peer
support network of ‘cancer support volunteers’. Cancer support volunteers are individuals
who themselves have had a diagnosis of cancer and are now in recovery and will provide
practical and emotional support to people who have had a cancer diagnosis. They will also
raise awareness of the activities of the Cancer Support Association and other external services
as appropriate. An induction and training is being developed for the cancer support volunteers
which will include cancer support workshops provided by Macmillan Cancer Support. Cancer
support volunteers will receive ongoing support from the group’s lead volunteer and participate
in peer volunteer support sessions.
In addition, the Health Patrol Specialist Unit programme is being implemented. Previously
restricted to the Tactical Support Group, it is now being extended to other specialist units.
The overarching aim is to adopt a multi-disciplinary approach to maintain the well-being
of specialist unit officers and staff by monitoring the job-related medical, musculoskeletal,
psychological and physical competence risk factors associated with the posts and, where
necessary, introduce support programmes for those with health-related issues. It will also
contribute to placing the right person, from a health and physical competence perspective,
in the right post.
2012
Future plans
Carol Mounce, PSNI’s Occupational Health and Well-being Manager, outlines that, ‘this
programme has received such positive feedback both internally and externally. The impact
of the programme is far-reaching with well-being embedded in PSNI. We must maintain the
momentum and develop new initiatives as appropriate. We strive to introduce mandatory
fitness tests for all officers in PSNI – these are already in place for police officers entering the
force, but PSNI would like to roll these out across the whole organisation. In a time where
budgets are being reduced and restricted, one of our most important challenges is being
innovative about how we secure and use funds for this programme. We must encourage wellbeing teams to be creative in their approach and help them to see that much can be achieved
with limited funds.’
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
45
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
EMPLOYEE ABSENCE AND THE
ECONOMIC CLIMATE
The threat of redundancies hangs over a significant proportion
of organisations. Nearly a third of employers have noticed an
increase in the number of people coming to work ill in the last
12 months and 44% report an increase in mental health problems,
such as anxiety and depression, among employees.
Redundancies and absence
employees who struggle into work when unwell.
Two-fifths (40%) of public sector organisations
Nearly a third of employers report an increase in the
and at least a fifth of private and non-profit
number of people coming to work ill in the last 12
organisations report they will be making
months, a slight increase on previous years (2012:
redundancies over the next six months (private
30%; 2011: 28%; 2010: 23%). Organisations that are
services: 23%; manufacturing and production:
expecting redundancies in the coming six months
20%; non-profits: 20%).38 Larger private sector
are more likely to report an increase (35% compared
organisations are more likely to anticipate
with 26% of those who are not expecting to make
redundancies than smaller ones, although size has
further redundancies), are less likely to report they
less effect on expected redundancies in the public
have not noticed an increase (55% compared with
and non-profit sectors.39
69%) and are also less certain (11% report they
don’t know if there has been an increase compared
The uncertainty of the economic climate is also
with 5% of those not making redundancies).41
apparent in the additional high proportions
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
46
reporting they will possibly be making redundancies
Such ‘presenteeism’ can have a damaging effect
(public sector: 36%; private services: 36%;
on organisations’ productivity, not only if illness is
manufacturing and production: 22%; non-profits:
transmitted to other colleagues, but also because
45%). Overall, just a third of the organisations
ill employees are likely to work less effectively than
surveyed report they won’t be making any
usual, may be more prone to costly mistakes and
redundancies, while 8% report they don’t know.
take longer to recover from their illness.
Nearly half of organisations (47%) report they use
Presenteeism is also a sign of anxiety. Failure by
employee absence records as part of their criteria
organisations to address employees’ concerns is
for selecting for redundancy (2011: 43%). As in
likely to impact on morale and commitment and
previous years, this is most common in the private
may lead to stress or mental health problems, with
sector, particularly manufacturing and production
costly longer-term consequences. As in previous
organisations (70%; private services: 51%; public
years we found that, regardless of whether or not
sector: 35%; non-profits: 33%).
they are anticipating redundancies, organisations
40
who have noted an increase in presenteeism
Presenteeism
over the past year are more likely to report an
The threat of redundancies and concerns over job
increase in stress-related absence over the same
security can lead to an increase in the proportion of
period (52% compared with 38% of those who
2012
did not report an increase in people coming to
As with the findings on presenteeism reported
work ill). Similarly, they are more likely to report
above, organisations that are planning to make
an increase in mental health problems, such as
redundancies in the next six months are more likely
anxiety and depression (62% compared with 35%
to report an increase in mental health problems
of those who did not report an increase in people
(55% compared with 48% who are possibly
coming to work ill). These associations cannot
planning redundancies and 37% who are not
confirm causation; however, they are in line with
planning redundancies).46
42
43
other research findings that link presenteeism to
mental health problems and underline the need
Focus on employee well-being
for organisations to take pre-emptive action to
Less than a third of organisations (30%) report they
address employees’ concerns in times of challenge,
have increased their focus on employee well-being
uncertainty and change.
and health promotion as a result of the economic
context. This is a slight increase since 2010
This year we asked a new question to find out if
(2011: 29%; 2010: 22%), mainly due to a higher
organisations are taking steps to discourage people
proportion of public sector organisations reporting
from coming to work ill. Two-fifths report they
that they have increased their focus on well-being.
are, with no significant sector or size differences.
Nearly two-fifths of the public sector (38%) are
Employers who have noticed an increase in
focusing more on well-being compared with a third
presenteeism in the last 12 months are particularly
of the non-profit sector (33%) and about a quarter
likely to be taking steps (63% compared with 36%
of the private sector (26%).47
who haven’t noticed an increase). This suggests
44
Whether or not organisations are planning
issue with presenteeism are attempting to address it.
redundancies does not bear any relationship to
Of more concern is the third of employers who have
their focus on well-being, despite the stress and
noticed an increase in people coming to work ill but
anxiety redundancies can cause, including for those
are not taking any steps to discourage it.
who are retained.
Mental health
More positively, we found that organisations
Over the last few years our survey has revealed
who have noticed an increase in people coming
an increase in reported mental health problems,
to work ill are more likely to have increased their
such as anxiety and depression, among employees
focus on employee well-being (37% compared
(2012: 44%; 2011: 39%; 2010: 38%; 2009: 21%).
with 26% of those who have not noticed an
The issue appears to be related to organisation
increase in people coming to work ill).48 Similarly,
size (but not sector once size differences are
those that have noticed an increase in mental
accounted for), with larger organisations most
health problems are also more likely to report they
likely to report an increase in reported mental
have increased their focus on well-being (41%
health problems (61% of organisations with
compared with 22% of those with no increase).49
5,000+ employees report an increase compared
An increased focus on well-being is not, however,
with 47% of those with 250–999 employees and
related to increases in employee absence or stress-
22% of those with fewer than 50 employees).
related absence.
45
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
that most organisations who are aware they have an
47
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
CONCLUSIONS
On the face of it, the findings from this year’s
The ongoing turmoil in the eurozone is putting
survey present some positive news. While there
further pressure on global growth and investment.
is considerable variation across organisations,
This, together with the recent reductions in growth
overall absence rates have fallen by an average
forecasts for the UK economy, means that the harsh
of one day per employee per year; two-fifths of
reality is that organisations are unlikely to escape
organisations report their absence levels have
soon from this tough period of ‘belt tightening’.
decreased compared with the previous year. In fact,
Organisations need to ensure that employees are
in the public sector the 2012 absence figure is at its
not facing unsustainable levels of strain which could
lowest level for the past ten years of the survey.
increase both absenteeism and presenteeism.
Yet, the extent to which this reduction in
More employers this year report an increase in
absence is advantageous is not clear-cut. There
stress-related absence and reported mental health
is some indication of a slight decline in the
problems. As in previous years, the volume of work
proportion of employers ranking non-genuine
that employees face is the most common cause of
absences among their top causes of short-term
stress, and appears to be even more of an issue this
absence. At the same time, however, nearly a
year. And similar to last year, the survey found an
third of organisations (an increase on previous
association between presenteeism and both stress-
years) report an increase in ‘presenteeism’ –
related absence and mental health issues. Employers
people coming to work ill. The presence of ill
taking pre-emptive action to address employees’
people at work can be more detrimental to the
concerns is essential for employee well-being.
business than their absence, not only if illness is
transmitted to other colleagues, but also because
What are organisations doing?
ill employees are likely to work less effectively
Monitoring and understanding the causes of
than usual, may be more prone to costly mistakes
absence are clearly the first steps to addressing
and take longer to recover from their illness. If
issues. Most organisations surveyed record their
absence is simply replaced with ‘presenteeism’,
annual employee absence rate, although a
absence rates will improve but not productivity.
quarter of private services organisations do not
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
do this (regardless of their size). Just under half of
‘Presenteeism’ is associated with challenging
organisations have a target in place for reducing
economic circumstances and anxiety. Employees
employee absence and most collect information on
struggle to work while ill to demonstrate
the causes of employee absence.
their commitment, particularly when their job
security is threatened. For the last three years
Almost all employers have a written absence/
organisations have been ‘tightening their belts’,
attendance management policy and half have
restricting spending, reducing recruitment
introduced changes to some aspect of their approach
and making redundancies. Organisations have
in the last year, suggesting that they are proactive
been ‘doing more with less’ while undergoing
in attempting to improve their absence approach.
significant changes and it appears to be taking a
There has also been a gradual increase over the past
toll on employees.
few years in the proportion of organisations with
an employee well-being strategy. More than half of
organisations now have one in place.
48
2012
steps to identify and reduce stress in the
Evaluate the benefits of existing and potential
measures
workplace. Nevertheless, more than a quarter of
In times of limited resources, it is essential to
organisations that report stress is one of the top
understand the causes of absence and target
five causes of absence are not taking any steps
initiatives appropriately. Organisations need to
to address it. Results are also mixed with regards
ensure that investments in measures to reduce
to presenteeism. Nearly two-thirds of those who
absence and promote employee well-being are
have identified an increase in people coming
having the desired effect. For example, do you
to work ill are taking steps to discourage this.
examine the impact of your well-being spend?
Three-fifths of organisations are taking
Conversely, more than one-third of those with an
identified presenteeism issue are not attempting
to address it.
Establish a culture where the well-being and
contributions of employees are valued
The current economic climate has placed many
Less than half of employers monitor the cost of
organisations and their employees under
absence, although the public sector and larger
considerable stress. Many have experienced
organisations are most likely to do so. Furthermore,
several rounds of redundancies, the loss of
less than a quarter of respondents report their
colleagues, increased workloads, stress and
organisations evaluate the impact of their well-
uncertainty, along with a reduction in benefits
being spend.
and real pay increases. Organisations need to
review workloads regularly, manage and monitor
What more can be achieved?
all absences consistently, consider developing
As in previous years, most organisations believe
a stress management policy and engage the
they can reduce absence levels. So how can this
workforce in developing and celebrating a
be achieved?
culture of well-being.
Evaluate the costs of absence
Promote flexible working opportunities
In the current economic climate organisations
A third of organisations report that home/family
may be reluctant to invest in new measures to
responsibilities are in the top five most common
address absence, which is why it is particularly
causes of absence. Demographic changes to the
paramount that organisations understand the
population mean that an increasing proportion
costs of absence in order to evaluate the potential
of the workforce have responsibilities as carers
savings they might achieve. The costs of absence
and organisations will need to address their
go beyond the monetary value of replacing an
needs through appropriate, and flexible, working
absentee or the reduction in business sales and
arrangements. ‘Illegitimate absence’ and stress can
services or efficiency that result. Absence can have
also be reduced through serious commitment to
a significant impact on the morale, workloads and
flexible working.
have a malignant effect on other employees who
Train and support line managers
see themselves as rewarded no better for their hard
Line managers take primary responsibility for
work. If absence is not managed appropriately,
managing absence in the majority of organisations.
cultures can develop where absence is seen as part
Not all organisations, however, train managers
of an employee’s entitlement.
in absence-handling and fewer provide them
with tailored support. This clearly needs to be
addressed if absence is to be managed effectively
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
stress levels of colleagues. Moreover, absence can
49
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
and consistently across the organisation and
And finally, as the survey results suggest, employers
‘presenteeism’ discouraged. Providing adequate
need to be mindful about apparent changes in
training and ongoing support also sends a clear
absence figures, looking deeper at the causes of
message regarding the significance of absence to
such changes before conclusions are drawn. For
the organisation.
example, if absence levels have decreased, a more
in-depth analysis of figures is needed to ascertain
Overall, there is more that can be done to reduce
whether this is due to a better organisational
absence and promote well-being across the board.
approach rather than reflecting the negative
The prevailing uncertain economic context makes
effects of presenteeism.
it even more important that employers regularly
review their approach to absence management,
and tailor well-being offerings to employee needs.
A clear and consistent approach is essential, which
both supports employees with health problems
to stay in or return to work and takes action
against those who try to take advantage of their
organisation’s sick pay scheme.
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
50
2012
BACKGROUND TO THE SURVEY
This is the thirteenth annual CIPD Absence Management survey.
It explores absence management trends, policy and practice.
The survey was conducted in June 2012 and we received 667
valid responses to an online survey questionnaire.
The survey consists of 44 questions completed
through an online self-completion questionnaire.
Table A1: Distribution of responses, by region
The majority of questions remain the same as in
Number of
respondents
%
2012
%
2011
%
2010
previous years, to provide useful benchmarking data
East Anglia
26
4
3
4
on topics including absence levels, causes and costs
East Midlands
30
5
4
6
as well as how organisations attempt to manage
West Midlands
34
5
5
7
absence and promote health and well-being at work.
North-east of
England
20
3
3
4
North-west of
England
52
8
9
7
South-west of
England
56
8
9
7
Yorkshire and
Humberside
36
5
6
5
Sample profile
South-east of
England (excluding
London)
77
12
12
13
As in previous years, most respondents (82%)
London
75
11
11
10
Scotland
59
9
7
7
Wales
23
3
3
3
Northern Ireland
2
0
3
4
Ireland
1
0
1
0
172
26
24
26
We also continue to explore the influence of external
factors on absence rates and policy, including the
impact of the economic climate and the effect of
government initiatives, such as the fit note and the
abolition of the Default Retirement Age. Following
last year’s findings that stress is on the increase, we
also explore this topic in further detail this year.
answered the questions in relation to their whole
company/organisation, while 12% answered in
relation to a single site and 5% in relation to a
single division.
Respondents come from across the UK, in a similar
spread to last year. A quarter responded in relation
Whole of UK
Base: 663 (2012); 582 (2011); 564 (2010)
to employees across the UK, while others replied
Table A1).
Table A2: Number of UK employees in
respondents’ organisations (% of respondents
reporting for whole organisation)
Two-fifths of respondents work in small to medium2012
sized organisations, in terms of the number of UKbased employees, but larger organisations are also
Fewer than 50
represented (Table A2). Fewer respondents come
2011
2010
6
12
6
50–249
34
30
28
from very small organisations (fewer than
250–999
31
28
35
50 employees) compared with last year, while there
1,000–4,999
19
18
16
is a slight increase in the proportion working for
More than 5,000
10
11
15
organisations with 50–250 employees.
Base: 592 (2012); 579 (2011); 429 (2010)
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
in relation to employees in specific UK regions (see
51
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
Figure A1: Size of organisation, by sector
1
Manufacturing and production
9
5,000+
22
Private sector services
1
Public services
10
16
No. of UK employees
1,000−4,999
Non-profit organisations
30
13
41
26
250−999
32
36
45
41
50−249
11
43
3
7
1−49
5
7
0
10
20
Base: 653
Percentage
30
40
50
The sector spread of respondents is similar to
median is used in cases where the distribution is
previous years. Two-fifths work for private services
significantly skewed and the 5% trimmed mean
organisations and more than a quarter in the public
where there are some extreme outliers. The 5%
sector. A smaller proportion work in manufacturing
trimmed mean is the arithmetic mean calculated
and production and voluntary, community and not-
when the largest 5% and the smallest 5% of the
for-profit organisations (referred to in the report as
cases have been eliminated. Eliminating extreme
‘non-profit organisations’) (Table A3). Public sector
cases from the computation of the mean results in a
organisations are more likely to be larger in size than
better estimate of central tendency when extreme
those in the private or non-profit sectors (Figure A1).
outliers exist. When the median or 5% trimmed
mean is used, it is noted.
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
52
Note on abbreviations, statistics and
figures used
With the exception of average working time and
Voluntary, community and not-for-profit
days lost, all figures in tables have been rounded
organisations are referred to throughout the report
to the nearest percentage point. Due to rounding,
as ‘non-profits’ or ‘non-profit organisations’.
percentages may not always total 100.
‘The private sector’ is used to describe organisations
Different statistical tests have been used,
from manufacturing and production and private
depending on the type of analysis and the
sector services. These two groups are combined
measures used in the questionnaire, to examine
where there are no significant differences between
whether differences between groups are
their responses.
significantly different than could be expected
by chance and to examine associations between
Some respondents did not answer all questions, so
measures. Non-parametric tests are used where
where percentages are reported in tables or figures,
the data did not meet the requirements of
the respondent ‘base’ for that question is given.
parametric equivalents. Tests used include ChiSquare, Spearman’s rho, Tau-b, Wilcoxon Signed
‘Average’ in the report is used to refer to the
Rank test and Kruskal-Wallis H. We report on
arithmetic mean and the standard deviation from
statistics at the generally accepted level of
the mean is reported where appropriate. The
significance, p<0.05.
2012
Table A3: Distribution of responses, by sector
Manufacturing and production
Agriculture and forestry
Number of
responses
%
109
16
1
0
15
2
Construction
9
1
Electricity, gas and water
3
0
Engineering, electronics and metals
27
4
Food, drink and tobacco
17
3
General manufacturing
9
1
Mining and quarrying
1
0
Paper and printing
4
1
Textiles
4
1
19
3
289
43
Professional services (accountancy, advertising, consultancy, legal, etc)
50
7
Finance, insurance and real estate
41
6
Hotels, catering and leisure
10
1
IT services
20
3
Call centres
9
1
Media (broadcasting and publishing, etc)
7
1
Retail and wholesale
29
4
Transport, distribution and storage
27
4
Communications
10
1
Other private services
86
13
Chemicals, oils and pharmaceuticals
Other manufacturing/production
Private sector services
Public services
27
14
2
Education
35
5
Health
36
5
Local government
56
8
Other public services
39
6
Voluntary, community and not-for-profit (‘non-profit organisations’)
89
13
Care services
17
3
Charity services
21
3
Housing association
27
4
Other voluntary
24
4
Base: 667
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
180
Central government
53
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
FURTHER SOURCES OF
INFORMATION
Visit cipd.co.uk/2012absencemanagementsurvey
CIPD, Investors in People and the Health and
to access related products and services and to view
Safety Executive on research into management
previous Absence Management survey reports.
competencies for preventing and reducing stress at
work. Case studies are included of organisations that
Absence measurement and management
have implemented the findings from previous stages
Read our factsheet, which provides guidance on
of the research.
absence policies, measuring absence levels and
cipd.co.uk/atozresources
managing short- and long-term absence.
cipd.co.uk/atozresources
Mental health
A guide, Managing and Supporting Mental Health
Acas have published an advisory booklet on how
at Work: Disclosure tools for managers, produced by
to manage attendance and employee turnover.
the CIPD and Mind, contains information, practical
Available at: www.acas.org.uk/
advice and templates to help managers facilitate
conversations about stress and mental health
Download the guidance produced jointly by the
problems, and put in place support so employees can
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence
stay well and in work.
(NICE) and the CIPD, which offers advice to
cipd.co.uk/atozresources
employers: Managing Long-term Sickness Absence
and Incapacity for Work.
Health and safety
cipd.co.uk/atozresources
The CIPD factsheet Health and Well-being at Work
gives introductory guidance on employers’ duties to
Well-being
provide a safe and healthy working environment. It
Read our change agenda What’s Happening with
introduces the law on health and safety at work and
Well-being at Work? which provides case study
outlines employers’ obligations.
examples of how employers are introducing
cipd.co.uk/atozresources
the concepts of employee well-being into their
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
54
organisations and identifies the impact of well-being
Occupational health
on individuals and organisations.
Take a look at our factsheet Occupational Health.
cipd.co.uk/atozresources
cipd.co.uk/atozresources
Stress
The CIPD factsheet Stress and Mental Health at Work
provides advice on identifying the key indicators
of employees’ stress and outlines steps that people
To stay up to date with the latest thinking
management specialists can take to manage
from the CIPD, visit cipd.co.uk/research
organisational stress.
Sign up to receive our weekly e-newsletter
cipd.co.uk/atozresources
and get the latest news and updates on
Read our research insight Preventing Stress:
Promoting positive manager behaviour. This
report is the result of collaboration between the
CIPD research straight into your inbox.
Sign up by visiting cipd.co.uk/cipdupdate
2012
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The CIPD is very grateful to those organisations and
We hope that you find the research useful when
individuals who gave their time to take part in this
considering your own absence management practices.
research. They include:
Please contact us if you have any questions or ideas
• Annette Sinclair, Research Consultant, for
based on our findings [email protected]
analysing the findings and writing this
comprehensive report
• all those who shared examples of their
organisation’s practices
• Simplyhealth for their support and commitment
at every stage of the research.
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
55
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
ENDNOTES
1
Chi Square=35.7, df=3, p<0.001, n=650.
17
Rho=0.51, p<0.001, n=560.
2
Ten organisations (across private, public and
18
Full pay: Kruskal-Wallis H=60.3, df=3, p<0.001,
the non-profit sectors) report that 10% or more
n=563; Reduced pay; Kruskal-Wallis H=168.4,
of working time is lost to absence. One public
3
df=3, p<0.001, n=563.
sector educational organisation reported an
19 absence rate of 43%.
20
Chi Square=31.6, df=9, p<0.001, n=651.
21
All employees: Rho=–0.28, p<0.001, n=566;
The 5% trimmed mean is the arithmetic mean
calculated when the largest 5% and the
4
senior management: Rho=–0.23, p<0.001, n=493.
smallest 5% of the cases have been eliminated.
22
Chi Square=16.1, df=2, p<0.001, n=584.
Eliminating extreme cases from the computation
23
Of those who identify stress as one of the top
of the mean results in a better estimate of
five causes of absence, 32% have increased their
central tendency when extreme outliers exist.
focus on stress management for the workforce
In 2010 we reported the arithmetic mean as the
as a whole and 21% for those in senior
standard deviation was within acceptable limits,
management compared with 15% and 12%
showing less variation in the level of absence.
respectively of those who do not report stress in
We have included both the mean and 5%
trimmed mean in Table 1 for reference.
5
Wilcoxon Signed Rank test, p<0.01, n=82.
cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
56
their top five causes of absence.
24 Chi Square=38.1, df=4, p<0.001, n=667.
25
Chi Square=13.3, df=6, p<0.05, n=661.
26
Chi Square=6.3, df=2, p<0.05, n=662.
The absence rates for very small and very large
27
Chi Square=85.4, df=6, p<0.001, n=663.
organisations in the non-profit sector are also
28
Chi Square=66.6, df=8, p<0.001, n=649.
particularly large, but the small number of
29
Chi Square=38.9, df=4, p<0.001, n=653.
respondents in this category means we should
30
Chi Square=33.6, df=2, p<0.001, n=620.
treat these figures with caution.
31
Chi Square=30.2, df=4, p<0.001, n=607.
Chi Square=29.0, df=12, p<0.01, n=628.
Chi Square=34.2, df=9, p<0.001, n=639.
6
7
Rho=0.26, p<0.001, n=552.
Rho=0.35, p<0.001, n=489.
8
Kruskal-Wallis H=31.35, df=12, p<0.01, n=494.
32
9
Chi Square=37.6, df=6, p<0.001, n=631.
33
10
Chi Square=14.6, df=4, p<0.01, n=662.
34 11
Chi Square=29.2, df=4, p<0.001, n=580 (‘Don’t
35
Chi Square=43.7, df=4, p<0.001, n=462.
know’ responses were excluded from this
36
Chi Square=18.0, df=4, p<0.01, n=482.
analysis due to small n’s in each category).
37
Chi Square=11.9, df=4, p<0.05, n=606.
F=10.6, df=3, p<0.001, n=372.
38
Chi Square=41.1, df=6, p<0.001, n=610.
Percentage of absence in the private services
39
Chi Square=51.0, df=8, p<0.001, n=598.
sector accounted for by short-term leave by
40
Chi Square=45.2, df=6, p<0.001, n=659.
UK workforce size: rho=–0.37, p<0.001, n=167;
41
Chi Square=21.6, df=4, p<0.001, n=606.
percentage of absence in the public sector
42
Chi Square=14.6, df=4, p<0.01, n=574.
accounted for by short-term leave by UK
43
Chi Square=91.9, df=4, p<0.001, n=652.
workforce size: rho=–0.23, p<0.05, n=85.
44
Chi Square=39.6, df=2, p<0.001, n=596.
Size of organisation: Chi Square=38.4, df=8,
45
Chi Square=79.3, df=8, p<0.001, n=642. The
12 13 14 p<0.001, n=653; Public sector: Chi Square=22.2,
relationship is observed regardless of whether
df=6, p<0.01, n=667.
15
16
Kendal’s tau-b=0.59, p<0.001, n=638.
organisations are making redundancies or not.
Chi Square=32.5, df=6, p<0.001, n=660 (1 cell has
46
Chi Square=31.3, df=4, p<0.001, n=604.
expected count less than 5, reducing robustness.
47
Chi Square=14.9, df=4, p<0.01, n=661.
The minimum expected count is 3.1).
Chi Square=33.7, df=4, p<0.001, n=658.
Chi Square=11.0, df=2, p<0.01, n=589.
48
49
Chi Square=63.9, df=4, p<0.001, n=654.
2012
OTHER TITLES IN THIS SERIES
LEARNING AND TALENT DEVELOPMENT
The annual Learning and Talent Development
survey provides valuable commentary on
current and future issues and trends. It
explores employer support for learning, talent
management, employee skills, managing and
evaluating coaching and training spend. The
latest report is brought to you in partnership
with Cornerstone OnDemand.
RESOURCING AND TALENT PLANNING
The annual Resourcing and Talent Planning
survey contains valuable information on
current and emerging trends in people
resourcing practice. The report provides
benchmarking information to support
employers on resourcing strategies, attracting
and selecting candidates, labour turnover and
employee retention. This report is brought to
you in partnership with Hays.
REWARD MANAGEMENT
The annual Reward Management survey
provides practical insights into current
trends, practices and issues affecting reward
management in the UK. It examines strategic
reward, base and variable pay, bonuses,
incentives, pensions, reward measurement
and total reward issues. This report is
brought to you in partnership with Benefex.
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT 2012
EMPLOYEE ATTITUDES TO PAY
The annual Employee Attitudes to Pay
survey investigates employee attitudes and
expectations towards pay and bonuses.
This survey is carried out by YouGov and
focuses on employees in the UK.
Issued: October 2012 Reference: 5982 © Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development 2012
Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development
151 The Broadway London SW19 1JQ UK
Tel: +44 (0)20 8612 6200 Fax: +44 (0)20 8612 6201
Email: [email protected] Website: cipd.co.uk
Incorporated by Royal Charter Registered charity no.1079797