Toolkit to help councils reduce sick leave

Date: Friday 17/07/09

Wellbeing Toolkit to build morale and reduce absence cost to councils

A sick day here or there may not seem particularly impactful to the individual in the grand scheme of things but it all adds up.

In 2007 the direct cost of absence in the workplace was £13.2billion in the UK and the CBI estimates indirect costs amounted to an additional £263 per employee. Together the estimated cost to the UK of absence in the workplace was £19.9billion in 2007. In terms of days lost, approximately 5.8 million days were lost to sickness or injury and a report shows that those working in the public sector are more likely to be absent from work due to sickness or injury than those in the private sector (1).

For example, a National Audit Report in 2007 demonstrated that absence due to sickness costs the Department of Transport £24million each year and estimated that reducing sickness absence in the department and its agencies could save the taxpayer £15million over five years (2).

When discussed in those terms, it becomes clear that tackling workplace absence should be a priority, particularly in the public sector where the problem is more pronounced and funds and resources greatly stretched.

One can argue the case for various approaches to reduce workplace absence due to sickness. Some organisations don’t pay employees for sick days. Others pay employees more for not being sick. However, does this tackle the real issue or simply provide a short-term carrot and stick method of coercion?

The Hampshire and Isle of Wight (HIOW) Improvement and Efficiency Partnership (part of Improvement and Efficiency South East, otherwise known as IESE) believe the solution needs to take the form of a more holistic approach. Absence from work due to sickness is not a form of rebellion or idleness, but a reflection of general wellbeing, both psychologically and physically.

To reduce absence, organisations therefore need to view employees as complete individuals and understand how to facilitate wellbeing both in the workplace and the home. The approach suggests that prevention is better than cure, and that taking responsibility for employee wellbeing could potentially save organisations money and time and build a loyal and productive workforce.

HIOW have sought to provide a solution aimed at councils to enable them to achieve this challenge and ultimately reduce workplace absence thereby increasing employee wellbeing and morale. They launch their Wellbeing Toolkit this July and it is available to any council that wishes to make use of it.

Drawing on quantitative data on workplace wellbeing from across 16 local authorities it provides statistics and, most importantly, best practise information collated from both the private and public sector to take councils step-by-step through their wellbeing improvement programme. Furthermore it provides information to equip managers with the knowledge to manage absence and productivity effectively.

This approach to managing and reducing workplace absence is growing in popularity, and it is becoming widely recognised that employers have a duty of care towards their employees. As a result, employers need to ensure that they are acting on this duty not only to reduce the cost of absence but to create an environment less likely to breed dissatisfaction. Unite advocate that employees who are engaged in their work, feel they are fairly rewarded, have a positive and good place to work and, most importantly, believe they have some influence and control over their job are much less likely to take time off (3).

An example of promoting wellbeing in the workplace actively working to reduce sickness has been reported in The MacLeod Review, Engaging for Success: enhancing performance through employee engagement. The report outlines the South Tyneside approach in the form of a