Absenteeism, a theft of time.
In the 17 years I have worked for my current employer I have missed a grand total of 3 days due to illness. And I missed those 3 days consecutively this year. My work place attendance is highly unusual, as the average number of sick days taken by Canadian workers is 9 days per year.
Now, I'm a fairly health guy; I run 3-4 days per week, I lift weights, I try to eat 5 servings of fruits and vegetables, I don't smoke, I drink moderately and I try to get enough rest. By the way, I hate stretching, I don't eat tofu and my wife has to nag me me to eat my vegetables. Other than that, I'm just an average healthy guy, no more, no less.
What I can't understand is why the average Canadian worker misses so many days from work each year? Until that is, I read this research paper from Statistics Canada.
Statistics Canada calls, absenteeism, a term used to refer to absences that are avoidable, habitual and unscheduled, and a source of irritation to employers and co-workers. Such absences are disruptive to proper work scheduling and output, and costly to an organization and the economy as a whole. Although absenteeism is widely acknowledged to be a problem, it is not easy to quantify.
Estimates from the Labour Force Survey show that both the incidence and the number of days lost for personal reasons (illness or disability, and personal or family responsibilities) have shown a rising trend since 1997. Several factors have contributed: notably, an aging workforce; the growing share of women in the workforce, especially mothers with young children; high worker stress; and more generous sick- and family-related leave benefits.
In an average week in 1997, excluding women on maternity leave, about 5.5% (484,000) of all full-time employees holding one job were absent from work for all or part of the week for personal reasons. By 2006, the figure had risen to 8.2% (896,000). Total work time missed also rose steadily, from 3.0% of the scheduled week in 1997 to 3.9% in 2006. Extrapolated over the full year, work time lost for personal reasons increased from the equivalent of 7.4 days per worker in 1997 to 9.7 days in 2006.
Full-time employees in the public sector (more likely unionized or female) lost more work time in 2006 for personal reasons (about 13 days on average) than their private-sector counterparts (8.8 days).
Absences from work can be costly for an employer. Direct costs include reduced productivity and output as well as the need to bring in replacement of labour, while indirect costs show up in reduced staff morale and lower quality of output. Absenteeism creates additional stress on workers who must act as replacements and do additional tasks. This affects the team environment of the workplace and creates a perception of unfairness.
While "Personal Illness" was the leading single reason for unscheduled absences (33 percent), two out of three absences were for other reasons.
An increasing number of employees missed work at the last minute because of "Family Issues" (24 percent) and "Personal Needs" (21 percent) – with Personal Needs keeping people at home nearly twice as often in 2000 as in 2006, when it was only 11 percent. Stress accounted for 12 percent of employee absences, and finally "Entitlement Mentality" 10 percent. This, "hell, I deserve a day off mentality" has become an ingrained entitlement in many workplaces. When did sick days change from being used when you are sick to simply another day off, to take when ever you feel like it?
Two job factors significantly influenced an absence: having medical or disability insurance coverage through an employer (indicating paid sick leave) and being in a unionized job. The first variable suggests that unless they are very sick, people without insurance may stay on the job, since the alternative may result in lost wages. The second—being in a union— alludes to job protection and higher levels of compensation while off work. Another factor in personal-illness absences is job permanency, indicating job security and reduced fear of reprisal.
Employee absenteeism is a costly issue facing all employers in Canada. It is estimated that employee absenteeism is costing Canadian employers $16 billion each year. With only 33% of all absences caused by actual sickness, employers need to find a way to tackle the issue of employee absenteeism in Canada.
Absenteeism, is really a "theft of time" and it shouldn't be condoned!
posted by Walter Schultz @ 1:30 PM
7 comments
7 Comments:
The work environment has a lot to do with the number of sick days taken. Over the last five years, I've had two jobs: one in the public sector and one in the private sector. In government, I worked regular hours and always got to take my vacation days. If you look at my sick leave during that period, I maybe took one or two sick days a year max. In my private sector job, where I work regular overtime and routinely defer vacation because workload makes it impossible -- I basically took none of my holidays in 2006 -- I tend to miss four to six days a year. Is this "theft of time" or the health consequences that come with overwork?
Not having a personal perspective of your situation leaves me in a poor position to judge. You are are the only one qualified to truly answer your question - - Do you believe that the four to six days a year you miss are a theft of time?
In most union workplaces, absenteeism is far worse than in non-union workplaces. If you ask union employees why this is, they will tell you it is because their jobs are more stressful and this makes them sick. Is this a likely explanation? Isn't it more likely that union members tend to take more sick time simply because they can get away with it?
Walter, your question is futile. Most people will always find a way to justify their actions to themselves. If you wake up with a headache on Monday morning you'll soldier on, right? But to a union employee, that headache would be a show-stopper. He would honestly believe that it justified him to call in sick.
Having been confined to a bed or on the toilet those days, I have a hard time calling it a theft of time. Human beings, like machines, break down. My point is the stressfulness of the workplace impacts health.
What's interesting, at least in my experience, is the workplace that was better controlled in terms of hours of work and ability to take vacation -- the public sector workplace -- resulted in me being away fewer days. I bring this up because it appears to go against the numbers you put forward. It's completely limited to my experience, yes, but it paints a different picture than the one offered by the statistics.
With respect to the idea of "theft of time" I find it interesting that there is no mention in your post about employers stealing employees' time via things like unpaid overtime and workloads that force employees to take work home. At what point does an extra hour or two at the office, an extra conference call at home on your day off, start to translate into theft of time on the employee side? This is a difficult question to answer because the competitiveness of business today demands this kind of availability from its workers. But does it not represent an abuse in its own right?
By the way, I like your blog, even if I don't really agree with you about the union stuff. You take an interest and you make an effort to argue your perspective. Keep it up.
Thank you for your encouragement. I agree with your thoughts on employers stealing your time via unpaid overtime and taking work home. I hadn't thought of the issue from that perspective. However, that type of employer would be an excellent target for unionization. And that is the point; most employers are good employers. The ones, who are not, will have employees who are interested in unionizing to deal with the unsatisfactory work environment.
I'm off to Toronto for a few days. My posts return on Thursday, Sept 20th.
I wonder if that means that CIBC will end up a target for a unionization?
As a public sector employee, I have to say I don't think I've taken more than a day off in each of the last seven years - and usually that's at the point where I end up on antibiotics or am sick enough that coworkers would complain that I'm coming in infecting them. When its the latter, I usually end up working from home for at least part of the day - even with bad sinusitis and pinkeye (combined) where my doctor told me not to go in to work as I was highly contagious.
And that's the other side of it: consideration for others in the workplace. Its incredibly disrespectful if a contagious coworker comes in and ends up spreading their germs. Other people get sick and take off even more time. And the tradeoff may be a day or two of work for one worker, as opposed to a day or two for numerous workers who end up getting sick. Far more of a "theft of time" in the latter case.
Post a Comment
<< Home