Contact Information
Employees Taking More Time Off For Personal And Family Needs
Nearly Half Stay Home to Tend to Family, Personal Business Employers Slow to Adopt Programs to Help Manage Reasons, Costs
(RIVERWOODS, ILL., October 16, 2002) – During the past year, the
American workforce was more likely to take unscheduled
"sick" time in order to meet personal or family needs than
for actual illness, according to the 2002 CCH Unscheduled Absence
Survey by CCH INCORPORATED (CCH), a leading provider of human
resources and employment law information (hr.cch.com).
Now in its 12th year, the survey, conducted for CCH by
Harris Interactive®, indicates that nearly one-half (45
percent) of unscheduled absences are due to Family Issues or Personal
Needs. While Personal Illness accounts for one-third (33
percent) of unscheduled absences, issues other than physical illness
continue to dominate the reasons why people miss work. The rate of
unscheduled absenteeism due to Personal Needs rose to 21
percent in 2002 – nearly twice the 11 percent attributed to Personal
Needs a year ago.
Absence due to Family Issues increased as well from 21
percent in 2001 to 24 percent this year. Other reasons employees
called in sick at the last minute included Stress (12 percent)
and Entitlement Mentality (10 percent), according to the 2002
survey.
"Many employees have reprioritized their lives over the past
year," said Lori Rosen, JD, a CCH workplace analyst. "We’re
seeing that their loyalties are with themselves and their families.
Employers will need to pay extra attention to this issue in order to
strengthen the bond between their workers and their workplace."
While the overall rate of absenteeism has remained steady for the
last three years, hovering at just over 2 percent, the cost of
absenteeism continues to rise – increasing nearly 30 percent since
2000. With a 2002 per-employee cost of an average of $789 a year, the
cost of unscheduled absenteeism has reached an all-time high, putting
added pressure on employers’ bottom lines.
"Employers need to recognize this and re-examine whether the
policies they’re putting in place to control unscheduled absences
and support the work-life needs of their employees are the right
programs for their workforce," said Rosen.
"The CCH surveys over the years have underscored the fact that
absenteeism is a persistent and costly problem, made all the more
complex by the reality that solutions need to be tailored to fit each
organization and its culture," said Rosen. "While many
companies rely on disciplinary action to control unscheduled absences,
a combination of work-life programs has proven more effective."
Work-Life Programs Help Employees Balance Competing Needs
Work-life programs refer to employer-sponsored benefit programs or
initiatives designed to help employees balance work with their
personal life. The most common work-life programs reported by
employers in the 2002 CCH Unscheduled Absence Survey include Employee
Assistance Plans (68 percent), Wellness Programs (54
percent), Alternative Work Arrangements (53 percent) and Leave
for School Functions (52 percent). Other work-life options can
include child and elder care programs, compressed work week, concierge
services and more.
Which programs are more effective at reducing unscheduled absences?
On a scale of one to five, with five being the most effective, human
resource professionals ranked Alternative Work Arrangements
(3.6), Compressed Work Week (3.5), Leave for School
Functions (3.3) and On-Site Child Care (3.3) among this
year’s top work-life programs.
Effectiveness and Use of Work-Life Programs
Work-Life Program |
Effectiveness Rating
(1: Not Very
Effective to 5: Very Effective) |
Percent Use |
Alternative Work Arrangements |
3.6 |
53% |
Compressed Work Week |
3.5 |
49% |
Leave for School Functions |
3.3 |
52% |
On-site Child Care |
3.3 |
25% |
Employee Assistance Plans |
3.2 |
68% |
Telecommuting |
3.2 |
47% |
Wellness Programs |
3.1 |
54% |
On-Site Health Services |
3.1 |
36% |
Job Sharing |
3.0 |
37% |
Satellite Workplaces |
2.8 |
35% |
"It’s the rare person who isn’t struggling to balance the
needs of their professional life with their personal life," said
Rosen. "And, it’s hard for employees to feel compelled to put
in the extra effort when their employers’ scheduling and time-off
policies aren’t flexible enough to accommodate reasonable life
events such as doctors’ appointments, PTA meetings or picking up a
sick child."
According to Rosen, this inevitable conflict between the needs of
the job and the needs of the family and self may even work in
employers’ favor – if organizations implement meaningful work-life
programs.
"Adopting effective work-life programs makes good sense not
only in helping to reduce unscheduled absences, but in recruiting and
holding on to top-notch employees," said Rosen. "Employees
often make the choice to change employers based not on salary, but on
the environmental factors that make their lives easier – factors
such as on-site child care and flexible time-off programs that allow
employees to schedule personal time off or take a few hours off at a
time."
Employers appear to be searching for the right mix, with the number
of overall work-life programs in use on the rise. In the past two
years, the average number of work-life programs used by organizations
has increased from 3.4 in 2000 to 7.3 in 2002, according to survey
results.
More Work-Life Programs, Better Morale, Fewer No-Shows
Morale seems to matter when it comes to absenteeism rates. In fact,
companies that report Very Good/Good morale had a lower
absenteeism rate (1.9) compared to those reporting Fair/ Poor
morale (2.4).
Additionally, the effects of September 11 were much more likely to
contribute to a change in unscheduled absenteeism among those with
lower morale. Specifically, nearly one-fourth (23 percent) of
organizations with Fair/Poor morale reported experiencing an
increase in unscheduled absences post 9/11, while only 7 percent of
organizations with Very Good/Good morale saw an increase.
Those companies with the strongest morale also reported using more
work-life programs than other employers, with an average of 8.4
programs in use by companies with Very Good morale compared to
the overall average of 7.3 programs.
Organizations with strong morale also were slightly more likely to
offer some of the more effective work-life programs, including:
- Alternative Work Arrangements
, with 55 percent of those with
Very Good/Good morale using these programs, compared to 51
percent of those with Fair/Poor morale;
- Compressed Work Week
, used
by one-half of those with Very Good/Good morale versus 47
percent of those with Fair/Poor morale; and
- Leave for School Functions
,
in use at 56 percent of organizations reporting Very Good/Good
morale versus 49 percent of those with Fair/Poor morale.
Absence Control Programs: Discipline, Paid Leave Banks
The Paid Leave Bank, also known as paid time off (PTO), is
the most effective absence control program, according to survey
respondents, receiving a 3.6 effectiveness rating on a scale of one to
five, with five being most effective.
Despite overall agreement on the effectiveness of such programs, 41
percent of companies have not implemented Paid Leave Banks. By
combining an individual’s vacation, sick, holiday and personal time
into a bank of hours from which the employee may draw throughout the
year, paid leave banks generally create a win-win situation for both
the employer and the employee.
Because advance notice can usually be given, paid leave plans
result in fewer costly surprise absences for the employer. Employees
gain by receiving more flexibility and the ability to take their time
in full-day, half-day or hourly increments.
"While HR professionals call paid leave banks an absence
control program, it really is a work-life benefit as well," said
Rosen. "Think of how much more sense it makes – and how much
more productive it is – for an employee to take off only the two
hours he needs to take his elderly mother to the doctor rather than an
entire day. Everyone wins."
In addition to a Paid Leave Bank, other programs receiving a
high effectiveness rating for controlling absences included Disciplinary
Action (3.4) and Buy Back programs (3.4), which compensate
employees for allotted time off that they do not use.
Disciplinary Action was ranked the most used program, with
nearly all (93 percent) of the surveyed companies using this to combat
absenteeism. With most employers reporting the use of multiple
programs (on average 5.2) to help control absenteeism, Rosen cautioned
that Disciplinary Action should be used sparingly.
"Discipline should really be reserved for the most egregious,
repeat offenders and, even then, employers need to find out why the
employee is not showing up for work," said Rosen.
"If it’s a serious health condition affecting either the
employee or one of her family members, this may trigger the
application of the Family Medical Leave Act," Rosen noted.
"If the employee informs you that she’s suffering from a
disabling condition that’s interfering with her ability to come to
work, you may need to look at reasonable accommodations for her under
the Americans with Disability Act, or you may find, based on what the
employee tells you, that she should be referred to the company’s
employee assistance program. Only after managers have ruled out these
types of issues should they consider discipline."
Effectiveness and Use of Absence Control Programs
Absence Control Program |
Effectiveness Rating
(1: Not Very
Effective to 5: Very Effective) |
Percent Use |
Paid Leave Bank |
3.6 |
59% |
Disciplinary Action |
3.4 |
93% |
Buy Back |
3.4 |
50% |
Bonus |
3.2 |
54% |
Yearly Review |
3.0 |
81% |
Verification of Illness |
3.0 |
71% |
No Fault |
3.0 |
57% |
Personal Recognition |
2.7 |
59% |
About the Survey
The 2002 CCH Unscheduled Absence Survey, now in its 12th
year, surveyed 333 human resource executives in U.S. companies and
organizations of all sizes and across major industry segments in 43
states and the District of Columbia. The survey reflects experiences
of randomly polled organizations with an estimated total of nearly two
million employees. The CCH Human Resources Management Ideas &
Trends newsletter sponsored the survey, which was conducted online
by Harris Interactive from June 25 to July 16, 2002. The data was
weighted to reflect industry distribution as represented in the
Society for Human Resource Management.
Mean absence rates were calculated by dividing total paid
unscheduled absence hours by total paid-productive hours. Scheduled
absences, such as vacation, legal holidays, jury duty, personal time
and bereavement leave were not included.
Obtain a Copy of the Survey
To order the CCH Human Resources Management Ideas & Trends newsletter
containing the 2002 CCH Unscheduled Absence Survey, call
800-449-9525 and ask for offer number 06280001. Price is $29.95, plus
tax, shipping and handling.
About Harris Interactive®
Harris Interactive (www.harrisinteractive.com)
is a worldwide market research and consulting firm best known
for The Harris Poll®, and
for pioneering the Internet method to conduct
scientifically accurate market research. Headquartered in Rochester,
New York, U.S.A., Harris Interactive combines proprietary
methodologies and technology with expertise in predictive, custom and
strategic research. The Company conducts international research
through wholly owned subsidiaries—London-based HI Europe
(www.hieurope.com)
and Tokyo-based Harris Interactive Japan—as well as through
its network of local market and opinion research firms, and various
U.S. offices. EOE M/F/D/V
About CCH INCORPORATED
CCH INCORPORATED, Riverwoods, Ill., is a leading provider of
employment law and human resources information and e-learning for HR
professionals. The CCH Human Resources Group is among the nation’s
most authoritative sources of employment law, including information on
HR management, benefits, compensation and worker safety. CCH is a
wholly owned subsidiary of Wolters Kluwer North America. The CCH web
site can be accessed at cch.com.
The CCH Human Resources Group site can be accessed at hr.cch.com.
-- ### --
nb-02-112
EDITOR'S NOTE: For more information, contact Sheri Cardo at
800-727-1133, ext. 1334 or Leslie Bonacum at 847-267-7153. Available
to members of the press: Charts and graphs depicting the full range of
survey data. This release and related information are posted in the
CCH Press Center: www.cch.com/absenteeism.
Also available to members of the press upon request, the new CCH book HR
How-to: Work-Life Benefits.
|