Absence Management 2016 Tcm18 16360

in partnership with
ANNUAL SURVEY REPORT
Absence
Management
2016
The CIPD is the professional body for HR and people
development. The not-for-profit organisation champions
better work and working lives and has been setting the
benchmark for excellence in people and organisation
development for more than 100 years. It has more than
140,000 members across the world, provides thought
leadership through independent research on the world of
work, and offers professional training and accreditation for
those working in HR and learning and development.
Absence Management
Annual survey report 2016
Contents
Foreword from the CIPD 2
Foreword from Simplyhealth 3
Summary of key findings 4
Level of employee absence 7
The cost of absence 12
Causes of absence 14
Managing absence 20
Work-related stress and mental health 28
Employee well-being 36
Conclusions 44
Background to the survey 47
Further sources of information 49
Endnotes 50
Acknowledgements
The CIPD is very grateful to those organisations and individuals who gave their time to take part in this research.
They include:
Annette Sinclair, research consultant, for analysing the findings and writing this comprehensive report
all those who completed the survey
Simplyhealth, for their support and commitment at every stage of the research.
We hope that you find the research useful when considering your own absence management practices.
Please contact us if you have any questions or ideas based on our findings: research@cipd.co.uk
1 cipd.co.uk/absencemanagementsurvey
Foreword from the CIPD
Were delighted to present our be able to have what can be sensitive promotion and employee well-being.
seventeenth annual Absence or difficult conversations with staff Proactively supporting well-being can
Management survey results, in who are experiencing problems. prevent people from going off sick, or
partnership with Simplyhealth. The help support employees with an issue
survey of over 1,000 HR professionals The number of organisations that told before it becomes a real problem.
provides useful benchmarking us theyd seen an increase in stress- Employee well-being is clearly moving
data as well as highlights the key related absence and reported mental up organisations agendas, with
absence management trends that UK health problems indicates these are almost half of survey respondents
employers need to be taking action on. both still causes for concern. Stress saying their organisations focus on
has once again topped the list of the well-being has increased over the past
Overall, absence levels have dropped most common causes of long-term year. The top reason given by those
marginally compared with last year, absence, and is the second most organisations for increasing their focus
from 6.9 days per employee per year common cause of short-term absence on employee well-being was wanting
to 6.3 days. However, its our data after minor illness. Workload, non- their organisation to be a great place
about the causes of absence and work factors and management style to work, which was cited notably more
the methods of managing it that are still reported as the top three than other reasons. Improvements
provides the most food for discussion causes of stress at work. And similar to can be seen in communication to staff
and shows where employer attention last year, around two-fifths of survey about the well-being benefits on offer
needs to be focused. respondents say reported mental and how to access them, and more
health problems (such as anxiety and organisations are making changes to
More organisations are recognising depression) have increased among the working environment to promote
the critical role of line managers employees in the past year. Although employee well-being than in 2015.
in managing absence this year. our findings suggest that many
We asked the HR professionals we employers are taking action when An increased focus on employee
surveyed to tell us the top three most these issues occur, attention needs to well-being is good news for
effective approaches for managing shift to understanding and addressing employees, business and wider
both short- and long-term absence the root causes. Our survey findings society, and we hope trends
in their organisation. Notably, more suggest that addressing long hours continue to move in this direction
organisations are rating giving line cultures and increasing focus on well- over the coming year. In sum,
managers primary responsibility for being are among the steps required employers need to focus even more
managing absence and giving sickness by employers. on taking a preventative approach
information to line managers among to employee absence, particularly
their most effective approaches. This survey provides encouraging addressing the barriers to having
news when we look at presenteeism a workplace culture that genuinely
However, this recognition for the (coming into work when unwell). For supports employee well-being. This
line manager role doesnt appear to the past several years weve asked involves strong leadership support
be matched by employer support survey respondents if theyve seen for a healthy workplace, including
for them to manage absence most an increase in people coming to role-modelling the appropriate
effectively. There has been a decrease work sick over the last 12 months. behaviours, as well as investment in
this year in both the number of The number of organisations saying line manager training and support,
organisations saying they train line they have has remained around recognising their critical role as the
managers in absence-handling and three in ten, indicating it is still an first point of call for employees.
in the number who provide tailored issue for UK businesses. However,
support for managers for example, more organisations this year say We hope the findings are useful
online support or a care conference they are taking steps to discourage in considering your organisations
with HR. Both initial training and presenteeism (2016: 48%; 2015: 31%; approach to both absence
ongoing support for line managers is 2014: 32%). management and well-being
essential if they are to feel capable and promotion.
confident to manage absence in the We believe an effective absence
appropriate way, create a team culture management approach is one which Dr Jill Miller
that supports employee well-being and is coupled with a focus on health Research Adviser, CIPD
2 Absence management survey report 2016

Foreword from Simplyhealth
This is the seventh year that other long-term physical health

Simplyhealth has sponsored concerns. As a result, employers
the CIPD Absence Management are being called upon to take
survey, and we do so because more responsibility for supporting
we recognise the value it brings employee health, which is now
to businesses and organisations viewed as a shared responsibility
across the UK. between employee and employer.
Setting a culture where employee
Each year, the CIPD Absence health and well-being is genuinely
Management survey delivers at the heart of the workplace is an
invaluable insights into how important step for the long-term
businesses manage workplace success of an organisation and its
absence as well as the latest workforce. We can see from the
key trends and issues both results that theres an increased
employers and employees face. need to focus on training at line
Its an important tool and piece of manager and leadership level
research that were very proud to to ensure ongoing awareness,
be a part of. understanding and a willingness
to provide and support employees
As you will see, this years with positive interventions, while
survey highlights that, although also encouraging and empowering
workplace absence levels have employees to take responsibility
marginally decreased since for looking after their own health.
last year, the main causes of
absence and how employers We hope that the insights from this
support employee health and years CIPD Absence Management
well-being still requires focus and survey will be a helpful tool and
improvement. Additionally, despite resource for organisations to
more organisations recognising develop their own successful
the critical role line managers employee health and well-being
play in managing absence, this strategies. Long term, this will
isnt yet matched by employer help reap positive rewards for
support to enable and empower both employers and employees,
line managers to implement this which, in turn, will deliver positive
effectively. outcomes and opportunities for
business success.
The UK has an increasingly ageing
workforce that spends more and Corinne Williams
more time at work than ever Director of HR & Engagement
before. This is often balanced Simplyhealth
with the responsibility of caring
for family members which has a
direct impact on the physical and
mental well-being of the individual.
This years survey also shows
that organisations have seen an
increase in stress-related absence
and mental health problems.
Stress has once again topped
the list of most common cases of
long-term absence in addition to
Summary of key findings
This report sets out the findings of the CIPDs seventeenth national survey of absence
management trends, policy and practice. The analysis is based on replies from 1,091
organisations across the UK in reference to 3.8 million employees.
The average Absence levels

The average level of employee
medical conditions and mental ill
health continue to be the most
level of employee absence (6.3 days per employee) common causes of long-term
has decreased in all sectors and is absence.
absence (6.3 days at its lowest level for seven years.
The decrease is greatest in the A quarter of organisations report
per employee) has non-profit sector and smallest in that non-genuine absence is
decreased in all the public sector, where employees
have over three days more
one of their top five causes of
short-term absence. The private
sectors and is at absence each year on average sector is particularly likely to rank
compared with their private sector illegitimate absence as well as
its lowest level for counterparts. There is, however, home/family/carer responsibilities
considerable variation in absence among their top causes of absence.
seven years. levels within as well as between In contrast, the public sector is
sectors. Absence levels tend to more likely than the private to rank
be higher in larger organisations, stress, musculoskeletal injuries and
regardless of sector. Manual mental ill health among their main
workers have 2.1 more days causes of absence.
absence per year on average than
non-manual workers. Managing absence
Almost all organisations surveyed
Cost of absence have a written absence/attendance
A third of organisations monitor management policy and use
the cost of employee absence. a combination of methods to
The public sector and larger manage absence. Over a quarter
organisations are most likely to report that absence management
do so. The overall median cost is currently among their top three
of absence per employee (522) greatest people management
has fallen slightly compared with priorities and is a key focus for
previous years, corresponding with their organisation.
the decrease in absence levels.
This decline, however, masks The most common methods for
considerable variation within and managing short-term absence are
between sectors. As in previous return-to-work interviews, trigger
years the median cost of absence mechanisms to review attendance
is considerably higher in the public and giving sickness absence
sector (835 per employee), where information to line managers.
absence levels are highest. Return-to-work interviews also
remain the most common method
Causes of absence for managing long-term absence,
The main causes of absence are despite a drop in use compared
similar to previous years. Minor with previous years. There has also
illness remains the most common been a reduction in the proportion
cause of short-term absence, of organisations managing
followed by stress. Stress, acute long-term absence through risk

assessments to aid return to work, common cause of short-term absence. Both are related to a long
capability procedures, health absence after minor illness. Just hours culture and are less common
promotion and leave for family one in nine report that stress- where there is a stronger focus on
circumstances, although there is related absence has decreased, employee well-being.
no corresponding decline in the although, for the private sector
reported effectiveness of these at least, the proportion reporting A third of organisations have a
methods. Use of leave for family an increase is lower compared policy that covers mental health
circumstances has also declined with the previous year. Workload and a further 12% report they are
for short-term absence. The remains the most common in the process of developing one.
manufacturing and production cause of stress followed by non- The majority of organisations
sector has seen the greatest work relationships/family and are taking some action to
reduction in methods to manage management style. promote good mental health,
short- and long-term absence most commonly through flexible
compared with previous years. The Just over three-fifths of working options/improved work
public sector remains most active organisations are taking steps to life balance, employee assistance
in managing absence. identify and reduce stress in the programmes and counselling.
workplace, although a third of those Our findings, however, suggest
The methods organisations rank who include stress among their that organisations are better at
as most effective for managing top five causes of absence are not supporting people with mental
absence tend to correspond with taking any steps to address it. While health problems than actively
the methods most commonly few organisations overall report a promoting good mental well-being.
used: occupational health reduction in stress-related absence Respondents are divided regarding
involvement and return-to-work over the past year, those that are how well senior leaders support
interviews for long-term absence taking steps to identify and reduce mental health and respondents
and return-to work interviews stress are more likely to do so. are more likely to disagree than
and trigger mechanisms to agree that managers are confident
review attendance for short-term Organisations that attempt to and competent to spot the early
absence. This year, however, more identify and reduce stress do so warning signs of poor mental
organisations include giving line using a range of methods. Staff health. Two-fifths also disagree
managers primary responsibility surveys, flexible working options/ that staff are well informed about
for managing absence and giving improved worklife balance and common mental health risks and
sickness absence information to risk assessments/stress audits symptoms.
line managers among their most remain the most common methods
effective methods for managing used. The public sector continue to Employee well-being
both short- and long-term absence, be most proactive in their efforts One in ten organisations have a
although there is no increase in the to manage stress, although fewer standalone well-being strategy in
proportion that report they do this. public sector organisations are support of their wider organisation
providing stress management strategy, while a further 25% have a
When they need external advice or training for the whole workforce well-being plan/programme as part
guidance on absence management, compared with previous years. of a wider people strategy. Smaller
organisations most commonly turn organisations are more likely to act
to an external occupational health Managing mental health flexibly on an ad hoc or individual
service. Very small organisations, Overall, two-fifths of organisations basis. Just 8% are not currently
however, are more likely to turn to claim an increase in reported doing anything to improve
an HR consultant. mental health problems (such as employee health and well-being.
anxiety and depression) among
Work-related stress employees in the past 12 months. More organisations have made
Nearly a third of respondents The public sector, however, are changes to their well-being
report that stress-related absence twice as likely as the private to approach over the last 12 months
in their organisation has increased report an increase and larger compared with the previous year.
over the past year, although organisations within each sector The most common change, made
this rises to half of public sector are also more likely to do so. An by two-thirds of respondents, was
organisations. Stress is the most increase in reported mental health to improve communications to staff
common cause of long-term problems is strongly associated about the well-being benefits on
absence and is the second most with an increase in stress-related offer and how to access them.
Nearly half of Most respondents report their
organisation provides one or more
of organisations that invest in
well-being report their well-being
respondents report well-being benefit to all employees.
Access to counselling services and
spend has increased this year and
just 5% report it has decreased.
their organisations employee assistance programmes Looking forward, slightly more
remain the most common well- organisations anticipate an increase
focus on well-being being benefits on offer. Overall, in well-being spend in 2017 (46%).
nearly half of organisations with Just one in six of those who invest
has increased well-being activities report they in employee well-being evaluate
compared with the focus equally on physical health,
mental health and good lifestyle
the impact of their spend. Eight
per cent of respondents link well-
previous year and choices. being metrics with organisation
performance metrics.
just 3% report it While the majority have some
well-being provision, organisations Most respondents report that,
has decreased. are divided in the emphasis they on the whole, employees do use
place on employee well-being. their yearly holiday entitlement.
Just over half report well-being Nearly three-quarters, however,
considerations are part of their report they have observed
people management approach, presenteeism people coming to
at least to a moderate extent, work when unwell within their
while more than two-fifths report organisations. Moreover, three in
that employee well-being is taken ten organisations report this has
into consideration in business increased in the last 12 months.
decisions, employee well-being Nearly half of organisations
is on senior leaders agendas and have taken steps to discourage
that line managers are bought presenteeism, a considerable
into the importance of well-being. increase on previous years.
Nearly three-fifths report that
their organisation is much more
reactive than proactive regarding
well-being and a higher proportion
this year report a culture of long
working hours.
Nearly half of respondents report

their organisations focus on well-
being has increased compared
with the previous year and just 3%
report it has decreased. The most
common reasons given for the
increased focus on well-being are
we want our organisation to be a
great place to work and because
the organisation believes employee
well-being is linked to business
performance. In the public sector,
however, the most common reason
is to lower absence figures.
Organisations that have increased

their focus on well-being are
more likely to have increased
well-being spend over the same
period. Overall, nearly two-fifths

Level of employee absence
Our findings show that average absence levels have decreased compared with last year
and are at their lowest level for seven years. Nevertheless, average absence rates vary
considerably within and between sectors. They remain highest in the public sector, which
has seen only a small reduction compared with last year. On average manual workers
have 2.1 more days absence each year than non-manual workers.
The majority of organisations

(82%) collect absence data.1 Public
Considerable variation across
and within sectors
On average public
sector organisations are most Figure 1 shows that average sector employees
likely to do so (public sector: 95%; absence levels have decreased
manufacturing and production: in all sectors compared with last have over three
83%; private services: 76%; non- year. The greatest decrease is
profits: 84%).2 in the non-profit sector, which days more absence
There is considerable variation in
shows a general downward
trend over the last few years.
each year than
reported levels of absence, with There is also some evidence their private sector
some organisations reporting very of a fluctuating but generally
high absence.3 In order to avoid downward trend in absence levels counterparts.
a few extreme cases skewing the in the private services sector. In
results, we report the 5% trimmed the manufacturing and production
mean4 (Table 1). This suggests sector, absence levels have been
that average absence levels have more stable but have reduced
decreased compared with last year by half a day compared with last
and, moreover, are at their lowest year. The public sector shows the
level for the last seven years. smallest reduction in absence
compared with last year and
considerable fluctuations over the
last few years.
Table 1: Average level of employee absence, per employee per annum
Average working time lost Average number of days lost per

per year (%) employee per year
5% trimmed Standard 5% trimmed Standard

mean deviation Mean mean deviation Mean
2016: all employees 2.8 3.8 3.3 6.3 8.6 7.5
2015: all employees 3.0 4.4 3.7 6.9 10.1 8.3
2014: all employees 2.9 3.1 3.3 6.6 7.0 7.4
2013: all employees 3.3 3.9 3.8 7.6 9.0 8.6
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: 736 (2016); 396 (2015); 342 (2014); 393 (2013); 498 (2012); 403 (2011); 429 (2010)
On average public sector Table 2 shows that there is also
employees have over three days considerable variation within
more absence each year than sectors, although the small number
their private sector counterparts. of respondents in each industry
Average absence in the non-profit means differences should be
sector is also higher than in the treated with caution. Non-profit
private sector but lower than in the care services, local and central
public sector (Figure 1). government organisations, public
health, and food, drink and tobacco
organisations report particularly
high levels of absence.
Figure 1: Average number of days lost per employee per year, by sector (5% trimmed mean)
10
8
Average number of days
Manufacturing and production

5
Private sector services
Public services
Non-profit sector
All organisations
4
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Table 2: Average level of employee absence, all employees by industry
Average working time Average days lost per

lost per year (%) employee per year
Number of 5% trimmed 5% trimmed

respondents mean Mean mean Mean
Agriculture and forestry 3 n/a* 1.8 n/a* 4.0
Chemicals, oils and pharmaceuticals 11 2.0 2.0 4.5 4.6
Construction 7 2.1 2.1 4.9 4.9
Electricity, gas and water 7 2.3 2.3 5.2 5.2
Engineering, electronics and metals 24 2.1 2.1 4.8 4.9
Food, drink and tobacco 17 4.0 5.1 9.2 11.7
General manufacturing 5 2.9 2.9 6.6 6.6
Mining and quarrying 2 n/a* 1.7 n/a* 3.9
Paper and printing 4 2.8 2.9 6.5 6.5
Textiles 3 n/a* 3.2 n/a* 7.3
Other manufacturing/production 34 2.2 2.3 5.1 5.3
Professional services (accountancy, advertising, consultancy) 71 1.9 2.6 4.4 5.9
Finance, insurance and real estate 45 2.6 4.1 5.9 9.3
Hotels, catering and leisure 21 2.2 2.3 5.1 5.3
IT services 23 1.6 1.8 3.8 4.0
Communications 12 1.6 1.6 3.6 3.7
Media (broadcasting and publishing, etc) 8 1.8 1.9 4.0 4.4
Retail and wholesale 29 2.8 3.2 6.5 7.4
Transport, distribution and storage 20 3.1 3.4 7.0 7.8
Call centres 7 2.3 2.3 5.3 5.3
Other private services 83 2.4 2.9 5.6 6.7
Public services
Education 41 3.3 3.9 7.4 8.9
Central government 22 4.2 4.8 9.6 10.9
Local government 50 4.3 4.6 9.9 10.5
Health 49 3.9 4.8 8.9 10.9
Other public services 32 3.2 3.4 7.3 7.7
Non-profit sector
Housing association 21 3.4 3.5 7.8 7.9
Charity services 40 2.8 3.1 6.3 7.0
Care services 18 4.7 5.0 10.8 11.3
Other voluntary 27 2.2 2.3 5.0 5.1
*It is not meaningful to calculate the 5% trimmed mean with a low number of respondents.
Absence may be Higher levels of absence in
larger organisations
Higher levels of absence
among manual workers
more disruptive As weve found in previous years, Some respondents gave average
larger organisations tend to have levels of absence for manual and/or
and noticeable higher levels of absence than non-manual workers as well as, or
smaller ones regardless of sector instead of, all employees. Findings
in smaller (Figure 2).5 Absence may be from this reduced sample show
organisations and more disruptive and noticeable in
smaller organisations and sick pay
that, on average, manual workers
have 2.1 more days absence per
sick pay schemes schemes tend to be less generous, year than non-manual workers
which may discourage absence (Table 3).
tend to be less or encourage a speedy return to
work. The reduction in average
generous. absence levels noted this year is
observed across small, medium
and larger organisations but is
particularly notable in medium-
sized organisations with 50249
employees.
Figure 2: The effect of workforce size
9.9
10
9.4
8.8
Average number of days lost per employee
8.1
8
7.1
per year (5% trimmed mean)
6.7 6.7
6 5.5
4.0 4.2
4
0
149 50249 250999 1,0004,999 5,000+
(Base: 2016: 135; (Base: 2016: 270; (Base: 2016: 138; (Base: 2016: 103; (Base: 2016: 90;
2015: 70) 2015: 152) 2015: 95) 2015: 50) 2015: 29)
Number of UK employees
2016
2015

Table 3: Average level of employee absence, by sector for all, manual and non-manual employees
Average working time lost Average days lost per employee

per year (%) per year
Number of 5% trimmed Standard 5% trimmed Standard
respondents mean deviation Mean mean deviation Mean
All employees
Manufacturing and production 117 2.4 2.9 2.7 5.4 6.7 6.1
Private sector services 319 2.3 4.2 2.9 5.2 9.6 6.5
Public services 194 3.7 4.0 4.3 8.5 9.1 9.8
Non-profit sector 106 3 2.3 3.3 6.9 5.2 7.5
Total 736 2.8 3.8 3.3 6.3 8.6 7.5
Manual employees
Public services 31 3.8 3.5 4.3 8.7 8.0 9.8
Non-profit sector* 14 3.9 3.6 4.3 9.0 8.3 9.9
Total 182 2.8 4.0 3.4 6.5 9.2 7.7
Non-manual employees
Public services 43 2.8 3.0 3.2 6.4 6.9 7.3
Non-profit sector* 25 3.2 7.4 4.5 7.2 17.0 10.4
Total 248 1.9 4.1 2.6 4.4 9.4 5.9
*Not all respondents gave absence levels for manual and non-manual employees. Sector breakdowns are based on a small number of respondents so should be
treated with caution.
The cost of absence
The median annual absence cost per employee (522) has fallen in comparison with
previous years, corresponding with the decrease in absence levels. This decline, however,
masks considerable variation within and between sectors. Costs remain considerably
higher in the public sector (835).
Overall, a third of organisations median figures are considered in the public and private services
(33%) report they monitor the to be more representative of the sector compared with last year,
cost of employee absence. Larger sample than the arithmetic mean despite decreases in absence
organisations, and those in the and are reported on. levels in these sectors. These
public sector, are significantly more changes, however, should be
likely to do so (Figure 3).6 The overall median cost of absence interpreted with caution given
per employee has fallen slightly the small number of respondents
115 respondents reported their compared with previous years who provided this data within
average annual cost of absence (Figure 4), corresponding with the each sector and the considerable
per full-time employee. There fall in the average level of absence. variation within sectors.
is considerable variation in This overall finding, however,
the figures reported and some masks differences between sectors. As in previous years, the median
extremely high responses. Some Average absence costs show a absence cost is considerably higher
of this variation may be due to slight general downward trend in the public sector, reflecting
organisations including different in the non-profit sector and have the higher level of absence and
costs in their calculations (see reduced in the manufacturing traditionally more generous sick
CIPD Absence Management reports and production sector compared pay schemes in this sector.
2012, 2013). With this caveat, the with last year, but have increased
Figure 3: Proportion of organisations that monitor the cost of employee absence (%)
All organisations 33
Industry sector
Manufacturing and production 25

Private sector services 28
Public services 55
Non-profit sector 25
Number of UK employees
149 22
50249 22
250999 37
1,0004,999 52
5,000+ 72
Base: 733 (Dont knows excluded)

Figure 4: Median cost of absence per employee per year, by sector ()
1,000
Public services
Non-profit sector
900
All organisations
800
Median cost ()
700
600
500
400
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Base 2016: manufacturing and production: 22; private sector services: 48; public services: 24; non-profit: 21
Causes of absence
Minor illness remains the top cause of short-term absence for most organisations. Stress
and acute medical conditions are most commonly responsible for long-term absence
(four weeks or more) followed by mental ill health, musculoskeletal injuries and back
pain. Non-genuine absence remains among the top causes of short-term absence for a
quarter of organisations.
Short-term absence causes of short-term absence, In similar findings to last year, a

The main causes of short-term although, as in previous years, quarter of organisations report
absence (up to four weeks) are musculoskeletal injuries are more that non-genuine absence is one of
similar to previous years. Three- common for manual workers, while their top five causes of short-term
quarters of organisations report stress is more common for non- absence. Further examination within
that minor illness (including colds, manual workers. Over a third of organisations is required to fully
flu, stomach upsets, headaches and organisations include home/family/ understand the reasons for absence
migraines) is the most common carer responsibilities, mental ill within this category. Those that
cause of short-term absence (Table health and back pain among their use flexible working or leave for
4). Stress and musculoskeletal five most common causes of short- family circumstances (such as carer/
injuries are among the top five term absence. emergency/dependant leave) to
Table 4: Common causes of short-term absence (% of respondents)
Most common cause In top 5 most common causes

All employees Manual Non-manual All employees Manual Non-manual
Minor illness (for example colds/
flu, stomach upsets, headaches and 75 64 81 95 80 88
migraines)
Stress 13 3 7 47 32 42
Musculoskeletal injuries (for example
neck strains and repetitive strain 2 13 2 44 48 34
injury, but excluding back pain)
Home/family/carer responsibilities 2 2 2 35 25 33
Mental ill health (for example clinical
2 2 3 34 26 30
depression and anxiety)
Back pain 2 10 1 34 45 25
Recurring medical conditions
(for example asthma, angina and 0 1 0 31 24 31
allergies)
Injuries/accidents not related to work 1 1 0 18 20 20
Acute medical conditions (for example
1 0 1 16 14 18
stroke, heart attack and cancer)
Pregnancy-related absence (not
0 0 0 11 7 10
maternity leave)
Work-related injuries/accidents 0 1 0 6 15 3
Drink- or drug-related conditions 0 0 0 2 3 2
Absence due to non-genuine ill
1 2 1 24 30 20
health (that is, pulling a sickie)
Base: all employees 879; manual 271; non-manual 316

manage absence are somewhat less
likely to include illegitimate absence
The private sector is more likely
than the public or non-profit
As weve found
among their top five causes of sectors to include illegitimate in previous years,
short-term absence.7 absence and home/family/carer
responsibilities among their top the public sector
Sector differences causes of short- and long-term
As weve found in previous years, absence. This may be at least partly
is considerably
the public sector is considerably
more likely to include stress,
attributable to more widespread
flexible working practices in the
more likely to
musculoskeletal injuries and mental public and non-profit sectors include stress,
ill health among their top causes of (Tables 9 and 11). While it is also
short-term absence (Table 5). This possible that ongoing cuts in the musculoskeletal
disparity may reflect differences in public sector may deter employees
the nature of work across sectors, from taking illegitimate absence, injuries and mental
the demographics of employees and/
or sectoral differences in awareness
this sector difference has been
consistently found in our surveys
ill health among
of stress and mental health issues. across the years, including when their top causes of
Our findings show that public redundancies were more common
sector organisations are more likely in the private sector. short-term absence.
than those from other sectors to
report that heavy workloads and
considerable organisational change/
restructuring are among the main
causes of stress at work (Table 13).
Table 5: Top five most common causes of short-term absence, by sector (%)
All Manufacturing Private sector Public Non-profit

sectors and production services services sector
All employees (base) (879) (150) (423) (182) (124)
flu, stomach upsets, headaches and 95 94 96 90 96
migraines)
Stress 47 27 42 73 50
neck strains and repetitive strain injury, 44 46 33 61 53
but excluding back pain)
Home/family/carer responsibilities 35 35 41 20 35
34 23 29 52 36
Back pain 34 42 30 34 37
Recurring medical conditions (for
31 25 31 31 35
example asthma, angina and allergies)
Injuries/accidents not related to work 18 22 21 11 12
16 16 14 19 18
11 7 13 9 10
maternity leave)
Work-related injuries/accidents 6 11 5 5 3
Drink- or drug-related conditions 2 1 3 2 2
Absence due to non-genuine ill health
24 33 27 15 17
(that is, pulling a sickie)
continued overleaf
Table 5: continued

Manual employees (base) (271) (102) (100) (47) (22)
migraines)
Stress 32 23 31 49 45
26 26 22 32 27
Back pain 45 44 39 68 27
24 21 21 34 27
14 13 16 15 14
7 6 13 2 0
maternity leave)
30 35 32 19 14
Non-manual employees (base) (316) (99) (137) (49) (31)

migraines)
Stress 42 30 38 73 45
30 21 27 45 48
Back pain 25 28 20 35 19
31 28 31 31 35
18 12 18 31 13
10 6 14 10 3
maternity leave)
20 22 22 14 13

Long-term absence Sector differences
Stress and acute medical As in previous years, sector
conditions remain the top causes differences in the causes of long-
of long-term absence (four weeks term absence correspond with
or more) followed by mental ill those for short-term absence.
health, musculoskeletal injuries Public sector organisations are
and back pain (Table 6). Nearly more likely than those in the
a fifth include home/family/carer private sector to report that
responsibilities among their top stress, mental ill health and
five causes of long-term absence. musculoskeletal injuries are among
Pulling a sickie is less frequently their top five most common
blamed for long-term than short- causes of long-term absence
term absence but, nevertheless, (Table 7). They are least likely to
7% include it among their top five include illegitimate absence or
causes of long-term absence for all absence due to home/family/carer
employees. responsibilities (at least for non-
manual employees) among their
top causes of absence.
Table 6: Common causes of long-term absence (%)
Most common cause In top 5 most common causes

All employees Manual Non-manual All employees Manual Non-manual
Stress 29 12 21 53 39 47
Acute medical conditions (for
example stroke, heart attack and 23 20 25 53 45 50
cancer)
13 8 14 49 34 39
neck strains and repetitive strain 8 25 9 44 51 37
injury, but excluding back pain)
Back pain 5 12 7 35 43 35
Recurring medical conditions
(for example asthma, angina and 4 2 7 29 27 31
allergies)
Injuries/accidents not related to work 6 4 4 23 21 22
Home/family/carer responsibilities 1 1 2 18 15 17
flu, stomach upsets, headaches and 7 9 11 18 17 19
migraines)
2 1 1 10 9 10
maternity leave)
Work-related injuries/accidents 1 4 4 8 18 7
Drink- or drug-related conditions 0 0 0 2 4 2
Absence due to non-genuine ill
0 0 0 7 9 10
health (that is, pulling a sickie)
Base: all employees: 764; manual: 232; non-manual: 246
Table 7: Top five most common causes of long-term absence, by sector (%)

All employees (base) (764) (126) (352) (174) (112)
Stress 53 38 46 75 56
53 51 49 60 54
49 39 43 66 56
Back pain 35 40 27 44 37
29 32 27 28 31
migraines)
10 6 12 8 9
maternity leave)
7 9 9 2 5
Manual employees (base) (232) (82) (87) (41) (22)

Stress 39 32 33 56 55
45 45 39 61 41
34 30 28 51 36
Back pain 43 34 44 54 50
27 27 25 29 32
migraines)
9 7 14 2 9
maternity leave)
9 11 13 5 0

Table 7: continued

Non-manual employees (base) (246) (72) (104) (43) (27)
Stress 47 38 41 81 37
50 47 46 72 37
39 40 30 53 48
Back pain 35 26 30 51 48
31 33 29 33 33
migraines)
10 4 16 7 7
maternity leave)
10 10 12 5 11
Managing absence
Over a quarter of respondents report that managing absence is currently one of the top
three key people management priorities for their organisation. Almost all organisations
have a written absence/attendance management policy and use a combination of
methods to manage absence. The public sector remain most active, while manufacturing
and production organisations are using fewer approaches than in previous years.
Over a quarter Almost all organisations surveyed

(93%) have a written absence/
management priority. Regardless
of sector, organisations with higher
of respondents attendance management levels of absence are more likely
policy. Even among very small to include absence management
report that absence organisations (19 employees) among their top priorities.9
nearly two-thirds (63%) have a
management is written policy. Managing short-term absence
currently among Over a quarter of respondents
Most organisations use a
combination of methods to
their top three report that absence management manage absence. As in previous
is currently among their top three years, methods that focus on
greatest people greatest people management reviewing, monitoring and
priorities and is a key focus for deterring absence remain most
management their organisation (Table 8). common (Table 9). Leave for
priorities and is a Absence management is most
likely to be a key priority in the
family circumstances and flexible
working also remain among the
key focus for their public sector, where absence levels most common methods used,
and costs are highest.8 Indeed, particularly in the public and
organisation. a fifth of the public sector (21%) non-profit sector, although the
report absence management is proportion reporting they provide
currently their number one people leave for family circumstances has
Table 8: Top three people management areas of greatest priority (% of respondents)

organisations and production services services sector
Recruitment 40 34 43 40 36
Engagement 37 40 42 27 34
Retention 33 32 42 18 27
Change management 29 36 20 40 34
Absence management 27 26 19 44 31
Employee well-being 24 19 22 27 29
Organisation development 21 17 21 21 27
Workforce planning 20 21 17 27 17
Pay and reward 18 17 22 11 20
Employee relations 17 21 16 17 15
Learning and development 17 24 19 11 13
Organisation design 12 9 10 14 16
Base: 1,043

declined compared with previous include it among their most sector is also more likely to report
years across all sectors (2016: 57%; effective methods for managing it trains managers in absence-
2015: 73%; 2014: 76%; 2013: 84%). absence.10 handling and provides them with
There has also been a reduction tailored support.
in the use of leave for family Line managers take primary
circumstances to manage long- responsibility for managing Just over a quarter (28%) report
term absence (Figure 5). There has short-term absence in 57% of they attempt to manage short-term
not, however, been a corresponding organisations overall, rising to 72% absence through an organisation
decline in the proportion who of the public sector. The public focus on health and well-being,
Table 9: Approaches used to manage short-term absence (% of respondents)

Return-to-work interviews 79 84 72 89 83
Trigger mechanisms to review attendance 70 77 61 88 70
Sickness absence information given to line
70 67 66 79 74
managers
Disciplinary procedures for unacceptable
59 70 56 61 50
absence
Line managers take primary responsibility
57 47 53 72 64
for managing absence
Leave for family circumstances (such as
57 56 51 67 61
carer/emergency/dependant leave)
Flexible working 53 41 47 68 66
Occupational health involvement 50 54 35 78 53
Managers are trained in absence-handling 44 40 37 64 43
Employee assistance programmes 42 28 38 53 55
Changes to working patterns or environment 40 30 36 55 43
Restricting sick pay 39 46 44 23 35
Capability procedure 38 40 32 52 37
Risk assessment to aid return to work 38 34 32 55 39
Health promotion 32 25 23 58 31
Stress counselling 31 14 22 62 38
Organisation focus on health and well-being 28 14 25 46 31
Offering private medical insurance 24 27 34 7 13
Tailored support for line managers (for example
20 9 19 36 17
online support, care conference with HR)
Specific well-being benefits targeted at
18 12 17 30 12
preventing the causes of absence
Rehabilitation programme 18 19 13 32 9
Employees absence records taken into
12 12 12 15 7
account when considering promotion
Nominated absence case manager/
11 5 9 22 8
management team
Attendance bonuses or incentives 8 16 6 4 6
Attendance driven by board 6 6 3 12 8
Access to private GP services 6 8 7 3 3
Attendance record is a recruitment criterion 5 5 4 11 3
Base: 880
32% through health promotion and occupational health services, In contrast, private sector
18% through specific well-being make changes to working patterns employers are more likely to offer
benefits targeted at preventing the or environment, have capability private medical insurance and
causes of absence, although, again, procedures, risk assessments to aid restrict sick pay. The manufacturing
the public sector is more likely to return to work, stress counselling and production sector is also
do all of these (Table 9). The public and rehabilitation programmes. more likely to offer attendance
sector is also more likely to provide bonuses or incentives. These sector
Table 10: Most effective approaches for managing short-term absence (% of respondents citing as one of top three most
effective methods)

Line managers take primary responsibility for
28 21 27 31 33
managing absence
25 26 25 22 29
managers
17 27 18 9 12
absence
10 7 12 6 16
Risk assessment to aid return to work 3 3 3 1 2
2 0 3 2 1
2 1 2 4 1
management team
2 0 2 4 0
1 1 1 0 1
Base: 842

differences have also been noted in Most effective approaches for
previous years. This year, however, managing short-term absence
manufacturing and production Employers were asked to rank
organisations are employing fewer their top three most effective
methods to manage short-term approaches for managing short-
absence. Compared with the last term absence. As in previous
few years, fewer manufacturing years, the most commonly used
and production respondents methods, return-to-work interviews
report they manage short-term and trigger mechanisms to review
absence through employee attendance, are also ranked as
assistance programmes, making most effective by employers from
changes to working patterns all sectors (Table 10). This year,
or environment, restricting sick however, more organisations
pay, health promotion, stress (across all sectors) include
counselling or, as mentioned above, giving line managers primary
leave for family circumstances. In responsibility for managing
addition, fewer manufacturing and absence (2016: 28%; 2015: 17%;
production respondents report 2014: 20%) and giving sickness
that line managers take primary absence information to line
responsibility for managing managers (2016: 25%; 2015: 18%;
absence, that they train managers 2014: 21%) among their most
in absence-handling or provide effective methods for managing
them with tailored support. short-term absence. In contrast,
the proportion ranking disciplinary
Only a small proportion of procedures for unacceptable
organisations have a nominated absence among their most
absence case manager/ effective methods has declined
management team for short-term (2016: 17%; 2015: 24%; 2014: 26%).
absence (11%), although more use
them for long-term absence (22%).
Even fewer report that attendance
is driven by the board (for either
long- or short-term absence). Both
are more common in the public
sector and (regardless of sector) in
organisations that report absence
is currently one of their top three
people management priorities.11
Nevertheless, it is notable that
even among organisations that
report absence management is
currently their number one people
management priority, only 14%
report that attendance is driven by
the board.
Managing long-term absence the most common method used There has also been a notable
Fewer organisations are using to manage long-term absence, reduction across all sectors in the
return-to-work interviews to followed by occupational health use of risk assessments to aid
manage long-term absence involvement and giving sickness return to work after long-term
compared with previous years absence information to line absence, the use of capability
(Figure 5), although they remain managers (Table 11). procedures, health promotion and
Table 11: Approaches used to manage long-term absence (% of respondents)

57 51 49 71 66
managers
Risk assessment to aid return to work after
49 47 43 61 54
long-term absence
Line managers take primary responsibility for
43 26 38 63 53
managing absence
39 43 36 51 26
absence
32 25 27 51 33
25 21 20 43 20
22 22 19 36 13
management team
17 10 14 27 16
7 7 6 11 2
Base: 842

leave for family circumstances occupational health involvement are less likely to be using several
(Figure 5), although there has among organisations most effective methods compared with previous
not been a corresponding decline methods for managing long-term years, including: occupational
in the effectiveness rankings of absence (Table 12). There have been health involvement, sickness
these methods. Moreover, while no notable increases in the use of absence information given to line
few include health promotion, any of the other methods. managers, trigger mechanisms to
leave for family circumstances or review attendance, flexible working,
capability procedures among their In addition, echoing the findings for changes to working patterns or
most effective methods, return-to- short-term absence, manufacturing environment, employee assistance
work interviews are second only to and production organisations programmes, disciplinary procedures
Figure 5: Changes in approaches used to manage long-term absence: 201116 (% of respondents)
100
80
% of organisations reporting using the approach
60
40
20
0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Base: 842 (2016); 541 (2015); 482 (2014); 594 (2013); 632 (2012); 538 (2011)
Return-to-work interviews
Risk assessment to aid return to work after long-term absence
Capability procedure
Leave for family circumstances (such as carer/emergency/dependant/compassionate leave)
Health promotion
Employees absence records taken into account when considering promotion
for unacceptable absence, training making changes to working family circumstances, disciplinary
managers in absence-handling and patterns or environment and procedures and trigger mechanisms
stress counselling. having a nominated absence case to review attendance for short-
manager/management team are term absence. Organisations
As in previous years, risk more commonly used to manage are also more likely to report
assessments to aid return to long-term than short-term that line managers take primary
work, rehabilitation programmes, absence. In contrast, organisations responsibility for managing short-
occupational health involvement, are more likely to use leave for term than long-term absence.
Table 12: Most effective approaches for managing long-term absence (% of respondents citing as one of top three most
effective methods)

Line managers take primary responsibility
20 10 17 30 24
for managing absence
Risk assessment to aid return to work after
15 14 16 12 18
long-term absence
15 14 13 14 26
managers
11 12 10 13 6
management team
7 8 6 10 5
7 4 9 8 1
absence
3 1 4 3 4
1 0 2 1 2
1 0 1 1 0
Base: 837

In line with findings on managing
short-term absence, the public
Seeking advice on absence
management
Organisations
sector is far more active in A new question this year are more divided
managing long-term absence asked respondents where their
compared with their private sector organisation typically goes when in their views
counterparts (Table 11). They are they need external advice or
more likely to be using most of the guidance on absence management. regarding which
methods listed in Table 11, although,
as with short-term absence, they are
Just 18% of respondents (30%
of those from organisations
approaches are
less likely than the private sector to with fewer than 50 employees) most effective for
offer private medical insurance and report their organisation has
attendance bonuses or incentives. never needed external advice or managing long-
Nevertheless, while public sector guidance on absence management.
organisations are less likely than Half report they typically go to term absence
those in the private sector to restrict
sick pay for short-term absence,
an external occupational health
service, while a quarter turn to
compared with
there is a much smaller (and non- public and/or voluntary sector short-term absence.
significant) sector difference in the organisations (for example Acas,
proportion that restrict sick pay to HSE, Mind) and a similar proportion
manage long-term absence. use solicitors. Just under a fifth
tend to use HR consultants (19%)
Most effective approaches for or professional membership bodies
managing long-term absence (18%), while 13% typically go to
Organisations are more divided a healthcare provider (4% of the
in their views regarding which public sector12).
approaches are most effective
for managing long-term absence Small organisations (fewer than
compared with short-term 50 employees) are less likely to go
absence. As in previous years, to an external occupational health
the top-ranking method for most service (22% compared with 57%
effectively managing long-term of larger organisations).13 They
absence is occupational health are more likely to turn to an HR
involvement (Table 12). Return- consultant (35% compared with
to-work interviews and trigger 15% of larger organisations).14
mechanisms to review attendance
also remain among the most
commonly used and most effective
methods, although the private
sector is particularly likely to rank
return-to-work interviews among
their most effective methods and
the public sector is more likely to
include trigger mechanisms.
As with short-term absence, more

organisations this year include
giving line managers primary
responsibility for managing
absence (2016: 20%; 2015: 11%;
2014: 12%) and giving sickness
absence information to line
managers (2016: 15%; 2015: 7%;
2014: 11%) among their most
effective methods for managing
long-term absence.
Work-related stress and mental health
Nearly a third of organisations report an increase in stress-related absence over the past
year and two-fifths a rise in reported mental health problems. Both are considerably
more common in the public sector. Just over three-fifths of organisations are taking steps
to identify and reduce stress in the workplace and the majority are taking some action
on mental health. Our findings suggest, however, that organisations tend to be more
effective at supporting people with mental health problems than actively promoting good
mental well-being.
Stress is now the Stress is now the most common

cause of long-term absence
organisations are particularly likely
to report stress-related absence
most common and ranks the second most has increased (Figure 6), as are
common cause of short-term larger organisations across all
cause of long-term absence after minor illness (see sectors.15 Nevertheless, for the
Causes of absence). Nearly a private sector at least, the figures
absence. third of respondents report are more positive than those
that stress-related absence in from last years survey, with more
their organisation has increased organisations reporting a decrease
over the past year, while just in stress-related absence and fewer
12% report it has decreased reporting an increase (Figure 6).
(16% dont know). Public sector
Figure 6: Changes in stress-related absence over the past year (% of respondents in 2015 and 2016)
2015 11 39
Non-profit sector
2016 14 42
2015 7 51
Public services
2016 8 49
2015 6 36
Private services
2016 12 22
2015 7 41
All respondents
2016 12 31
Decrease Increase
Base: 761 (2016); 565 (2015)

Table 13: The causes of stress at work (top three causes, % of respondents)
Manufacturing Private sector Public Non-profit

All and production services services sector
Workloads/volume of work 55 49 56 68 41
Non-work factors relationships/family 33 38 32 25 41
Management style 32 33 29 33 35
Non-work factors personal illness/health
27 25 29 25 26
issue
Considerable organisational change/
26 21 19 41 35
restructuring
Relationships at work 25 24 21 31 28
Pressure to meet targets 17 15 20 19 8
Long hours impacting worklife balance 15 12 21 9 13
Lack of employee support from line
14 20 14 8 15
managers
Poorly managed organisational change/
11 14 11 12 8
restructuring
Non-work factors financial concerns 7 12 8 3 8
Job insecurity 7 8 7 6 8
Lack of control over how work is carried out 7 5 7 7 8
Poorly designed jobs/poorly designed roles 4 5 5 2 5
Lack of training 3 3 5 1 4
Lack of consultation 1 1 1 1 1
Base: 730
Workload is the main cause of Public sector most proactive in causes of absence (Figure 7).22
stress managing stress Nevertheless, nearly two-fifths of
The main causes of stress at Just over three-fifths of private sector organisations that
work have changed very little organisations (63%) are taking include stress in their top five
over the last few years. Workload steps to identify and reduce causes of absence are not taking
remains the most common cause, stress in the workplace, a similar any steps to address it.
particularly in the public sector proportion to previous years.
(Table 13).16 Consistent with this, The public sector is particularly Organisations that attempt to
our findings show that increases proactive (78%), followed by identify and reduce stress do so
in stress-related absence are more the not-for-profit sector (65%; using a range of methods. Staff
common where long working hours private sector: 57%).20 While few surveys, flexible working options/
are the norm.17 organisations overall report a improved worklife balance and
reduction in stress-related absence risk assessments/stress audits
The public sector is also twice over the past year, those that are remain the most common methods
as likely as their private sector taking steps to identify and reduce used, followed by training for line
counterparts to rank considerable stress are four times more likely to managers to more effectively
organisational change/restructuring do so (19% vs. 5% of those who are identify and manage stress in
among their top three causes of not taking steps).21 their teams. Stress management
stress at work.18 Unlike last year, training for the whole workforce or
however, they are not significantly Unlike public sector and non-profit training aimed at building personal
more likely than respondents from organisations, those in the private resilience is considerably less
other sectors to include poorly sector are significantly more likely common, particularly in the private
managed change/restructuring to take steps to identify and reduce sector (Table 14). Although public
among their top causes of stress.19 stress if it is among their top five sector organisations are most likely
Figure 7: Is your organisation taking steps to identify and reduce stress in the workplace? (% of respondents)
Private sector
Stress is not among the top 5 causes of absence 51 49
Stress is among the top 5 causes of absence 63 37

Public sector

Non-profit

All respondents
Base: 668 Taking steps Not taking steps
Table 14: Methods used to identify and reduce stress in the workplace (% of respondents that take steps to manage stress)
Manufacturing Private sector Public Non-profit

All and production services services sector
Staff surveys 68 55 61 82 74
Flexible working options/improved work
61 39 60 66 75
life balance
Risk assessments/stress audits 56 55 40 78 62
Training for line managers to more
effectively identify and manage stress in 52 42 51 64 43
their team
Employee assistance programme 50 39 48 55 57
Written stress policy/guidance 32 21 24 54 29
Greater involvement of occupational
30 32 21 44 30
health specialists
Training aimed at building personal
resilience (such as coping techniques,
26 9 18 46 32
mindfulness, cognitive behaviour therapy,
positive psychology courses)
Changes in work organisation, for
24 17 28 19 29
example job role adaptations
Focus groups 24 17 19 35 25
Stress management training for the whole
22 11 20 31 25
workforce
Health and Safety Executives stress
17 14 10 31 19
management standards
Relaxation or exercise classes 13 2 11 21 16
Other 3 2 4 1 3
Base: 422

to provide stress management
training for the whole workforce,
Increases in reported mental health
problems are strongly related
As with stress,
fewer are doing so compared with to increases in stress-related increases in mental
previous years (2016: 31%; 2015: 41%; absence.26 As with stress, increases
2014: 51%; 2013: 49%; 2012: 47%). in mental health problems are health problems
Generally, however, the public sector somewhat related to a long hours
remains more proactive in their culture and a lesser focus on well- are somewhat
efforts to manage stress and is more
likely than other sectors to use most
being.27
related to a long
of the methods listed in Table 14. A third have a policy that hours culture and
covers mental health
Managing mental health Only a very small minority a lesser focus on
Overall, two-fifths (41%)23 of of organisations (5%) have a
respondents claim that reported standalone employee mental well-being.
mental health problems (such health policy, although a further
as anxiety and depression) have 29% include mental health as part
increased among employees in of another policy and 12% report
the past 12 months, while just 8% that while they dont currently
report a decrease. The public sector have a policy, they are developing
is twice as likely as the private to one (Figure 8). Public sector
report an increase (Table 15).24 In organisations are nearly twice
addition, larger organisations within as likely to have a policy that
each sector is particularly likely incorporates employee mental
to report an increase (Table 15).25 health compared with their private
However, the proportion of large sector counterparts. In the private
private sector organisations (more sector, organisations are more
than 1,000 employees) reporting an likely to have, or to be developing,
increase in reported mental health a policy if they have seen an
problems has fallen compared with increase in reported mental health
previous years (2016: 47%; 2015: problems over the past year (50%
62%; 2014: 60%). compared with 36% of those who
havent seen an increase).28
Table 15: Have you seen a change in the number of reported common mental health problems, such as anxiety and
depression, among employees in the last 12 months? (%)
Yes, an increase Yes, a decrease No

All respondents 41 8 52
Private sector 32 8 60
Public services 65 9 26
Non-profit sector 43 6 51
No. of UK employees
149 20 7 73
50249 35 9 56
250999 48 8 45
1,0004,999 62 10 28
5,000+ 73 4 23
Base: 648
Figure 8: Does your organisation have an employee mental health policy? (% of respondents)
Private sector 5 23 12 60
Public services 8 45 10 38
Non-profit sector 2 33 11 54
All respondents 5 29 12 54
Base: 713
Yes, a standalone policy Not yet, but we are developing a policy

Mental health is part of another policy, for example health No
Most take some action to Organisations are better

More than half promote or support mental at providing support than
of respondents health
Most organisations, particularly
actively promoting good
mental health
agree that their those in the public and non-profit More than half of respondents
sectors, are taking some action to agree that their organisation is
organisation promote good mental health and/ effective at supporting people
or support employees with mental with mental health problems
is effective at health problems (Table 16). Private but just two-fifths believe their
supporting people sector organisations are more likely
to be taking action if they have
organisation actively promotes
good mental well-being (Figure 9).
with mental health experienced an increase in reported Moreover, while considerably more
mental health problems over the respondents agree than disagree
problems. last 12 months (86% vs. 73% of that their organisation is effective
those who have not experienced at supporting people with mental
an increase).29 In addition, larger health problems, views are more
organisations (within all sectors) mixed regarding whether senior
are also more likely to be taking leaders support the organisations
action.30 focus on mental well-being through
their actions and behaviours and
As in previous years, the methods respondents are twice as likely to
most commonly used to promote disagree than agree that managers
and support mental health are confident and competent to
are flexible working options/ spot the early warning signs of
improved worklife balance, poor mental health. Two-fifths
employee assistance programmes also disagree that staff are well
and counselling. Both employee informed about common mental
assistance programmes and health risks and symptoms.
counselling, along with greater
involvement of occupational health Respondents from the public
specialists, are particularly common sector are most likely to agree
in larger organisations.31 that their organisation actively
promotes good mental well-
being, encourages openness and
awareness about mental health,

Table 16: Efforts to support employees with mental health problems (% of respondents)

respondents and production services services sector
Flexible working options/improved worklife
52 36 51 65 56
balance
Employee assistance programme 47 36 45 52 55
Counselling service 43 27 29 73 57
Greater involvement of occupational health
32 34 21 49 39
specialists
We are increasing awareness of mental health
31 14 24 59 32
issues across the workforce as a whole
We provide training for managers to more
effectively manage and support staff with 22 13 18 38 22
mental health problems
Tailored support or mentoring for managers
22 18 20 28 23
when required
Training aimed at building personal resilience
(such as coping techniques, mindfulness, cognitive 16 5 11 34 19
behaviour therapy, positive psychology courses)
Sustained support for long-term mental health
15 12 10 28 13
conditions
Mental health champions 6 2 2 17 4
Other 3 4 3 1 7
We are not taking any action 17 27 20 7 8
Base: 719
Figure 9: Organisational support and promotion of mental health (% of respondents)
My organisation is effective at supporting people with mental

12 43 31 11 3
health problems
My organisation actively promotes good mental well-being 9 33 36 17 5
My organisation encourages openness and awareness about

12 35 33 16 4
mental health
Senior leaders support the organisations focus on mental

well-being through their actions and behaviour 7 25 42 20 7
Managers are confident and competent to spot the early

warning signs of poor mental health 4 16 38 33 9
Managers are confident to have sensitive discussions with staff

5 24 33 30 8
and signpost to expert mental health sources of help if needed
Staff are well informed about the common mental health

risks and symptoms 4 20 35 34 7
Staff are well informed about organisational support for

mental health 5 26 34 28 7
Base: 740
Strongly agree Neither agree nor disagree Strongly disagree

Agree Disagree
that senior leaders support the a policy regarding how effective when required. Respondents from
organisations focus on mental their organisation is at supporting organisations that do provide
well-being and that staff are and promoting good mental health such training and support have
well informed about mental and awareness, the support of more faith in their managers
health risks and organisational senior leaders, the competence of confidence and competence to
support (Table 17). Manufacturing managers to spot the early warning identify and manage mental health
and production organisations signs of poor mental health and issues (Figure 10). Nevertheless,
appear to be least proactive and how well informed staff are about even among those that do
supportive, with more than half mental health issues.32 provide training, less than a third
disagreeing that managers are agree managers are confident
confident and competent to spot Having a mental health policy does and competent to identify and
the early warning signs of poor not, however, have any apparent manage mental health issues.
mental health or that staff are impact on the confidence of Similarly, less than two-fifths of
well informed about risks and managers to discuss mental health those that provide managers with
organisational support. issues with staff. Further analysis tailored support or mentoring
shows that 60% of organisations agree managers are confident and
Across all sectors, respondents with a policy on mental health do competent to identify and manage
from organisations with a mental not provide mental health training mental health issues. These
health policy (either standalone for managers and just 31% of those findings highlight the importance
or as part of another policy) are with a policy provide tailored of reviewing and evaluating
more positive than those without support or mentoring for managers training and support efforts.
Figure 10: Confidence and competence of managers to identify and support mental health issues (% of respondents)
Strongly agree or agree Strongly disagree or disagree
No training provided 18 46
Managers are confident and Training provided 26 30

competent to spot the early
warning signs of poor mental
health No support provided 17 46
Tailored support provided 29 31
No training provided 28 41
Managers are confident to have Training provided 32 29

sensitive discussions with staff
and signpost to expert mental
health sources of help if needed No support provided 27 40
Tailored support provided 37 32
Base: 711

Table 17: Organisational support and promotion of mental health, by sector (% of respondents)
Manufacturing and
production Private sector services Public services Non-profit sector
Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly Strongly
disagree or agree or disagree or agree or disagree or agree or disagree or agree or
disagree agree disagree agree disagree agree disagree agree
My organisation
is effective at
supporting people 18 53 13 53 13 61 14 53
with mental health
problems
My organisation
actively promotes
37 27 22 40 13 63 19 37
good mental well-
being
My organisation
encourages
openess and 32 31 20 44 14 65 16 50
awareness about
mental health
Senior leaders
support the
organisations
focus on mental 37 21 26 29 21 43 26 34
well-being through
their actions and
behaviour
Managers are
confident and
competent to spot
51 13 41 21 42 21 37 21
the early warning
signs of poor
mental health
Managers are
confident to
have sensitive
discussions with
37 23 37 31 42 26 37 35
staff and signpost
to expert mental
health sources of
help if needed
Staff are well
informed about the
common mental 60 12 43 24 30 32 31 27
health risks and
symptoms
Staff are well
informed about
organisational 53 16 37 27 22 46 27 38
support for mental
health
Base: 740
Employee well-being
Most organisations make some effort to improve employee health and well-being,
although just a third have a formal well-being strategy or plan and organisations vary
considerably in how actively they promote well-being. Presenteeism (people coming
to work when unwell) remains a common issue, particularly in organisations where long
working hours are the norm. Nearly half of organisations have increased their focus on
well-being over the last year and nearly two-fifths have increased their well-being spend
over the same period. Only a minority, however, evaluate the impact of their investment.
One in ten organisations have a well-being plan/programme as part strategies or plans/programmes

standalone well-being strategy in of a wider people strategy (Figure while smaller organisations are
support of their wider organisation 11). Larger organisations are more more likely to act flexibly on an
strategy, while a further 25% have a likely to have formal well-being ad hoc basis.33 In addition, public
Figure 11: Formal well-being strategies by size and sector (% of respondents)
6
23
We have a standalone 10 Private sector
well-being strategy in 3
support of our wider 6 Public services
organisation strategy. 13
21
10 Non-profit
149 employees
20
43 50249 employees
A well-being plan/ 19
programme is part of our 14 250999 employees
wider people strategy. 17
26
46 1,000+ employees
25
All respondents
19
16
We dont have a formal 23
strategy or a plan, but we 13
have well-being initiatives. 22
23
18
19
46
We dont have a formal 13
strategy or a plan, but we 39
act flexibly on an ad hoc or 61
45
individual basis, according 31
to employee need. 12
38
9
5
Were not currently 10
doing anything to 9
improve employee 11
health and well-being. 8
4
8
Base: 809 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

sector organisations are particularly previous year (2016: 66%; 2015: As in previous years, three-fifths
likely to have formal well-being 48%). Other changes, while less of organisations offer some sort of
strategies or plans/programmes.34 common overall, had also increased insurance or protection initiatives,
Moreover, our findings show an compared with our findings from at least to some groups of staff.
increase in the proportion of public 2015 (Table 18). Private medical insurance remains
sector organisations with a well- most popular, although it is often
being strategy, plan or programme Well-being benefits just provided to particular groups
compared with last year (66% Most respondents report their of employees dependent on
compared with 51% in 2015). organisation provides one or more grade/seniority.
Just 8% of organisations are not well-being benefit to all employees
currently doing anything to improve (Table 19). As in previous years, Insurance and protection initiatives,
employee health and well-being. access to counselling services and particularly private medical
employee assistance programmes insurance, are considerably more
More organisations have made are the most common well-being common in the private sector
changes to their well-being benefits on offer. (Table 19). In contrast, employee
approach support initiatives (particularly
Organisations with a well-being Nearly three-quarters (74%) of counselling services) and many
strategy, plan/programme or organisations offer some sort of health promotion initiatives
initiatives are most likely to have health promotion benefit. The most (particularly mindfulness, stop
made changes to their approach common initiatives include advice smoking support, advice on
over the last 12 months, although on healthy eating, subsidised gym healthy eating and healthy canteen
more than half of those who just membership (back up to previous options) are more common in the
act flexibly on an ad hoc basis levels after a dip last year) and public sector. A notable exception
had also made one or more of health screening. There has been a is the provision of free fresh fruit,
the changes listed in Table 18. small increase in the proportion of which is more prevalent in the
Improving communications to organisations offering the practice private sector.
staff about the well-being benefits of mindfulness to all employees
on offer and how to access (20% compared with 13% in 2015), Balancing physical health,
them remains the most common particularly in the public sector healthy lifestyle choices and
change made, but a considerably (46% compared with 26% in 2015). mental health
higher proportion report they Otherwise there have been few There is considerable variation in
made this change over the last overall changes in the well-being the extent to which organisations
12 months compared with the benefits on offer. health and well-being activity is
Table 18: Over the past 12 months, have you made any of the following changes to your well-being approach? (% of respondents)
We have a standalone
well-being strategy We dont have a We dont have a
or a well-being plan/ formal strategy formal strategy or
programme as part or a plan, but we a plan, but we act
All of wider people have well-being flexibly on an ad hoc
respondents strategy. initiatives. or individual basis.
2016 2015 2016 2015 2016 2015 2016 2015
Improved communication to staff about
the well-being benefits we offer and 64 48 84 79 73 55 41 19
how to access them
Made significant changes to enhance
the physical working environment to 28 10 38 17 28 7 20 7
promote well-being
Introduced or revised how we monitor
24 10 37 16 27 10 12 7
employee usage of offerings
Introduced or revised measures to
evaluate the business benefits of 17 5 28 10 17 5 6 2
individual offerings
Base: 2016: 740; 2015: 512
Table 19: Employee well-being benefits provided by employers (% of respondents)
Employee support
Access to counselling service
All employees 56 41 46 81 66
Depends on grade/seniority 2 3 3 1 2
Employee assistance programme
Financial education/access to advice
Emotional intelligence training
Health promotion
Advice on healthy eating
Subsidised gym membership
Health screening
Stop smoking support
Healthy canteen options
Free fresh fruit
Access to physiotherapy
Well-being days
Mindfulness

Table 19: continued
Walking/pedometer initiatives
On-site massages
Relaxation or exercise classes
In-house gym
Personalised healthy living programmes
Insurance/protection initiatives
Private medical insurance
Healthcare cash plans
Long-term disability/permanent health insurance/income protection
Group income protection
Dental illness insurance
Self-funded health plans/healthcare trust
Personal accident insurance
Critical illness insurance
Base: 805
designed to promote good physical Public sector organisations are The public sector is also more likely
health, good lifestyle choices and most likely to report their activities to report their well-being activities
good mental health (Figure 12). focus on promoting good lifestyle focus on promoting good mental
In similar findings to last year, choices (38% do so to a large health (42% do so to a large extent
nearly half of organisations with extent compared with 23% of the compared with 29% of the private
well-being activities focus equally private sector and 18% of non-profit sector and 19% of non-profits).36
on all three aspects (16% to a organisations).35 This corresponds Again sector differences in well-
large extent, 21% to a moderate with the findings above (Table 19) being activities support this, with
extent and 9% to a little extent). that show the public sector is more the public sector more likely to
Five per cent report their well- likely to provide such benefits as offer access to counselling services,
being activities are not designed stop smoking support, advice on relaxation classes, mindfulness and
to promote good physical health, healthy eating and healthy canteen well-being days (Table 19).
good lifestyle choices or good options.
mental health at all.
Figure 12: To what extent is your employee health and well-being activity designed to promote good physical health, good
lifestyle choices and good mental health? (% of respondents with well-being strategies/plan/programme or initiatives)
Good physical health, for example

exercise and health checks 29 42 21 8
Good lifestyle choices, for example To a large extent

diet, smoking cessation 27 40 23 9
To a moderate extent
To a little extent
Good mental health 32 41 20 7 Not at all
Base: 420
Figure 13: Organisations well-being focus (% of respondents)
Our organisation is much more reactive (taking action

when people have gone off sick) than proactive 26 32 30 12
(promoting healthy choices and good well-being).
Long working hours is the norm for us. 19 37 30 14
Well-being considerations are part of our

people management approach. 17 37 32 14
Our organisation learns from the health and well-

being problems weve faced and takes action. 10 43 34 13
Employee well-being is taken into consideration

in business decisions. 11 34 37 19
Employee well-being is on senior leaders agendas. 16 27 37 19
Line managers are bought in to the importance

of well-being. 12 31 39 18
Well-being is a formal part of someones remit. 9 28 31 31
Employee well-being is only a focus in our

2 13 32 52
business when things are going well.
Base: 703
To a great extent To a little extent
To a moderate extent Not at all

The emphasis placed on Nearly three-fifths, however, report The public sector and non-profit
employee well-being that their organisation is much more organisations tend to have the
Organisations are divided in the reactive than proactive regarding greatest focus on well-being, while
emphasis they place on well-being well-being. While far fewer report manufacturing and production
(Figure 13). In similar findings that employee well-being is only organisations are least proactive
to last year, just over half of a focus in their business when (Figure 14). In addition, larger
respondents report well-being things are going well, one in six organisations in the private and
considerations are part of their report this is the case at least to non-profit sectors are more likely
people management approach, a moderate extent. In addition, a to report that long working hours
at least to a moderate extent, higher proportion this year report are the norm and less likely to
while more than two-fifths report a culture of long working hours report that employee well-being
that employee well-being is taken (56% report long working hours is is taken into consideration in
into consideration in business the norm, at least to a moderate business decisions.38
decisions, employee well-being extent, compared with 43% in 2015),
is on senior leaders agendas and which, as we have seen (in Work- Increasing focus on well-being
that line managers are bought into related stress and mental health) is Nearly half of respondents (46%)
the importance of well-being (at associated with increased stress and report their organisations focus
least to a moderate extent).37 reported stress-related absence. on well-being has increased
Figure 14: Organisations well-being focus, by sector (% of respondents that report the following apply to a large or moderate extent)
Our organisation is much more reactive (taking action 65

when people have gone off sick) than proactive 58
55
(promoting healthy choices and good well-being). 56
53
Long working hours is the norm for us. 61
64
32
45
Well-being considerations are part of our people 48
management approach. 68
64
44
Our organisation learns from the health and well- 52
being problems weve faced and takes action. 61
52
34
Employee well-being is taken into consideration in 44
business decisions. 49
52
31
Employee well-being is on senior leaders agendas. 43
52
48
26
Line managers are bought in to the importance of 43
well-being. 49
53
24
Well-being is a formal part of someones remit. 31
56
42
13
Employee well-being is only a focus in our business 18
when things are going well. 17
10
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Base: 703
Manufacturing and production Public services
Private sector services Non-profit sector
compared with the previous year. services, 55% of public services performance and 43% because
Just 3% report it has decreased, and 43% of non-profits).39 their organisation believes its the
while 6% report they dont right thing to do.
do anything to support staff Organisations most commonly
well-being. Manufacturing and increase their focus on well- In the public sector, however,
production organisations are being because they want to be a where absence levels are highest,
most likely to do nothing (14%) great place to work (Figure 15). the most common reason for
and are less likely to report they Nearly half report its because the increasing their focus on well-
have increased their focus (34% organisation believes employee being is to lower their absence
compared with 48% of private well-being is linked to business figures (Figure 15).40 Along with
Figure 15: What are the most prominent reasons for your organisations increased focus on employee well-being?
(% of respondents who report an increased focus on well-being)
63
69
We want our organisation to be a great place to work 65
51
77
47
Our organisation believes employee well-being is 33
46
linked to business performance 51
55
43
46
Our organisation believes its the right thing to do 44
39
43
42
33
To lower our absence figures 30
63
45
32
33
To retain people 38
24
23
28
Our senior leadership is driving a heightened focus 28
on employee well-being 21
39
34
10
10 All respondents
To attract the best talent 13
7
2 Manufacturing and production
7 Private sector services

10
We have a specific issue that needs addressing 5
7 Public services
7
Non-profit sector
2
3
Other 3
1
Base: 320 2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

non-profit organisations they More organisations are Looking forward, slightly more
are also more likely than private taking steps to discourage organisations anticipate an increase
sector respondents to report that presenteeism in well-being spend in 2017 (46%
their senior leadership is driving Nearly half of respondents (48%) anticipate an increase, 4% a
a heightened focus on employee report their organisation has taken decrease). Those that have seen
well-being.41 Public sector steps to discourage presenteeism increases this year are more likely
respondents are less likely than over the last 12 months, a to predict further increases in 2016.
those from other sectors to report considerable increase on previous
focus on well-being has increased years (2015: 31%; 2014: 32%; Few evaluate the impact of
because their organisation wants to 2013: 34%). Smaller organisations their spend
be a great place to work.42 are somewhat more likely to In similar findings to previous
have taken action (fewer than years, just one in six of those who
Presenteeism 250 employees: 54%; 250999 invest in employee well-being
Nearly three-quarters of employees: 41%; 1,000+ employees: evaluate the impact of their spend
respondents, across all sectors 35%).47 Those who had noticed an (2016: 17%; 2015: 14%; 2014: 21%;
and sizes of organisation, report increase in presenteeism over the 2013: 18%; 2012: 23%). Fifty-five per
they have observed presenteeism last 12 months are not more likely cent report they dont, while 28%
people coming to work when to have taken steps to discourage dont know. Consistent with last
unwell within their organisations. it, nor is taking action related to years findings, organisations that
Forty-five per cent of these report the proportion of employees that have a formal well-being strategy
that up to a quarter of staff come come to work ill. or plan are most likely to evaluate
to work when sick, but one in five impact (29% compared with 17%
(18%) report that more than half While presenteeism is a common of those who dont have a formal
do (15% dont know the proportion issue, most respondents across all strategy but have well-being
affected). A higher proportion sectors and sizes of organisations initiatives and 6% of those who act
of people coming to work ill is report that, on the whole, flexibly on an individual basis).49
associated with a culture of long employees do use their yearly Neither organisation size nor sector
working hours.43 holiday entitlement. Just 8% report have a significant impact once this
they dont, while 2% dont know. is taken into account.
Moreover, in similar findings The vast majority of organisations
to previous years, three in ten (87%) encourage or remind people Just 8% of respondents overall
organisations overall (29%) report to use their holiday entitlement. (15% of the public sector) report
they have noticed an increase in their organisation links well-
people coming to work ill in the Well-being spend being metrics with organisation
last 12 months (15% dont know), Nearly two-fifths (37%) of performance metrics. Nearly three-
although this rises to two-fifths of organisations that invest in well- quarters report they dont, while
the public sector. Organisations being (and are able to provide 18% dont know if they do or not.
that focus more on well-being information on changes in
were somewhat less likely to report expenditure) report their well-being
increases in presenteeism.44 spend has increased this year. Just
5% report it has decreased, with
As weve found in previous years, no significant differences across
presenteeism is associated with sectors or sizes of organisation.
stress-related absence and mental Changes in spending are
health problems. More than half of significantly related to changes
those who had noticed an increase in well-being focus: 62% of those
in presenteeism report an increase who report their organisations
in stress-related absence compared focus on well-being increased this
with less than a third of those who year compared with last also note
hadnt.45 They were also twice an increase in spending over this
as likely to report an increase in period, while 88% of those who
mental health problems, such as report a decrease in focus also
anxiety and depression (61% vs. report a decrease in spending.48
30%).46
Conclusions
A higher The reduction in the average

level of absence recorded this
More changes to well-being
approach
proportion of year is particularly positive given Neither have there been any
the record level of employment notable changes in the well-
organisations over this period. Studies have being benefits on offer, with the
often associated reduced levels exception of a small increase in
this year (nearly of absence with higher levels of the proportion of organisations
three-fifths overall) unemployment.50 To conclude,
we consider what has changed in
offering mindfulness. However,
nearly half report their
report that long policy and practice that may have
contributed to the reduction in
organisations focus on well-being
has increased. Compared with last
working hours are average absence as well as more year, a higher proportion report
concerning trends. Finally, we that over the last 12 months they
the norm. consider how organisations can have improved communication
move forward to make ongoing to staff about the well-being
and sustainable improvements in benefits on offer, made significant
absence and well-being. changes to enhance the physical
working environment to promote
What has changed in terms well-being, introduced or revised
of policy and practice? how they monitor employee usage
of offerings and introduced or
No change in absence data revised measures to evaluate the
collection business benefits of individual
In similar findings to previous offerings.
years, almost all organisations
have a written absence/attendance Greater focus on addressing
management policy and the presenteeism
majority collect absence data. Our findings also show a
considerable increase in the
Fewer methods are used to proportion of respondents that
manage absence report their organisation has taken
Similarly, there has not been any steps to discourage presenteeism
notable increase in the methods over the last 12 months. Employees
organisations use to manage coming to work ill can have a
absence. On the contrary, we have negative impact on productivity as
seen a notable reduction in the well as health.
range of approaches organisations
across all sectors (but particularly More concerning trends
in manufacturing and production)
are using to manage absence. Increasing long-hours culture
Fewer organisations are using A higher proportion of
return-to-work interviews, risk organisations this year (nearly
assessments to aid return to work, three-fifths overall) report that
capability procedures or health long working hours are the norm,
promotion to manage long-term consistent with recent findings
absence and fewer are providing from the TUC that the number of
leave for family circumstances people working excessive hours
to manage short- or long-term has risen by 15% since 2010.51
absence. This is a worrying trend given

our findings that workload is the
most common cause of stress-
Most organisations attempt to
manage absence and promote
Most organisations
related absence and that a long- well-being through a range of attempt to manage
hours culture is also associated practices and initiatives, but fewer
with increases in reported mental take a more strategic or holistic absence and
health problems. approach. Just over a third,
for example, have a well-being promote well-being
Decline in leave for family
circumstances
strategy or programme, while the
rest have well-being initiatives or
through a range
Fewer organisations this year just act flexibly on an ad hoc basis. of practices and
report they provide leave for Even in the public sector, which
family circumstances, although has the widest range of initiatives initiatives, but
home/family/carer responsibilities for managing absence and well-
remain among the most common being, more organisations are fewer take a more
causes of short- and long-term
absence. There is also a danger
reported to be reactive than
proactive.
strategic or holistic
that, without adequate support, approach.
carers will feel forced out of work. Moreover, at an organisational
An online poll from Carers UK level, the emphasis placed on
found that over 2 million people attendance and well-being varies
have given up work to care for a considerably. Very few report
loved one.52 Currently one in nine that attendance is driven by
of the UKs workforce provide the board, even where absence
care for a relative or dependant management is currently the
and experts predict that numbers number one people management
will rise significantly.53 Monitoring priority. Just over two-fifths
the caring responsibilities of report that employee well-being
employees and finding ways is taken into consideration in
to support working carers business decisions, that employee
is a growing imperative if well-being is on senior leaders
organisations are to avoid losing agendas or that line managers
productive staff. are bought into the importance of
well-being. Only a small minority
Looking forward link well-being metrics with wider
The reduction in average absence organisation performance metrics.
this year and the increased
focus on employee well-being is These findings suggest that
encouraging, as are our findings many would benefit from a more
of an, albeit small, increase in co-ordinated and integrated
the proportion of private sector approach. As stated in the CIPDs
organisations reporting a decrease 2016 policy report, Growing the
in stress-related absence this year. Health and Well-being Agenda:
Nevertheless, stress and mental From first steps to full potential,
health problems remain among which presents a framework for
the top causes of long- and short- a healthy workplace, a well-being
term absence and far more report culture and environment requires
these issues are increasing than the commitment of senior leaders
decreasing. An increasing trend for and managers. Initiatives to get
long working hours coupled with people back to work will be short
increased uncertainty for some as lived if their working environment
the UK moves towards Brexit may does not support health and well-
put further strain on employees if being, particularly where stress
organisations fail to address these and mental health problems are
issues adequately. common. Managers, who often
have responsibility for managing As the UK prepares for Brexit,
absence, also need to be organisations (particularly those
equipped with the confidence and with high levels of migrant
competence to manage absence workers or those that plan to
and spot early warning signs of ill relocate) will need to be mindful
health. of the impact of uncertainty and
change on employees well-being
This years survey findings suggest and ensure appropriate guidance
more organisations are realising and support is available. Our
the critical role of line managers latest Labour Market Outlook54
in managing absence, but fewer reports that many employers
are providing the support and expect Brexit to have a significant
training to them to do so most negative impact on costs and
effectively. More organisations business investment decisions.
this year said that giving line Where this creates uncertainty or
managers primary responsibility additional strain on employees,
for managing absence and giving the impetus for a strong focus on
sickness absence information to well-being will increase. At the
line managers are in their top same time, resource pressures
three most effective approaches may intensify the requirement
for managing absence. Yet fewer to make a strong business case
employers than last year said they for support. Understanding the
are training managers in absence- costs and causes of absence and
handling, and there has also been presenteeism and demonstrating
a decrease in the proportion of the business benefits of existing
organisations providing tailored initiatives can help garner support
support for line managers. Given for appropriate investments
the wide research evidence base in health and well-being, not
about the importance of the line only to improve productivity
manager role in creating a great through reducing absence, but
place to work, this misalignment also through creating a healthy
needs to be addressed. place to work that attracts talent,
improves retention and fosters
engagement.

Background to the survey
This is the seventeenth annual CIPD Absence Management survey. It explores absence
management trends, policy and practice in the UK. The survey was completed by 1,091
respondents in July 2016.
The survey consists of 38 Respondents come from Some respondents did not
questions completed through organisations of all sizes. Medium- answer all questions, so where
an online self-completion sized organisations are particularly percentages are reported in tables
questionnaire. Many questions well represented (Table A1). or figures, the respondent base
remain the same as previous for that question is given.
years, to provide useful Forty-six per cent of respondents
benchmarking data on topics work in private sector services, 17% The median is used in cases where
including absence levels, in manufacturing and production, the distribution is significantly
causes and costs, as well as 23% in the public sector and skewed and the 5% trimmed mean
how organisations attempt to 13% in voluntary, community where there are some extreme
manage absence. This year we and not-for-profit organisations outliers. The 5% trimmed mean
also include new questions on (referred to in the report as non- is the arithmetic mean calculated
the priority given to absence profit organisations), in a similar when the largest 5% and the
management compared with distribution to previous years smallest 5% of the cases have
other people management issues (Table A2). been eliminated. Eliminating
and where organisations go for extreme cases from the
advice on absence management. Note on abbreviations, computation of the mean results
We also examine in more detail statistics and figures used in a better estimate of central
the issue of presenteeism and Voluntary, community and not-for- tendency when extreme outliers
organisations policies and profit organisations are referred exist. When the median or 5%
support for good mental well- to throughout the report as non- trimmed mean is used it is noted.
being. profits.
With the exception of average
Sample profile The private sector is used to working time and days lost,
As in previous years, most describe organisations from all figures in tables have
respondents (84%) answered the manufacturing and production and been rounded to the nearest
questions in relation to their whole private sector services. These two percentage point. Because of
company/organisation, while 12% groups are combined for reporting rounding, percentages may not
answered in relation to a single purposes where there are no always total 100.
site and 3% in relation to a single significant differences between
division. A minority responded for their responses. Different statistical tests have
a region or multiple sites but not been used, depending on the
the whole organisation. type of analysis and the measures
Table A1: Number of people employed in respondents organisations (% of respondents reporting for whole organisation)
2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010

Fewer than 50 18 18 14 13 6 12 6
50249 34 38 37 38 34 30 28
250999 19 22 21 22 31 28 35
1,0004,999 14 13 15 14 19 18 16
More than 5,000 15 10 13 13 10 11 15
Base: 912 (2016); 467 (2015); 413 (2014); 499 (2013); 592 (2012); 579 (2011); 429 (2010)
Table A2: Distribution of responses, by sector
Number of
respondents %
Manufacturing and production 186 17
Agriculture and forestry 3 0
Chemicals, pharmaceuticals and oils 15 1
Construction 12 1
Electricity, gas and water 8 1
Engineering, electronics and metals 44 4
Food, drink and tobacco 29 3
General manufacturing 8 1
Mining and quarrying 3 0
Paper and printing 9 1
Textiles 4 0
Other manufacturing/production 51 5
Private sector services 503 46

Professional services (accountancy, advertising, consultancy, legal, etc) 111 10
Finance, insurance and real estate 65 6
Hotels, catering and leisure 35 3
IT services 36 3
Communications 17 2
Media (broadcasting and publishing, etc) 14 1
Retail and wholesale 50 5
Transport, distribution and storage 35 3
Call centres 9 1
Other private services 131 12
Public services 255 23

Education 62 6
Central government 27 2
Local government 60 5
Health 61 6
Other public services 45 4
Voluntary, community and not-for-profit (non-profit organisations) 147 13

Housing association 26 2
Charity services 54 5
Care services 29 3
Other voluntary 38 3
Base: 1,091
used in the questionnaire, to associations between measures. Chi-Square (2) and Spearmans
examine whether differences Non-parametric tests are used rho (rs). We report on statistics
between groups are significantly where the data did not meet at the generally accepted level of
different than could be expected the requirements of parametric significance, p<0.05.
by chance and to examine equivalents. Tests used include

Further sources of information
Visit cipd.co.uk/ Stress Read our survey report Employee

absencemanagementsurvey The CIPD factsheet Stress in the Outlook: Focus on mental health
to access related products Workplace provides advice on in the workplace 2016, which
and services and to identifying the key indicators of examines the impact of poor
view previous Absence stress and outlines steps that mental health on performance in
Management survey reports people management specialists can the workplace and highlights why
and case studies. take to manage it. mental health in the workplace is
an issue that employers cannot
Read our research insight afford to ignore.
Absence measurement and Preventing Stress: Promoting
management positive manager behaviour. This Health and safety
Read our factsheet, which provides report is the result of collaboration The CIPD factsheet Health and Well-
guidance on absence policies, between the CIPD, Investors being at Work gives introductory
measuring absence levels and in People and the Health and guidance on employers duties to
managing short- and long-term Safety Executive on research provide a safe and healthy working
absence. into management competencies environment. It introduces the law
for preventing and reducing on health and safety at work and
Acas have published an advisory stress at work. Case studies are outlines employers obligations.
booklet on how to manage included of organisations that have
attendance and employee turnover. implemented the findings from Occupational health
Available at: www.acas.org.uk previous stages of the research. Take a look at our factsheet
Occupational Health.
Download the guidance produced Developing Resilience: An evidence-
jointly by the National Institute based guide for practitioners Flexible working
for Health and Clinical Excellence provides a thorough review of the Read our survey report Flexible
(NICE) and the CIPD, which offers available evidence about how to Working Provision and Uptake,
advice to employers: Managing develop resilience at individual and which discusses the types of
Long-term Sickness Absence and organisational level. flexible arrangements employers
Incapacity for Work. adopt, the benefits of offering
Mental health flexible working and the typical
Well-being The CIPD factsheet Mental Health barriers faced.
Read our report Growing the in the Workplace considers how
Health and Well-being Agenda: employers can support employee
From first steps to full potential, mental health at work and the
which builds on the research and importance of incorporating mental
guidance that the CIPD and others health considerations into a wider
have already published, examining employee well-being policy.
what a healthy workplace looks like
and setting out key policy calls for Managing and Supporting Mental
employers and government. Health at Work: Disclosure tools for
managers, produced by the CIPD
Take a look at our well-being and Mind, contains information,
hub page: cipd.co.uk/well-being practical advice and templates
for links to thought pieces from to help managers facilitate
experts and leading thinkers on conversations about stress and
different well-being issues and mental health problems, and put
other CIPD publications and in place support so employees can
resources on the topic. stay well and in work.
Endnotes
1 2015: 87%; 2014: 76%; 2013: 81%; 2012: 82%; 2011: 20 2 =21.0, df=2, p<0.001, n=682.
81%. 21 2 =24.3, df=2, p<0.001, n=585.
2 2=42.6, df=3, p<0.001, n=1,044. 22 2 =5.9 with continuity correction, df=1, p<0.05, n=428.
3 Four per cent of organisations report that 10% or more of 23 2015: 41%; 2014: 43%; 2013: 42%; 2012: 49%; 2011: 45%;
working time was lost to absence. 2010: 42%, 2009: 24%. The dont know responses were
4 The 5% trimmed mean is the arithmetic mean calculated excluded to improve comparability across years.
when the largest 5% and the smallest 5% of the cases 24 2=45.0, df=2, p<0.001, n=648.
have been eliminated. Eliminating extreme cases from 25 rs =0.33, p<0.001, n=645.
the computation of the mean results in a better estimate 26 rs =0.58, p<0.001, n=581.
of central tendency when extreme outliers exist. 27 Long working hours are the norm and increase in
5 rs =0.46, p<0.001, n=732. reported mental health problems: rs =0.15, p<0.001,
6 Size of organisation: rs =0.31, p<0.001, n=728; Sector: n=580; Employee well-being is taken into consideration
2=44.1, df=3, p<0.001, n=733. in business decisions and increase in reported mental
7 Twenty-one per cent of those that use flexible working health problems: rs =0.14, p<0.001, n=558.
report illegitimate absence is a major cause of short- 28 2=9.2, df=2, p<0.05, n=402.
term absence compared with 30% of those that dont 29 2=7.5 with continuity correction, df=1, p<0.01, n=391.
use flexible working: 2=9.3 with continuity correction, 30 rs =0.20, p<0.05, n=715.
df=1, p<0.01, n=879; 20% of those that use family leave 31 Number of employees and employee assistance
report illegitimate absence is a major cause of short- programmes: rs =0.30, p<0.001, n=715; number of
term absence compared with 29% of those that dont employees and counselling: rs =0.31, p<0.001, n=715;
use family leave: 2=9.3 with continuity correction, df=1, number of employees and greater involvement of
p<0.01, n=879. occupational health specialists: rs =0.33, p<0.001, n=715.
8 2=54.3, df=3, p<0.001, n=1,043. 32 My organisation is effective at supporting people with
9 rs =0.32, p<0.001, n=707. mental health problems: 2=30.4, df=2, p<0.001, n=702;
10 Short-term absence 2016: 10%; 2015: 11%; 2014: 8%; 2013: My organisation actively promotes good mental well-
6%; long-term absence 2016: 3%; 2015: 5%; 2014: 3%; being: 2=73.7, df=2, p<0.001, n=699; My organisation
2013: 1%. encourages openness and awareness about mental
11 Eighteen per cent of those who include absence health: 2=45.5, df=2, p<0.001, n=695; Senior leaders
management in their top three people management support the organisations focus on mental well-being
priorities have nominated absence case managers/ through their actions and behaviour: 2=48.1, df=2,
management team compared with 8% of those who p<0.001, n=699; Managers are confident and competent
dont include absence management in their top three to spot the early warning signs of poor mental health:
priorities: 2 =18.5 with continuity correction, df=1, 2=11.5, df=2, p<0.01, n=698; Staff are well informed
p<0.001, n=874; 12% of those who include absence about the common mental health risks and symptoms:
management in their top three people management 2=43.8, df=2, p<0.001, n=698; Staff are well informed
priorities report attendance is driven by the board about organisational support for mental health: 2=49.4,
compared with 4% of those who dont include absence df=2, p<0.001, n=697.
management in their top three priorities: 2 =20.0 with 33 2=153.7, df=12, p<0.001, n=809.
continuity correction, df=1, p<0.001, n=874. 34 2=107.0, df=8, p<0.001, n=809.

12 2 =9.9, df=3, p<0.05, n=481. 35 2=16.7, df=6, p<0.05, n=419.
13 2 = 37.4 with continuity correction, df=1, p<0.001, n=481. 36 2=24.0, df=6, p<0.05, n=420.
14 2 = 18.0 with continuity correction, df=1, p<0.001, n=481. 37 These items are all strongly related (rs =0.57 or higher).
15 rs =0.31, p<0.001, n=636 (dont know responses excluded 38 Organisation size and long working hours are the norm
for this analysis). for us: rs =0.22, p<0.001, n=543; Organisation size and
16 2 =21.6, df=3, p<0.001, n=730. employee well-being is taken into consideration in
17 rs =0.17, p<0.001, n=581. business decisions: rs =0.16, p<0.001, n=515.
18 2 =34.4, df=3, p<0.001, n=730. 39 2 = 27.3, df=9, p<0.001, n=693.
19 In 2015 20% of the public sector included poorly 40 2 = 25.2, df=3, p<0.001, n=320.
managed change/restructuring in their top three causes 41 2 = 9.5, df=3, p<0.05, n=320.
of stress at work. In 2016 this fell to 12%. 42 2 = 10.1, df=3, p<0.05, n=320.

43 The extent to which long working hours is the norm and 50 Osborg Ose, S. and J.M. Dyrstad (2001) Non-linear
percentage of staff coming to work when they are sick: rs unemployment effects in sickness absence: discipline
=0.12, p<0.05, n=398. or composition effects? WP 2502. Department of
44 Increase in presenteeism and well-being considerations Economics, Norwegian University of Science and
are part of our people management approach: rs Technology.
=0.11, p<0.05, n=393; Increase in presenteeism and 51 TUC. (2015) 15 per cent increase in people working
employee well-being is taken into consideration in more than 48 hours a week risks a return to Burnout
business decisions: rs =0.12, p<0.05, n=389; Increase in Britain, warns TUC. Available at: https://www.tuc.org.
presenteeism and employee well-being is only a focus uk/international-issues/europe/workplace-issues/work-
in our business when things are going well: rs =0.11, life-balance/15-cent-increase-people-working-more
p<0.05, n=385. [Accessed 7 September 2016].
45 2=15.9, df=2, p<0.001, n=390. 52 Carers UK. (2015) Facts about carers. Policy briefing.
46 2=34.4, df=2, p<0.001, n=395. October. London: Carers UK. Available at: https://www.
47 rs =0.17, p<0.001, n=683. carersuk.org/for-professionals/policy/policylibrary/facts-
48 Change in well-being focus this year and change in well- about-carers-2015 [Accessed 7 September 2016].
being spend: rs = .53, p< .001, n=512. 53 Carers UK. (2016) State of caring report. London:
49 2 = 77.4, df=4, p<0.001, n=674 (37% of those with a Carers UK. Available at: http://www.carersuk.org/for-
formal strategy or plan dont evaluate compared with professionals/policy/policy-library/state-of-caring-2016
62% of those who dont have a formal strategy but [Accessed 7 September 2016].
have well-being initiatives and 70% of those who act 54 CIPD/Adecco Group UK & Ireland. (2016) Labour Market
flexibly on an individual basis; 34% of those with a formal Outlook: Summer 2016. London: Chartered Institute of
strategy or plan dont know if they evaluate compared Personnel and Development. Available at: http://www.
with 21% of those who dont have a formal strategy but cipd.co.uk/hr-resources/survey-reports/labour-market-
have well-being initiatives and 24% of those who act outlook-summer-2016.aspx [Accessed 20 September
flexibly on an individual basis). 2016].
Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development
151 The Broadway London SW19 1JQ United Kingdom
T +44 (0)20 8612 6200 F +44 (0)20 8612 6201
E cipd@cipd.co.uk W cipd.co.uk
Incorporated by Royal Charter
Registered as a charity in England and Wales (1079797) and Scotland (SC045154)
Issued: November 2016 Reference: 7389 CIPD 2016

Absence Management 2016 Tcm18 16360

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Absence Management 2016 Tcm18 16360

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

in partnership with

ANNUAL SURVEY REPORT

Foreword from Simplyhealth 3

Summary of key findings 4

Level of employee absence 7

The cost of absence 12

Work-related stress and mental health 28

Background to the survey 47

Further sources of information 49

2 Absence management survey report 2016

This is the seventh year that other long-term physical health

The average Absence levels

4 Absence management survey report 2016

Nearly half of respondents report

Organisations that have increased

6 Absence management survey report 2016

The majority of organisations

Table 1: Average level of employee absence, per employee per annum

Average working time lost Average number of days lost per

5% trimmed Standard 5% trimmed Standard

Manufacturing and production

8 Absence management survey report 2016

Average working time Average days lost per

Number of 5% trimmed 5% trimmed

Figure 2: The effect of workforce size

10 Absence management survey report 2016

Average working time lost Average days lost per employee

Manufacturing and production 25

Base: 733 (Dont knows excluded)

12 Absence management survey report 2016

Short-term absence causes of short-term absence, In similar findings to last year, a

Table 4: Common causes of short-term absence (% of respondents)

Most common cause In top 5 most common causes

14 Absence management survey report 2016

All Manufacturing Private sector Public Non-profit

All Manufacturing Private sector Public Non-profit

Non-manual employees (base) (316) (99) (137) (49) (31)

16 Absence management survey report 2016

Table 6: Common causes of long-term absence (%)

Most common cause In top 5 most common causes

All Manufacturing Private sector Public Non-profit

Manual employees (base) (232) (82) (87) (41) (22)

18 Absence management survey report 2016

All Manufacturing Private sector Public Non-profit

Over a quarter Almost all organisations surveyed

Table 8: Top three people management areas of greatest priority (% of respondents)

All Manufacturing Private sector Public Non-profit

20 Absence management survey report 2016

Table 9: Approaches used to manage short-term absence (% of respondents)

All Manufacturing Private sector Public Non-profit

All Manufacturing Private sector Public Non-profit

22 Absence management survey report 2016

Table 11: Approaches used to manage long-term absence (% of respondents)

All Manufacturing Private sector Public Non-profit

24 Absence management survey report 2016

Figure 5: Changes in approaches used to manage long-term absence: 201116 (% of respondents)

All Manufacturing Private sector Public Non-profit

26 Absence management survey report 2016

As with short-term absence, more

Stress is now the Stress is now the most common

Base: 761 (2016); 565 (2015)

28 Absence management survey report 2016

Manufacturing Private sector Public Non-profit

Stress is not among the top 5 causes of absence 51 49