9.0/10 (10459 reviews)
Register and Subscribe Now to work on UK Wales Self Cert Sickness & more fillable forms. Web-based PDF Form Filler. Edit, Sign and Save UK Wales Self Cert Sickness Form.
Good value and easy to use - G2 Crowd
Search results
Nov 17, 2022 · In this podcast episode, we discuss the role of occupational health, the importance of sickness policies and how to manage a return to work.
This factsheet takes a closer look at sickness absence, the reasons for it, and its implications for organisations. Explore our viewpoint on employee health and wellbeing in more detail, along with actions for government and recommendations for employers.
- Statement of compliance
- Executive Summary
- Acknowledgements
- The Authors
- Glossary and Abbreviations
- 1. Summary
- 2. Introduction
- 3. Understanding employer behaviour
Value of this research
the research provides a description of the health and wellbeing initiatives used by employers and contributes to the growing evidence base findings from this report have informed the ongoing development of policy decisions relating to employers
Trustworthiness
this research was conducted, delivered and analysed impartially by Ipsos MORI, working to the Government Social Research code of practice authors: Ipsos MORI – Trinh Tu, Kelly Maguire, Karl Ashworth and Sarah Tipping
Quality
the survey was carried out using established statistical methods the research has been quality assured using Ipsos MORI’s internal quality checking processes the report has been checked thoroughly by Employers, Health and Inclusive Employment (EHIE) analysts to ensure it meets the highest standards of analysis and drafting
This summary presents the key findings from a survey of 2,564 employers (with at least 2 employees) across Great Britain and follow-up qualitative research with 30 of these employers, conducted by Ipsos MORI. The research looked at employer attitudes, behaviours, support and provisions around employee health, sickness and disability in the workplace. This research was carried out prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Employer attitudes towards health and wellbeing were generally positive. The majority of employers recognised the link between work and the health and wellbeing of employees.
Organisation size had a direct bearing on employer health and wellbeing provision. Large and medium employers were more likely to provide a wider range of formal support to prevent employee ill-health or improve general health and wellbeing. Small employers took a more informal approach which they saw as more appropriate for their size and culture.
Large and medium employers were more likely to experience long-term sickness absence (LTSA) than small employers. Measures to manage returns to work after LTSA were adopted by the majority of employers, regardless of size, but large employers were more likely to provide support that incurred an additional cost.
Across each of the topic areas covered by the research (managing sickness absence, retaining employees with health conditions, managing return to work, sick pay, and occupational health provision), employers’ decisions were driven by their legal obligations, a duty of care to their employees, employee demand for support and cost-benefit analysis (for example, to retain employees that were critical to the organisation).
This meant that employers sometimes made discretionary decisions on a case-by-case basis, considering what they needed to do to support or retain a given employee. For example, some employers who paid Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) only, would choose to pay above SSP depending on the employee and their needs.
The authors at Ipsos MORI would like to thank all of the employers who gave their time to participate in this research.
We would also like to thank all of our colleagues at Ipsos MORI who supported with the delivery of the quantitative and qualitative strands of this project. Particular mention goes to Karl Ashworth, Anna Sperati, and Sarah Tipping for their work on the statistical analysis, and Sarah Fullick and Yasmin White for their work on the qualitative interviews.
This report was authored by researchers at Ipsos MORI:
•Trinh Tu (Research Director)
•Kelly Maguire (Research Manager)
•Theebika Shanmugarasa (Senior Research Executive)
General terms Sector definitions
Several smaller sectors were combined to allow for analysis by sector. The groupings used throughout the report are as follows:
Size definitions
Employers are referred to by size (number of employees) throughout the report. These definitions are as follows:
1.1. Introduction
This summary presents the key findings of a telephone survey with 2,564 employers and follow-up qualitative interviews with 30 employers across Great Britain with at least 2 employees, undertaken during 2018-19. The research was commissioned by the Employers, Health and Inclusive Employment (EHIE) team, part of a UK government unit, which brings together officials from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC). EHIE leads the government’s strategy to support working-age disabled people and people with long-term health conditions to enter, and stay in, employment. Please note, this research was carried out prior to the outbreak of coronavirus (also known as ‘COVID-19’).
1.2. Background and objectives
‘Improving Lives: The Future of Work, Health and Disability’[footnote 4] outlined the role of employers in helping disabled people or people with health conditions stay, and thrive, in work, as well as to prevent unnecessary sickness absence, presenteeism and health-related job loss. Disabled people and people with long-term health conditions are at greater risk of falling out of work[footnote 5], and in 2019, Government launched a consultation seeking views on the different ways in which government and employers could take action to reduce ill-health-related job loss[footnote 6]. Ipsos MORI were commissioned to conduct a survey and follow-up qualitative interviews that would contribute to the current evidence base surrounding employer attitudes and behaviours around disability and health in the workplace. The aim of the research was to provide a greater understanding of employers in regard to health and wellbeing – what drives their decisions, what support they put in place for their employees, and why – as they play a key role in preventing unnecessary sickness absence, presenteeism and health-related job loss. This report builds on the 2011 ‘Health and well-being survey of employers’[footnote 7] which was commissioned to provide evidence into a range of measures, including employers’ perceptions of the importance of work to health and health to work, the provision of health and wellbeing initiatives, and employers’ occupational sick pay (OSP) policies.
1.3. Summary of methodology
A random probability telephone survey was undertaken with 2,564 employers in Great Britain (GB), between June and August 2018. The sampling frame was sourced from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) Inter-Departmental Business Register (IDBR)[footnote 8] and the survey included GB employers with at least 2 employees. The data in this report have been weighted by size and sector to be representative of the GB employer population. The survey data was supplemented by qualitative research with 30 employers who took part in the survey. Interviews were carried out by telephone between July and August 2019. Quotas were set to ensure a good representation of employers in terms of characteristics and health and wellbeing practices. This report brings together findings from both quantitative and qualitative research. More detail on the methodology is provided in the Technical Report and survey data has also been published in an interim report to support the Health is Everyone’s Business consultation.
2.1. Policy background and research objectives
The ‘Sickness absence and health in the workplace’ survey and follow-up qualitative research was commissioned by the Employers, Health and Inclusive Employment (EHIE) team, a UK government unit, which brings together officials from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC). The EHIE team leads the government’s strategy to support working-age disabled people and people with long-term health conditions to enter, and stay in, employment. ‘Improving Lives: The Future of Work, Health and Disability’[footnote 11] outlined the role of employers in helping disabled people or people with health conditions stay, and thrive, in work, as well as to prevent unnecessary sickness absence, presenteeism and health-related job loss. Disabled people and people with long-term health conditions are at greater risk of falling out of work[footnote 12], and in 2019, the EHIE team launched a consultation seeking views on the different ways in which government and employers could take action to reduce ill-health-related job loss[footnote 13]. This report builds on the 2011 ‘Health and well-being survey of employers’[footnote 14] which was commissioned to provide evidence into a range of measures, including employers’ perceptions of the importance of work to health and health to work, the provision of health and wellbeing initiatives, and employers’ occupational sick pay (OSP) policies. Research aims Ipsos MORI were commissioned to conduct a survey and follow-up qualitative interviews that would contribute to the current evidence base surrounding employer attitudes and behaviours around disability and health in the workplace. The aim of the research was to provide a greater understanding of employers in regard to health and wellbeing – what drives their decisions, what support they put in place for their employees, and why – as they play a key role in preventing unnecessary sickness absence, presenteeism and health-related job loss. The research was designed to help answer the following research questions: what is the relationship between the nature of employers’ work, their attitudes toward employee health and wellbeing, perceived health risks and provision of support? And what is the impact of the employers’ proactivity on this? how does the number of part-time, low skilled, high-turnover employees, or temporary staff, impact the support that employers put in place? how do employer attitudes relate to their motivation to provide support to employees? And what are their motivations to invest in supporting staff? what is the totality of employers’ provision, in terms of health and wellbeing support? And how does an employer’s size impact this provision? are larger employers better equipped to support the health of their staff and manage sickness absence in a flexible way? what are the impacts and challenges that employers face in terms of sickness absence management and returns to work? how do employers understand their legal responsibilities and perceive their ease of compliance? what processes and considerations do employers have regarding adjustments? are there any perceived barriers, challenges or risks associated with retaining staff with health conditions or disabilities? how do employers use sick pay regimes? And what is the rationale behind them? where employers have Occupational Health (OH), what form does it take and how is it used? Where they don’t have OH, what are the barriers to purchase? Following the completion of the survey, Ipsos MORI were commissioned to design additional qualitative work to explore some of the survey findings in greater depth[footnote 15].
2.2. Method
The research comprised 2 strands, summarised below. For more detail on all aspects of the research design mentioned below, please refer to the Technical Report. Please note, this research was carried out in 2018, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Telephone survey This report presents key findings from this survey, which comprised 2,564 telephone interviews with employers in Great Britain (GB) with at least 2 employees. Employers were sampled from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) Inter-Departmental Business Register (IDBR)[footnote 16]. The findings are weighted by size and sector to be representative of GB employers, according to 2018 figures. In the GB employer population, 92% of employers are small (2-49 employees), 6% medium (50 to 249) and 2% large (250+). Large employers were oversampled, making up 20% of the unweighted sample to allow for analysis within the size category (see Table 2.1 below). Although such organisations are relatively few in number, they employ a large proportion (45%) of the total GB workforce and are therefore important to capture in terms of their impact on employee health and wellbeing. In comparison, 37% of GB employees work for small employers, and 18% of employees work for medium employers. The sample covered public, private and third sector organisations. Employers were sampled at head office level, and the survey was conducted with the most senior person with responsibility for personnel issues across the whole organisation in GB (where the organisation spanned multiple sites). Amongst smaller employers, this was usually the owner of the business or an office manager and in larger settings, this was usually a staff member with a dedicated human resources (HR) role. Fieldwork took place between June and August 2018, with a response rate of 43.7%[footnote 17]. Table 2.1: Sample profile weighted by employer unit and employee volume Variable – size: Variable – sector: Variable – ease of recruiting staff: Variable – ease of retaining staff: Variable – employee representation or trade union: Variable – decisions on daily work tasks: In-depth interviews The survey data was supplemented by qualitative research with employers who had consented to be re-contacted following their participation in the survey. Ipsos MORI conducted follow-up depth interviews with 30 employers over the telephone, between July and August 2019. A range of quotas were set to ensure the employers broadly reflected the employer population and had characteristics of interest to explore in more depth in the qualitative interviews: Table 2.2: Qualitative sampling matrix
2.3. Analysis and interpretation of the data
Survey data All tables and charts report weighted data but include the unweighted base. Where findings have only been reported descriptively, fully referenced supporting tables have been included in the Technical Report. The survey results are subject to margins of error, which vary depending on the number of respondents answering each question and pattern of responses. The report only comments on differences that are statistically significant (at the 95% level of confidence). Where figures do not add to 100%, this is due to rounding or because the question allows for more than one response. Several advanced techniques have been used to further explore the survey data. We have briefly explained the purpose of these techniques in footnotes throughout the report and have included a more detailed method section in the Technical Report. Qualitative interviews Qualitative approaches are used to explore the nuances and diversity of views, the factors which shape or underlie them, and the ideas and situations in which views can change. The results are intended to be illustrative, not statistically representative. Verbatim comments have been included in this report to illustrate and highlight key points and common themes. Where verbatim quotes are used, they have been anonymised and attributed with employer size, sector, and relevant behaviours (for example, whether or not they use occupational health (OH) services, in the OH chapter). Throughout the report, we also draw on 2 additional qualitative studies, conducted by Ipsos MORI, to support the evidence around the consultation. Both reports are referenced fully throughout: Ipsos MORI (2019) Employers’ motivations and practices: A study of the use of occupational health services Ipsos MORI (2020) Exploring perceptions and attitudes towards the extension of fit note certification The following section summarises the main influential factors identified in the analysis along with insight from the follow-up qualitative research with employers.
This chapter explores the health concerns that employers most commonly reported amongst their staff, and their attitudes and motivations to invest in employees’ health and wellbeing. It also looks at employers’ understanding of their legal responsibilities and use of information and advice, to provide context for interpreting the findings in later ...
Jul 20, 2021 · The aim of the research was to provide a greater understanding of employers in regard to health and wellbeing – what drives their decisions, what support they put in place for their employees, and...
- This research presents the key findings from a survey of employers across Great Britain (GB) and follow-up qualitative research with employers. The...
- A random probability telephone survey was undertaken with 2,564 employers in Great Britain (GB), between June and August 2018. The survey included...
- 1.4.1. Understanding employer behaviourEmployer attitudes towards health and wellbeing were generally positive, with the majority acknowledging a l...
Jul 25, 2023 · Effectively addressing sickness absence in your organisation can: reduce absence levels. improve employee morale and wellbeing. boost productivity. save money. There are different steps you can take to try and reduce absence in your organisation.
Why is managing sickness absence important? Employers should manage sickness absences effectively to prioritise employee wellbeing while maintaining productivity. Supporting employees during their absence creates a healthier and more positive work environment.
People also ask
How does sickness affect a business?
Does sickness affect productivity?
Why is long-term sickness absence important for employers?
Why is communication important during sickness absence?
How does sickness absence affect productivity?
Sep 7, 2023 · Why Does Absence Management Matter? As touched upon above, extended absences, repeated lateness and unauthorised leave can have numerous detrimental effects on a company, in terms of cost, efficiency and wellbeing. When an individual is away from work for an extended period, their responsibilities often fall on colleagues and managers.
