Skip to content

How companies can deal with occupational diseases

Unlock Editor’s Digest for free

The coronavirus pandemic is over, but the rise in diseases is not. In many developed economies, more workers report illnesses that limit the amount or type of work they can do than before the pandemic. They are also taking more sick days. German executives warn high absenteeism It is aggravating the country’s competitiveness problems; In September, Tesla bosses resorted to quick house calls to check on absent employees at its Berlin plant. In Norway, workers called in sick in the second quarter more than at any time in the last 15 years.

In the United Kingdom, official figures estimated a record 185.6 million working days they were lost through sick leave in 2022, for reasons including minor illnesses, musculoskeletal issues and mental health issues. Delays in post-pandemic healthcare are partly to blame. Last year some 3.7 million people of working age They were working with a “work-limiting” condition: an increase of 1.4 million in 10 years. The rate of work-limiting conditions has increased most rapidly among young workers, with sharp increases in reported mental illnesses.

Having fewer people working means economies don’t grow as fast as they could. It reduces tax revenues to finance increasingly overburdened public services. But it is employers and businesses that have to deal with the immediate effects of the disease: managing staff and shifts, and dealing with any legal backlash. Changes in diagnosis rates and generational attitudes toward mental illness, in particular, have influenced employee expectations about the workplace.

Prioritizing employee well-being means building trust and loyalty, as well as ensuring long-term productivity. Compassion must be balanced with practicality. Managers must provide appropriate support to absent workers, but also consider the impact on other staff and operations.

A transparent and fair illness policy is vital. Companies should set expectations for reporting illnesses, documenting absences, and returning to work, even when medical notes are needed. If employees know they will be treated fairly and consistently, they are more likely to respect the rules, fostering a culture of mutual respect and responsibility.

Identifying patterns of absenteeism can help reveal underlying problems, such as frequent absences on Mondays or sick leave during school holidays, and point out when bosses need to intervene sooner to address concerns at home, burnout or stress. But any sense that bosses are ultimately using data to punish staff will be counterproductive and breed resentment.

Data should be a topic of conversation to better understand the conditions of absences rather than attacking those perceived as lazy. Absenteeism may reflect deeper problems, such as excessive workloads, unmotivated staff or lack of support.

But the need for support in times of poor health is accompanied by the need for accountability. Problems arise when managers feel that trust is being exploited. Setting flexible policy limits and maintaining clear expectations can prevent abuse while offering support. Employees should understand that flexibility is often a benefit, not a right, and respect the parameters set by their employers.

For bosses, employee health information must also be handled with great care, and not just to avoid legal ramifications. When employees believe that their most sensitive information is handled discreetly, they will be more open to sharing health concerns and seeking support at their most vulnerable time.

Some companies rely on high salaries or rewarding jobs to attract staff, but in a competitive market, commitments to wellbeing can also help employers stand out. However, building a successful company depends above all on both parties creating a relationship of trust.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *