Attendance management

On this page:
Summary
Case study
Key references
Questions and answers
Overview
The importance of attendance management
Measuring absence
Devising an attendance procedure
Trigger mechanisms
Stages of an attendance procedure
Absences that should be discounted
Attendance review meetings
Patterns of absence
Inability to attend review meetings
Warnings for unsatisfactory attendance levels
Recording absence
Rules on notifying absence
Keeping records of absence notification
Self-certification
Data protection
Return-to-work interviews
Absences that may not genuinely be for the reason given
Possible causes of frequent non-attendance
Flexible working practices
Policy on domestic emergencies
Attendance incentives
Duvet days
Attendance levels during special events
Interaction between policies
Sick pay as a tool for managing absence
Disciplinary action for unjustified absence

More articles on this topic from XpertHR

Summary

1.1

It is important for employers to adopt and implement an attendance management policy and, for this, an accurate assessment of absence levels and patterns will be necessary. (See 1.3 The importance of attendance management and 1.4 Measuring absence)

The main aim of an attendance procedure is to encourage reliable attendance among all employees. The procedure will be triggered when an employee reaches a certain level of absence, and will usually consist of a number of defined stages. (See 1.5 Devising an attendance procedure, 1.6 Trigger mechanisms and 1.7 Stages of an attendance procedure)

Where a stage of the attendance procedure is activated, the employee should be invited to a formal attendance review meeting, which will usually result in a warning for unsatisfactory attendance. (See 1.9 Attendance review meetings and 1.12 Warnings for unsatisfactory attendance levels)

There must be clear rules on the reporting of all periods of absence, and absence levels should be consistently and accurately recorded. (See 1.13 Recording absence and 1.14 Rules on notifying absence)

Conducting return-to-work interviews is one of the most effective ways of facilitating reliable employee attendance. (See 1.18 Return-to-work interviews)

In addition to compiling statistics on the number of days lost to absence, an employer wishing to manage attendance effectively will need to establish why employees fail to attend work, and consider ways of encouraging higher levels of attendance. (See 1.20 Possible causes of frequent non-attendance, 1.21 Flexible working practices, 1.22 Policy on domestic emergencies, 1.23 Attendance incentives, 1.24 Duvet days and 1.25 Attendance levels during special events)

Consistency between attendance procedures and other policies and procedures will be essential. (See 1.26 Interaction between policies)

It can be helpful for employers to maintain some discretion over the payment of sick pay, thus allowing management to decline or withdraw payment from a particular employee if there is a proper reason to do so. (See 1.27 Sick pay as a tool for managing absence)

It should be made clear that disciplinary action will be taken against employees who take time off work without good reason or without providing proper notification. (See 1.28 Disciplinary action for unjustified absence)

Overview

1.2 This section of the XpertHR good practice reference manual discusses the management of attendance, including attendance procedures, attendance review meetings, possible causes of frequent non-attendance and ways of encouraging and promoting attendance.

'Attendance' in this context means employees' presence at work when not absent due to genuine sickness or on permitted leave such as annual holiday or maternity leave.

Another section of the XpertHR good practice reference manual, Managing sickness absence, deals with sickness absence issues.

Reasons for non-attendance might include:

childcare issues;

personal or family problems;

perceived stress (although stress can, of course, lead to genuine illness);

demotivation;

specific problems at work, such as bullying;

environmental factors affecting employees' levels of comfort at work;

the absence of flexible working practices, making it difficult for employees to manage their family responsibilities;

a holiday policy that imposes overly strict notice requirements, or does not permit half days of holiday to be taken; and

inflexible shift systems, including those that do not permit shift swapping.

Ultimately, good attendance levels will contribute to the effectiveness of both the employer's HR department and individual line managers.

The importance of attendance management

1.3 It is important for employers to adopt and implement policies aimed at managing their employees' attendance. Apart from the potential costs that may be incurred as a result of high levels of non-attendance, an employer that takes no steps to manage attendance is likely to experience:

excessive disruption to its business;

demotivated staff;

an adverse effect on customer service levels;

customer dissatisfaction; and

loss of productivity, profitability and business.

Research published by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) in July 2006 (Absence management survey report July 2006 (PDF format, 936K) (on the CIPD website)) shows that employee absence is a significant cost to 90% of businesses in the UK. Absence is currently running at an average of around eight days per employee per year, at an average cost of £598 per employee, with approximately 60% of absence lasting for a period of less than eight days. The CIPD also reports that most employers believe that around 15% of employee absence is not due to the reason stated.

A survey conducted by the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) found that in 2005 UK employers lost 164 million working days to employee absence at a cost of over £13 billion (Absence minded: absence and labour turnover 2006 (on the CBI website)).

Lack of attendance management procedures or a relaxed attitude to absence notification, recording and monitoring can send a message to employees that a certain level of non-attendance is acceptable and even expected. There is strong evidence that non-attendance thrives on neglect. Clear attendance management policies that are consistently and fairly implemented will convey to employees that their employer is concerned about their attendance and well-being, that management genuinely wishes to remove or reduce any work-related factors that might discourage reliable attendance, and that taking time off work without good reason will not be tolerated.

Any measures that employers can put in place to encourage reliable attendance will play an important part in reducing their operating costs and increasing efficiency and productivity.

Measuring absence

1.4 It is often said that if something is not measured, it cannot be managed. Without an understanding of the level and pattern of absences within the organisation, management will not have the data necessary to make sound decisions about what steps might help to achieve an improvement in employee attendance levels. Measuring absence can be used for a number of useful business purposes, including:

to benchmark absence levels against national averages, or against other organisations in the same industry;

to compare absence levels between different locations and/or departments;

to identify particular patterns of absence and any problem areas;

to investigate the causes of non-attendance at work;

to devise plans to improve employee attendance;

to establish trigger points for individual attendance reviews; and

to provide evidence for disciplinary action where appropriate.

Any policy aimed at measuring employee absence should be applied equally across all sectors and levels of the organisation. A system that reviewed junior staff but not management, or that measured the absence rates of shop-floor workers but not office-based staff, would be likely to cause resistance and resentment, thus negating the potential benefits of the measuring.

Once data on employee absences has been collected, it should be collated into a format that allows absence levels to be measured. To produce useful results, the employer will need to establish:

the total number of potential working days (or hours) in a year;

the number of days (or hours) lost through absence in a year, across all employees;

the number of separate occasions of absence for all employees; and

the reason for each absence, eg sickness, or personal or family problems.

Levels of absence can then be calculated and analysed, both across the organisation as a whole, and within individual locations or departments.

The simplest form of measurement - known as 'lost-time rate' - is to express the total amount of time lost through all employee absences (in days or hours) as a percentage of the total number of potential working days or hours in a given period such as one year. According to ACAS, this is the most common method of measuring absence.

The lost-time approach can also be broken down by type of absence, ie an analysis can be done on absences for family-related reasons and another on unauthorised or unexplained absences. Another approach could be to do a collective analysis of all absences that are known, or suspected, to be for reasons other than genuine sickness. Alternatively, analyses could be done by gender, racial group, age, occupation or job status (eg manual and non-manual).

Once lost-time rates have been established in this way, by multiplying the percentage lost-time figure by the total annual wage bill, the employer can calculate the direct costs to the business of absence.

This type of analysis will provide a yardstick for the employer to establish its levels of absence; benchmark these levels against those of other organisations in the same industry, or against national averages; and compare the absence levels in different departments. More detailed analysis would, however, be required to identify particular patterns of absence and any potential problem areas.

Devising an attendance procedure

1.5 Adopting policies and procedures to manage attendance will involve:

allocating responsibility for attendance management to senior management, in order to convey the message that the organisation takes the issue seriously;

taking positive steps to monitor and improve the working environment wherever possible;

establishing and tackling the causes of absence;

implementing measures to discourage casual absence; and

involving line managers in day-to-day attendance management.

The key aim of an attendance procedure will be to encourage reliable attendance among all employees, so that a dependable staffing base to meet the employer's service and/or production needs can be established. The attendance procedure should therefore be structured so that employees understand that one of its aims is to avoid the need for formal action, and that dismissal for unsatisfactory attendance will be implemented only as a last resort.

The attendance procedure should be designed to take into account all employee absence other than approved holidays and family leave periods. Absence due to sickness or family or personal reasons, and unauthorised or unexplained absences should all be counted, subject to some possible exceptions (see 1.8 Absences that should be discounted). It is therefore important to make it clear to employees that the monitoring of absences through the attendance procedure does not imply that they are doing, or have done, anything wrong. The procedure should be clearly described as a means of managing attendance, and should not be confused with the employer's disciplinary procedure.

Trigger mechanisms

1.6 At its core, an attendance procedure will involve the introduction of absence 'trigger points'. It will also involve the allocation of responsibility to individual line managers to interview any employee whose level of absence hits a defined trigger point and, depending on the circumstances, issue a warning about unsatisfactory attendance.

Trigger mechanisms are usually established using two key criteria, these being:

the total number of days' absence in a given period such as a year; and

the number of individual occasions on which the employee was absent in the same given period.

Established trigger points result in a consistent required standard of attendance being applied to all employees. A computer system can be set to flag up any employee whose absence levels have reached a trigger point. This removes the need for individual managers to monitor employees' level of attendance on an ad hoc basis, thus ensuring consistency. However, for this to work, absences must be properly recorded.

The well-known Bradford formula is an example of a mechanism for employers to manage attendance by implementing defined trigger points. The application of the formula results in a points score. The formula is: S x S x D = Bradford score.

S is the number of separate occasions on which an employee has been absent from work in a specified period (usually a year), while D is the total number of days' absence over the same period.

For example:

the score of an employee who had two absences of seven and two days respectively would be 2 x 2 x 9 = 36 points;

the score of an employee who had one absence of 25 days would be 1 x 1 x 25 = 25 points; and

the score of an employee who had six absences of two days' duration each would be 6 x 6 x 12 = 432 points.

It can be seen from the above examples that the Bradford formula places greater emphasis on the number of occasions of absence than on the total number of days' absence. The formula is therefore helpful for employers that are experiencing high levels of short-term casual absence.

Each employer can decide, as a matter of policy, the number of points that will 'trigger' action under its attendance procedure. The appropriate trigger point will depend on the nature of the employment and the size of the absence problem.

Normally the action taken at the trigger point will include:

a formal interview between the line manager and the employee (see 1.9 Attendance review meetings);

a review of the cause(s) of the employee's absences, any apparent pattern of absences and any particular circumstances that may have led to a high score;

fair consideration of any mitigating factors; and

the issue of a warning for unsatisfactory attendance (see 1.12 Warnings for unsatisfactory attendance levels).

Stages of an attendance procedure

1.7 An attendance procedure will normally consist of a defined number of stages - typically three - designed to communicate the minimum attendance standards required by the employer and the trigger points at which an employee's level of absence will become unacceptable and therefore subject to review and possible action.

The stages should be progressive, so that an employee whose attendance level triggers the procedure may move up over time through the stages of the procedure. This progress may, eventually, culminate in dismissal. However, at the early stages the procedure will allow for discussions with the employee, and the line manager should provide whatever support and encouragement is possible and practicable to facilitate an improvement in attendance.

As an alternative to using the Bradford formula, employers may prefer to apply their own formula for the establishment of trigger points for each stage of the procedure. For example, stage one of the procedure could be activated at or after:

four occasions of absence in any 12-month period; or

12 days' absence in any 12-month period.

The result of an employee reaching stage one of the attendance procedure would normally be an attendance review meeting resulting in a first written warning for unsatisfactory attendance.

Stage two of the procedure could be activated if, during the following 12 months, the employee has:

three occasions of absence; or

10 days' absence in total.

The result of reaching stage two would normally be an attendance review meeting resulting in a second written warning.

Stage three of the procedure would typically involve a repeat of the stage-two trigger points. However, since this would be the final stage of the procedure, it would normally result in the employee's dismissal, unless there were mitigating factors making it reasonable for the employer to decide otherwise.

Where an employee has triggered stage one of the attendance procedure, but his or her level of attendance improves so that it falls below the relevant trigger point during the following year, the employee should be removed from the procedure.

Where the attendance level of an employee who had reached stage two of the procedure falls below the trigger point for the next period, he or she should automatically revert to the previous stage of the procedure for the following year.

The attendance management procedure rules need not compel managers to issue warnings or dismiss an employee with continuing unsatisfactory attendance. Instead they set in place a framework for effective action to manage members of staff whose attendance levels are or remain unsatisfactory. The procedure can be structured to allow managers to elect to discount certain absences (for example on compassionate grounds), and not to issue a first or second written warning where stage one or two of the procedure has been triggered. An attendance review meeting should, however, still take place in these circumstances. If an exception is to be made, the reason for it should be discussed and clearly recorded.

Similarly, there is no reason why management should be compelled to go through with dismissing an employee on grounds of unsatisfactory attendance. The attendance procedure should allow for this course of action to be implemented as the norm, but equally permit an exception to be made where there are special circumstances justifying it.

Absences that should be discounted

1.8 It would be normal - and recommended - for employers to exempt certain types of absence from counting towards the trigger points. These types of absence include:

absences that are due to a pregnancy-related condition, since including such absences could be perceived as discriminatory on the grounds of sex;

absences that are related to an employee's disability, unless it is justifiable to include such absences in the calculation; and

absences resulting from accidents at work, unless the accident was caused by the employee's carelessness or negligence.

Attendance review meetings

1.9 When a trigger point is reached, thus activating one of the stages of the attendance procedure, the following steps should be taken.

The employee should be invited to a formal attendance review meeting, and advised of his or her right to be accompanied by a fellow worker or trade union official. The invitation should be in writing and should state that the meeting will be held under the employer's attendance procedure. It should include a statement summarising the employee's periods of absence during the defined time period used by the employer.

At the meeting the employee should be invited to put forward the reasons for his or her absences, and ask for any mitigating factors to be taken into account.

The manager should ensure that the employee understands the requirements of the attendance procedure, the reasons why the procedure is in place, the stage that he or she has reached in the procedure, and the possible consequences of a continuing unsatisfactory level of attendance.

A discussion about whether there is anything that the employer can do to facilitate an improvement in the employee's attendance levels should take place.

Unless the circumstances merit a different approach, a written warning should be issued after any stage-one or stage-two meeting (see 1.12 Warnings for unsatisfactory attendance levels). In deciding whether to give a warning, the manager should take into account all the relevant circumstances, including the employee's total length of service and past attendance record.

A record should be made of the key points discussed at the meeting and the outcome.

Prior to any action that might result in the employee's dismissal, certain statutory procedural steps must be followed - see 9.207 Statutory dismissal, disciplinary and grievance procedures in the XpertHR employment law reference manual.

Patterns of absence

1.10 Sometimes a pattern of absence becomes apparent. For example, the majority of an employee's absences may be on the same day of the week, or immediately before an important monthly deadline. If, during a review of an employee's absences, it appears that there is a pattern, the manager conducting the interview should put these observations to the employee directly and ask him or her to comment on or explain the pattern.

This should be done in a non-accusatory way, and should be accompanied by reassurance that, if the employee has a problem that is having an adverse impact on his or her level of attendance, the manager will do whatever is reasonably possible to provide support or assistance.

Inability to attend review meetings

1.11 If an employee claims that he or she is unable to attend an attendance review meeting due to sickness, the employer may:

wait until the employee has returned to work before conducting the meeting, which would be appropriate in the event of a short period of absence;

ask the employee to attend an appointment with an occupational doctor and ask the doctor to advise whether the employee is well enough to participate in the meeting;

consider whether it would be helpful to the employee to suggest holding the meeting away from the workplace, for example in the employee's home or at nearby location such as a private room in a hotel;

offer the employee the option of nominating a colleague or trade union official to put his or her case to management; or

if the absence is thought likely to be lengthy, write to the employee informing him or her that the relevant stage of the attendance procedure has been activated, and inviting submissions in writing, supported by a colleague or trade union official if the employee wishes.

Factors that are relevant to a decision to take action under the attendance procedure without first holding a meeting with the employee include:

whether it is clear from the evidence that the employee is genuinely unfit to attend a review meeting - bearing in mind that he or she may be unfit to work but nevertheless capable of attending a meeting;

the length of time that the employee has been absent and the frequency of past absences;

the importance of dealing with the matter promptly;

whether any delay might be to the detriment of other employees, the efficiency of the employee's department or the organisation as a whole; and

whether the employee's conduct, whilst absent, has been consistent with his or her alleged inability to attend a meeting.

Warnings for unsatisfactory attendance levels

1.12 Following an attendance review meeting, it will be usual for a warning to be issued to the employee. It should be made clear that the warning is for unsatisfactory attendance, and not, for example, for ill health. The warning should:

refer to the attendance review meeting, stating the date and time that it took place and who was present;

refer to any previous warning issued under the attendance procedure that is still 'in date';

state that the employee's level of attendance has fallen below the required standards defined by the employer in its attendance procedure;

state the improvement required, ie the minimum level of attendance that will be required in order to avoid triggering the next stage of the procedure, and the timescale involved;

describe any actions that were agreed at the meeting;

make it clear to the employee what the consequence of continuing unsatisfactory attendance will be, ie further formal action leading eventually to dismissal; and

state that the employee has the right to appeal against the warning, the timescale for an appeal to be lodged and how and with whom any appeal should be raised.

Recording absence

1.13 If absence levels are to be measured and managed effectively, they first need to be consistently and accurately recorded.

Responsibility for recording each instance of employee absence (whether half a day or several weeks) should be allocated to named individuals in each location or department. Along with the date(s) and duration of the absence, the reason provided by the employee for the absence should be recorded. This data should be passed to the HR department or a named senior manager to whom responsibility has been allocated for collecting and analysing the data across the whole organisation.

Rules on notifying absence

1.14 Employers should specify and communicate to employees clear rules on the reporting of all periods of absence.

The rules should specify a named person whom the employee must contact in the event of unexpected absence, by when the contact should be made and how it should be made. Telephone will be the usual method. Employees should not be permitted to leave messages with a receptionist or on a colleague's voicemail, unless no other option is available at the time. Except in the event of serious illness or injury, calls should be made by the employee personally, and not by a partner, friend or relative. The requirement should be that the employee speak to a named senior person, which will usually be his or her line manager, provide a reason for the absence and indicate how long he or she expects the period of absence to last.

If the line manager cannot be contacted at the time the employee phones in, he or she should telephone the employee at home later the same day to obtain the necessary information.

Similarly, if an employee has to leave work early unexpectedly, due to feeling unwell, for example, or because of a personal, domestic or family problem, the requirement should be for the employee to inform his or her line manager personally. In the event that the line manager is unavailable, the employee should be required to leave a written note addressed to the manager, stating the reason for the early departure and the time that he or she left work.

These rules should be rigorously enforced in every department, and any employee who fails to comply should be spoken to on his or her return to work and advised that proper notification must be made in the future. An employee who persistently fails to comply with the rules on notification should be dealt with under the company disciplinary procedure.

Personal telephone contact in the event of any unforeseen absence is an essential element of good attendance management. It may be necessary for the employer to offer line managers appropriate training in the organisation's absence policy as well as the communication skills necessary to apply it effectively.

Keeping records of absence notification

1.15 Whenever an employee phones in to notify the manager that he or she is unable to attend work, a record of the call should be made, preferably on a form designed for that specific purpose. The form should record:

the employee's name and employee number;

the employee's job title;

the name of the person who made the call, ie the employee personally or someone else on his or her behalf;

the name and job title of the person who took the telephone call;

the date and time of the call;

the reason given for the employee's absence; and

the length of time that the employee indicated that he or she expects to be absent.

Self-certification

1.16 Most employers operate a system of self-certification for periods of sickness absence lasting less than one calendar week. There is no reason why this system cannot be extended to all types of unplanned or unforeseen absence.

The requirement for employees to self-certify all short periods of absence from work should be rigorously enforced. As a matter of routine, employees should therefore be required to complete and sign a self-certification form for all short-term absences (including part days). Ideally, this should be done in the presence of the manager at the time of the return-to-work interview (see 1.18 Return-to-work interviews). An alternative would be for the employer to facilitate electronic self-certification of absences. This could involve the employee completing a self-certification form online and e-mailing it to the manager, with the face-to-face element taking place at the return-to-work interview.

Line managers should check that self-certification forms have been fully and properly completed, for example by ensuring that the reason given for the absence is clearly stated. Any vague, woolly reasons such as 'personal problem' or 'debility' should be questioned.

If, for example, there is something in the workplace that is having an adverse effect on the employee's motivation to attend work, the manager needs to know about this in order to investigate and take appropriate steps to tackle the cause of the problem. Managers should therefore always read through what is written on the self-certification form to establish:

that the form is fully completed;

that the employee has signed it (if the form was sent in electronically, the employee should be asked to sign it at a later time);

whether anything requires clarification; and

whether what is written on the form requires further investigation.

Data protection

1.17 Employers that record data about their employees must adhere to the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Employment Practices Data Protection Code (PDF format, 12MB) (on the Information Commissioner's Office website). The individual's signed consent to 'data processing' must be obtained and he or she must be properly informed of the purposes for which the data is being collected and how and by whom it will be used.

Return-to-work interviews

1.18 Return-to-work interviews have been shown to be one of the most effective interventions in facilitating reliable employee attendance. Although they are used most often following periods of sickness absence, it is advantageous for employers to implement a return-to-work interview after absences for other reasons. This approach ensures that the company's attendance management policy is comprehensively and consistently implemented and also allows management to investigate whether a particular absence might have been for a non-genuine reason.

One key advantage of conducting return-to-work interviews on a regular and consistent basis is that they give line managers an opportunity to identify the possible underlying cause(s) of frequent non-attendance at an early stage. Return-to-work interviews also:

provide a forum for frank discussions about any relevant issues affecting employees' attendance;

help to pinpoint any underlying pattern of absence or cause of absence, which can then be discussed and tackled;

allow managers to establish as accurately as possible the reasons for absences;

demonstrate to employees that their employer notices their absences and consistently implements a policy of monitoring and recording all absences; and

make it more difficult for employees to lie about the reasons for their absences, thus discouraging casual absence.

Return-to-work interviews are normally informal, but should be held in private. At the interview, the manager should:

explain to the employee that the purpose of return-to work interviewing is to manage and monitor employees' attendance so that any problem areas can be identified and support offered where appropriate;

ask the employee about the reason(s) for his or her absence, ensuring that the question is asked in a supportive way;

if the reason for the absence was illness or injury, ask the employee whether or not he or she consulted a doctor or attended hospital;

avoid asking intrusive medical questions of the employee, while at the same time seeking to establish the basic underlying cause of the absence;

check that the employee is well enough to attend work;

if there is any discrepancy between the employee's stated reason for the absence and the information given when notification of absence was originally provided, ask the employee to explain the discrepancy; and

review and check the employee's self-certification form, make sure the employee has signed it, and countersign the form.

If the manager has any grounds on which reasonably to conclude that the employee's absence was not genuinely for the reason given, the manager should put the evidence to the employee directly so that he or she has the opportunity to respond and provide an explanation (see 1.19 Absences that may not genuinely be for the reason given)

The manager should make a record of each return-to-work interview. The record should show:

the name of the person who conducted the interview;

the employee's name and employee number;

the employee's job title;

the date and time of the interview;

the length of the absence;

the date of the employee's return to work;

the reason given for the absence;

whether the employee gave proper notification of absence and, if not, why not;

whether the employee consulted his or her doctor or attended hospital;

whether there is any suggestion that factors at work may have caused or contributed to the absence and, if so, what these factors were and what action has been agreed to support the employee;

whether the absence is part of an overall pattern; and

whether the employee has any type of disability.

This type of record (normally made on a pro-forma designed for that purpose) can be a very useful tool for the accurate and consistent recording of both long- and short-term periods of absence. Having a comprehensive record of an employee's absences can greatly assist managers in dealing with potential problems with attendance at work.

The form should be completed at the conclusion of each return-to-work interview and a copy provided to the employee. It should be borne in mind that each employee will, under the Data Protection Act 1998, have the right of access to the record once it is placed in his or her file.

Absences that may not genuinely be for the reason given

1.19 If a manager has grounds to believe that an employee's absence may not genuinely have been for the reason given, but perhaps has no proof, the manager should gather as much information as possible about the circumstances. He or she should then put the facts to the employee at a private meeting. While it is quite acceptable for a manager to state facts, ask questions and seek to clarify any discrepancies or reasonable suspicions, he or she should make no unsubstantiated accusations.

During the investigation into the circumstances that have given rise to a suspicion about whether an employee's absence was for a genuine reason, or the stated reason, the manager should:

consider how much, if any, concrete evidence exists about the employee's absence and the sources of that evidence;

if another employee has supplied information about the employee whose absence is under investigation, consider carefully whether the information provided by that employee is likely to be accurate, or whether there is any possibility that it might be exaggerated or distorted;

double-check the facts with any witnesses to ascertain exactly what they saw or heard, when and where any events or observations occurred, and whether anyone else was present;

take care to distinguish clearly between facts and opinions;

take care to gather all the relevant information from any witnesses;

check whether there is any possibility that a witness might have been mistaken in what he or she saw or heard;

refrain from being influenced by any unrelated or irrelevant factors;

take care not to make personal assumptions, or jump to premature conclusions; and

recognise that a 'gut feeling' that the employee's absence was not for a genuine reason will not, on its own, be sufficient to take any action against the employee.

Following an investigation based on the above principles, the manager should arrange to interview the employee. At the interview the manager should:

explain to the employee that a problem or apparent discrepancy has arisen and that the purpose of the interview is to clarify the facts and establish the truth;

put the evidence to the employee directly in factual terms, ie state all the facts that are known, and any evidence or allegations;

make sure that the employee understands that no accusation is being made, but that the aim is to make the employee aware of the situation that has arisen and give him or her the opportunity to present his or her side of the story;

ask the employee to comment on what has been said, explain any discrepancy in the facts, or respond to any evidence supplied by any third party; and

allow the employee a full opportunity to respond to, explain and/or refute the allegations.

If the employee appears reticent or unwilling to elaborate on the circumstances, the manager should not be afraid to ask probing questions. However, the manager should remain patient and, if necessary, reassure the employee again that what has been said is not an accusation, but a presentation of evidence with a view to clarification of any discrepancy or difference.

Following the interview, the manager should form an objective view of whether the employee may have lied about the reason for his or her absence, and decide, on the balance of probabilities, whether there is sufficient evidence to instigate disciplinary action.

Possible causes of frequent non-attendance

1.20 It is a fact of life, but not one always adequately recognised as such, that people are different. Some employees are highly motivated even in the face of difficult work circumstances, while others never feel any enthusiasm for their work. One employee may cope superbly with a high work volume and pressure level, while another may crack under the strain of a lower volume of work and less pressure. This does not mean that one employee is strong and the other weak; they are just different.

Because people and the jobs that they do are different, it follows that employers need to devise and adopt policies and practices to suit their own environment, circumstances and culture.

An employer would, however, first need to examine the reasons why its employees take time off work when they are not sick, taking into account the working environment and other relevant circumstances.

Gathering data on the causes of non-attendance at work is more complex than compiling statistics on the number of days lost to absence. Nevertheless, any employer that wishes to manage attendance effectively will need to establish the reasons why employees fail to attend work. Until the causes are properly identified and understood, it will not be possible to arrive at an effective plan for improvement.

Apart from recording and analysing the information recorded on self-certification forms, doctors' certificates and return-to-work interview reports, employers may wish to consider:

conducting employee surveys from time to time to establish what, if any, factors in the workplace might cause demotivation or discourage regular attendance;

taking positive steps to prevent and reduce workplace stress;

monitoring the working environment regularly to ensure that environmental factors that may lead to employees taking time off are recognised and reduced to a minimum; and

instigating an effective and accessible grievance procedure and taking steps to ensure that employees feel comfortable about using it

Conducting an employee survey can, if the survey is well designed, provide invaluable information about the reasons why employees take time off work. If employees are assured that the information that they provide will be treated in confidence and will result in no negative repercussions for them, they will be more likely to disclose the truth about the reasons for ad hoc absences. Responses should therefore be requested on an anonymous basis. This has the obvious disadvantage that any issues raised, such as an allegation of bullying, will not be able to be traced or dealt with. Nevertheless, the data obtained will provide the employer with invaluable information on, for example, the extent to which long working hours or shift patterns create childcare problems for employees.

Some of the most common underlying causes of frequent non-attendance at work include:

overwork and long hours, leading to fatigue;

job insecurity;

job content, for example where the job duties are repetitive and boring;

demotivation, which in turn can have a variety of causes;

environmental factors, for example lack of natural light, poor ventilation or cramped conditions;

bullying and harassment or difficult working relationships;

stress;

management style;

poor communication, leading to poor understanding of how individual jobs contribute to the organisation's objectives;

problems with caring responsibilities;

personal or family problems;

inability to establish a satisfactory work-life balance; and

transport problems.

Flexible working practices

1.21 One of the common causes of poor attendance is an absence of flexible working practices, making it difficult for some employees to manage their family responsibilities or establish a work-life balance that is satisfactory to them.

Many employees have family responsibilities and will inevitably experience difficulties with childcare or elder-care or encounter other domestic problems from time to time. For some employees, juggling their family responsibilities with the demands of their employer can be difficult. Recent research indicates that domestic commitments are one of the most common causes of short-term absence (see In sickness and in health: a report on absenteeism and work-life balance - available for order on the Working Families website).

Employers that are unsympathetic towards the concept of work-life balance, or refuse to entertain flexibility in working patterns, will find themselves with higher levels of short-term absence than would be the case if they adopted a more open-minded approach towards flexible working patterns.

One way of making it easier for employees to balance their work and personal life is to introduce a system of flexitime. Flexitime allows employees to decide their start and finish times each day, provided that they work for a defined minimum number of hours each month and attend work during defined core hours each working day. It gives employees the ability to cope with unexpected domestic problems or disruptions to childcare arrangements, and so reduces the stress that stems from insisting that employees be at work by a specific time.

Other forms of flexible working arrangements include:

allowing employees to reduce their hours of work;

facilitating job-sharing arrangements;

agreeing to earlier or later start and finish times, for example a later start time so that an employee can take his or her child to school;

allowing term-time working for employees with school-age children;

introducing compressed hours, ie employees work fewer but longer days each week or fortnight;

adjusting shift patterns to allow, for example, for shifts that operate within school hours, and/or part-time shifts; and

developing formal homeworking or teleworking arrangements, or permitting employees to work from home on an ad hoc basis where appropriate.

Research shows that the implementation of flexible working arrangements reduces casual absence and also leads to increased motivation and productivity. Where employees are granted some choice or control over their working pattern, they are likely to be happier and less stressed, and capable of concentrating their energies on the job that they are employed to do.

Policy on domestic emergencies

1.22 Employees will, on occasion, need to take time off work to deal with domestic emergencies, such as a central heating breakdown or a burglary. Some employers operate a policy allowing 'special leave' to be granted, often at management discretion, to employees who experience unexpected family, personal or domestic problems. Such a policy should define:

the circumstances in which special leave will be granted;

how much special leave is normally permitted (typically one to three days);

whether some or all of this time off will be paid and, if so, on what basis payment will be made;

what will happen if the amount of time off taken exceeds the number of days permitted;

how the employer will deal with an employee who makes excessive requests for special leave;

how and when the employee should notify the employer of the need for special leave; and

whether and, if so, in what circumstances, employees will be expected to make up some or all of the lost time at a later date.

Another option is for the employer to allow employees to use part of their annual holiday entitlement when the need for time off for personal or domestic reasons arises. To facilitate this, any policy requiring employees to give a minimum period of notice in respect of holiday dates should be made flexible enough to allow for the requirement for notice to be waived in defined circumstances. If possible, employers should agree to allow time off to take care of domestic emergencies by the hour, or at least in half days, rather than insisting that employees take whole days off work.

Employers that wish to encourage loyalty and motivation among their staff will take a sympathetic and fair approach towards the need for time off work for domestic emergencies. If employees feel confident that they will not be frowned on or penalised for taking such time off work, they are more likely to return to work as soon as possible after dealing with the emergency, rather than taking a whole day off and pretending to be sick.

The overall aim should be to treat employees fairly and reasonably and grant time off work when an employee needs it, even though this may cause some inconvenience to the employer.

Employees have the right in law to take a reasonable amount of time off work in the event of an emergency involving a dependant, regardless of their length of service at the time. Such time off need not be paid. See 3.1543 Dependants in the XpertHR employment law reference manual.

Attendance incentives

1.23 According to the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, around 18% of employers use attendance incentives or bonuses as a tool in absence management.

The Royal Mail dominated the news for a while when it introduced a scheme under which employees with exemplary attendance records had their name entered into a prize draw to win a car. Other types of incentives include offering:

allowances or annual bonus payments to employees who meet a defined attendance target rate over a period of one year;

prizes for employees with full attendance; and

additional days' holiday entitlement for employees with good attendance records.

Such incentives are most commonly granted to manual workers in manufacturing and to staff in customer-facing roles.

There are, however, downsides to offering attendance incentives.

There is a risk that employees who are sick may struggle into work rather than taking time off, in order to avoid losing the opportunity to receive the incentive. Where an employee has flu or another infectious illness, this may be spread to his or her colleagues.

Employees who are sick and take time off as a result may perceive the incentive as unfair. The feeling of unfairness may be heightened where an employee's absence occurs towards the end of the incentive year after otherwise exemplary attendance.

Where an attendance allowance is routinely paid, it may be perceived as part of normal pay. Employees who are absent may perceive a reduction in the allowance as an unfair deduction from pay.

There may be resistance to the notion of paying employees extra simply to attend work, since they are already being paid their normal wage or salary to do so.

Duvet days

1.24 The concept of 'duvet days' originated from America and has not, to date, been widely implemented in the UK. A duvet day policy allows employees to take a defined maximum number of days off work without advance notice provided that they notify the employer in the morning that they have decided to take that day off work. Employees are not required to state any reason for wanting to take the day off.

Because a duvet day policy allows employees to take a day off work without advance notice, it can cause disruption to the employer's levels of service or productivity. Clearly, such a policy would not suit all employers. Where an employer wishes to consider implementing a duvet day policy, it will be important for it to have some measure of control about how it operates. For example, there may have to be specified times of the year or days of the week when duvet days are not permitted.

The perceived benefit of a duvet day policy is that it enables employees to take an occasional day off work without having to plan, justify or explain it, thereby making it less likely that employees will take unauthorised time off and subsequently lie about the reason for their absence.

It is arguable that such policies discourage reliable attendance and encourage employees to take the maximum number of duvet days off work on the basis that they believe that this is their entitlement.

Attendance levels during special events

1.25 During events such as the Olympic Games, the World Cup or a wedding or funeral of national significance, employers may experience higher levels of absence than usual. To minimise the potential problems of absence at such times and avoid the need for disciplinary action against employees who fail to attend work, the employer might consider:

allowing flexibility in start and finish times for the duration of the special event - perhaps on the basis that the employee undertakes to make the lost time up;

where the special event is televised, providing television screens in the workplace so that employees can watch the event at work, and make the lost time up;

encouraging employees to apply for annual leave well in advance of the event;

reminding staff of the correct procedures for requesting time off work;

allowing employees to take short periods of holiday, eg half days, at short notice;

ensuring that requests for time off work are treated fairly and consistently, bearing in mind that a first come, first served approach is usually fairest;

operating a temporary shift-swap system to allow those who wish to watch the event to swap shifts with those who do not; and

issuing a reminder that unauthorised absence from work will be treated as a disciplinary offence.

It should be made clear to employees that any concessions or flexibility in working hours implemented for the duration of the special event are temporary measures, and are a privilege and not a right.

When considering requests for flexible working hours or time off work during special events, employers should also consider how requests for flexible working or time off are dealt with in other circumstances. For example, if an employee has recently been refused a request to change his or her working hours to fit in with childcare arrangements, he or she might resent it if another employee is granted flexibility in order to be able to watch football matches on television.

Employers should also bear in mind the need for equality of treatment for employees of different nationalities. Increasingly diverse workforces mean that a wide range of events may result in requests for flexible working or time off. Similarly, employers should not make assumptions about the sexes, for example that only men will want time off to watch football matches.

Taking disciplinary action against employees who take unauthorised time off work is dealt with in 1.28 Disciplinary action for unjustified absence.

Interaction between policies

1.26 When devising policies on, for example, attendance, return-to-work interviews, flexible working practices and domestic leave, employers should check other pre-existing policies to ensure consistency. Other policies that should be cross-checked would include:

holiday policies;

parental leave policies;

sick pay policies; and

disciplinary rules and procedures.

In particular, issues such as notice requirements for leave and payment during periods of leave should be reviewed and checked for consistency.

Sick pay as a tool for managing absence

1.27 It is often helpful for employers to maintain some discretion over the payment of sick pay, thus allowing management to decline or withdraw payment from a particular employee if there is a proper reason to do so.

A discretionary policy does, however, carry with it the danger that employees who are not paid will perceive the policy (and management) to be unfair. If payment of sick pay is to be discretionary, managers should be provided with written guidelines on the factors that should, and should not, be taken into account when deciding whether or not to grant sick pay. Consistency and fairness in the application of the policy will be paramount.

A policy could, for example, state that payment of company sick pay may be withheld where:

the employee has less than six months'/one year's service with the organisation;

the employee has had more than a defined number of absences in the previous 12 months (including absences that are due to reasons other than sickness, while of course excluding periods of permitted leave such as annual holiday and maternity leave);

the employee has failed to comply with the company's notification and/or certification requirements (see 1.14 Rules on notifying absence and 1.16 Self-certification);

the employee has unreasonably refused to attend a medical examination with an occupational doctor;

there is some evidence to suggest that the employee's absence was not for a genuine reason, although this would need to be investigated and discussed with the employee first;

the employee's incapacity has been caused by participation in dangerous sports or activities;

the employee has given false or misleading information concerning the reason for his or her absence;

the employee has, in the previous 12 months, been subjected to the employer's disciplinary procedure; and

the employee has gone off sick while under investigation for a disciplinary offence or immediately after being invited to attend a disciplinary hearing.

Other employers adopt a policy of not paying sick pay for the first three days of an employee's absence. This has the advantage of discouraging short-term absence, but the disadvantage of penalising employees who are genuinely ill. One method of minimising this disadvantage is to make the three days' sick pay refundable once the employee has been absent for, for example, two weeks and has provided a doctor's certificate covering the whole period of the absence.

Disciplinary action for unjustified absence

1.28 It should be made clear, both within the employer's disciplinary procedure and in any other relevant policies and procedures, that unauthorised or unjustified absences will not be tolerated and that disciplinary action will be taken against any employee who abuses the absence or leave policies, or takes time off work without good reason or without providing proper notification.

However, it will be important to distinguish between an employee who has failed to provide proper notification and one who notifies sickness absence but whom the employer suspects is not genuinely ill.

Where an employee has failed, without good reason, to comply with the employer's procedure on notification of absence, or failed to provide the required certification, this should be treated as a disciplinary matter. Where, however, the employee is suspected of taking time off without good reason, the matter will require investigation and discussion with the employee (see 1.19 Absences that may not genuinely be for the reason given and 1.29 Case study).

Case study

1.29 Jack has phoned in sick, informing his manager, Alison, that he has hurt his back and is in great pain. He is subsequently absent from work for three days, completing a self-certification form on his return. On the second day of Jack's absence, Margaret, a colleague from the same section, told Alison that, while driving home after work the previous day, she happened to see Jack digging his garden. Margaret is angry that Jack is 'skiving off again and piling extra work on his colleagues'. Jack has had two other short periods of absence in the last year, which were reported as being on account of flu.

What steps should Alison take?

Alison should take care not to make assumptions about the reason for Jack's absence or jump to hasty conclusions. She should:

consider the extent to which Margaret's version of events is likely to be accurate, for example whether Margaret is someone whose word she can trust, or whether she might have a grievance against Jack for any reason that might cause her to exaggerate or even lie about what she saw;

double-check the facts with Margaret, to ascertain, for example, exactly when she saw Jack in his garden, what he was doing at the time, and whether anyone else was with him; and

ask Margaret whether there is any possibility that she might have been mistaken.

At Jack's return-to-work interview Alison should put the facts to him, but without making any accusation. For example, Alison might say: 'It was reported to me that you were seen around 5 pm on Thursday digging your garden. In light of the fact that you phoned in sick that morning saying you had hurt your back, would you like to explain this?'

Alison should form an objective view, following the interview, of whether Jack's absence was for a genuine reason or not. She should refrain from being influenced by the fact that Jack has had two previous absences in the past year, unless there is evidence to suggest that either or both of these absences were not for genuine reasons.

Alison should instigate disciplinary action against Jack only if there is evidence, on the balance of probabilities, that he was lying about having hurt his back. In a situation such as this, there is rarely any proof that an employee has deceived the employer regarding the reason for not coming to work. While it would be inappropriate for a manager to make unsubstantiated accusations, or to judge an employee guilty without proper evidence, it is perfectly acceptable to state the facts, ie that Jack was seen digging his garden on the same day he claimed to have hurt his back, and ask the employee to comment, explain or present his or her version of events.

If Jack had been seen during time off work having a beer in a cafe, rather than digging his garden, there would be no grounds to conclude that he was behaving improperly. While a back injury would undoubtedly make it very difficult, if not impossible, for him to dig his garden, it would not necessarily preclude him from drinking beer or relaxing with his friends in a cafe. An employee can be genuinely unfit to work, but remain able to carry out certain personal or social activities.

Key references

1.30

Useful links

Absence management survey report July 2006 (PDF format, 936K) (on CIPD website)
Absence minded: absence and labour turnover 2006 (on CBI website)
In sickness and in health: a report on absenteeism and work-life balance (available for order on the Working Families website)

Questions and answers

1.31

Q888: What factors in the workplace are likely to discourage regular attendance at work?

There are many workplace factors that might influence attendance levels. Some of the most common include environmental factors such as lack of air conditioning or cramped conditions, the absence of flexible working practices, such as the opportunity to work reduced hours, overwork and management style.

Q889: What is the 'lost-time rate' of measuring absence?

The 'lost-time rate' is a means of measuring employee absence by expressing the total amount of time lost through all employee absences (in days or hours) as a percentage of the total number of potential working days or hours in a given period such as one year. This enables management to review the extent of the absence problem in the organisation.

Q890: How can implementing an attendance management procedure assist employers?

The key aim of an attendance management procedure will be to encourage reliable attendance among all employees, so that a dependable staffing base can be established to meet the employer's service and/or production needs. Without a procedure, the employer is likely to find that levels of casual absence are higher than they should be.

Q891: When should an employer instigate a formal review of a particular employee's level of attendance?

A review of an employee's level of attendance should be triggered on the basis of two specified criteria: the total number of days' absence in a given period (typically a year) and the number of individual occasions on which the employee was absent in the same given period. Employers should determine trigger points that are appropriate for them in light of their business requirements, the nature of the employment and the size of their absence problem.

Q892: When conducting a formal review of an employee's attendance, should any absences be discounted?

Absences that are connected to an employee's pregnancy, any that are related to disability, and absences resulting from an accident at work (unless the employee's negligence caused the accident) should normally be discounted.

Q893: What can an employer do when an employee who has been invited to come to an attendance review meeting goes off sick?

If an employee claims that he or she is unable to attend an attendance review meeting due to sickness, the employer could ask the employee to attend an appointment with an occupational doctor so that the doctor can advise whether the employee is well enough to attend such a meeting, possibly held away from the workplace. Alternatively, if the employer has reason to conclude that it is inappropriate to wait until the employee returns to work before conducting the review meeting, the employee could be offered the option of either presenting submissions in writing or nominating a colleague or trade union official to put his or her case to management at the meeting. It is not advisable to delay the attendance review meeting indefinitely.

Q894: Is it acceptable to issue a formal warning to an employee whose level of attendance is unsatisfactory, even where there are genuine reasons for the various absences?

Yes, so long as it is clear that the warning is for unsatisfactory attendance, and not, for example, for ill health or personal problems. A warning will be necessary to advise the employee that his or her level of attendance falls short of what is required, and could eventually lead to further action or even termination of employment.

Q895: How should employees be required to notify any unexpected absences?

The rules for notifying absences should specify a named person (normally the line manager) whom the employee must personally contact in the event of unexpected absence. They should require the employee to provide a reason for the absence and the length of time that he or she expects to be absent. If the line manager cannot be contacted at the time the employee phones in, the manager should telephone the employee at home later the same day to obtain the necessary information.

Q896: Why is it good practice to conduct return-to-work interviews every time an employee has had a day or two off work?

Return-to-work interviews have been shown to be one of the most effective interventions in facilitating reliable employee attendance. They demonstrate to employees that the employer notices their absences, thus discouraging casual absence, while at the same time giving line managers an opportunity to identify the possible underlying cause(s) of an employee's frequent non-attendance at an early stage. Where an employee knows that he or she will have to justify an absence to the line manager, this may discourage the employee from taking a day off work.

Q897: What, if any, action should a manager take where he or she suspects, but has no proof, that an employee's absence was not genuinely for the reason given?

Having gathered as much information as possible about the circumstances, at a private meeting the manager should put the facts and any allegations to the employee, ask questions and seek to clarify any discrepancies or reasonable suspicions. However, the manager should make it clear that what is being put to the employee is not an accusation, but an attempt to make the employee aware of the situation that has arisen and give him or her the opportunity to present his or her side of the story so that the truth can be established.

Q898: How can an employer reduce the likelihood of employees taking time off work as a result of personal or family circumstances?

Research shows that flexibility in working arrangements and patterns can substantially reduce casual absence, as some element of flexibility will make it easier for employees to balance their work and personal lives. Flexibility can be implemented formally or informally, and may include a variation to an employee's start and/or finish times, part-time working, homeworking, job-sharing and flexibility in shift patterns.

Q899: What are the advantages and disadvantages of attendance incentives?

There are both advantages and disadvantages to a system of incentives for attendance. The obvious advantage is that the incentive will act to discourage casual absence. On the downside, the incentive might be perceived as unfair by, for example, employees who have come to regard the incentive as part of normal pay and who then have to take time off sick. Additionally, there is the possibility that employees who are sick may be tempted to struggle into work rather than taking time off. Before implementing attendance incentives, management should consult employees or their representatives and consider the implications carefully.

Q900: How can sick pay be used as a tool for managing attendance?

Some discretion over the payment of sick pay can allow management to decline or withdraw payment from a particular employee if there is proper reason to do so, for example if the employee did not properly notify his or her absence or where he or she is under investigation for a disciplinary offence. It will, however, be important to ensure that managers do not exercise discretion arbitrarily or inconsistently. Managers should therefore be provided with written guidelines on the factors that should, and should not, be taken into account when deciding whether or not to grant sick pay. Employees should also be informed of how the rules on sick pay operate.