As governments worldwide seek to reduce spending, one area that is currently receiving a lot of attention is public sector absenteeism, which many argue costs governments millions of dollars each year. For example, in the... [ view full abstract ]
As governments worldwide seek to reduce spending, one area that is currently receiving a lot of attention is public sector absenteeism, which many argue costs governments millions of dollars each year. For example, in the United Kingdom in 2001, absenteeism cost an estimated £13 billion, or approximately 192 million working days lost. This is no different in Canada, where absenteeism in the federal public service is said to have approximately cost the government $871 million in lost wages in 2013 alone. Similar examples abound in a number of developed and developing countries as a result of the rising rates of absenteeism in the public sector. The rising rates have been attributed to what some scholars have described as ‘sickie,’ a term denoting workers who call in-sick to their workplace and thus stay at home or absent from work or what is generally described as sick leave. Fixing ‘sickie’ as an absenteeism problem is not an easy task. Consequently, the debate continues to rage on, between politicians, scholars, and public sector unions on how to tackle what may be described as a wicked problem. Many governments are attempting to find ways in reducing sick leave.
In Canada, the federal government believes that simply reducing what it describes as ‘a generous sick leave package,’ particularly, the ability of employees to “bank” sick days and roll them over into accumulated sick days over the years and use them particularly priori to retirement and disability leave, can help resolve the problem. It contends that this package was negotiated by public sector unions over 40 years ago, which is different from what exist in the private sector and is archaic and detrimental to the current economic environment.
This approach has, however, been described as narrow and unsustainable in dealing with a difficult problem. To many, a simple reduction in sick leave and dismantling ‘banked days’ and bringing it to what exists in the private sector can lead to increased presenteeism, where sick employees come to work but are impaired, costing organizations up to three times more in the long run. Furthermore, adopting sick leave policies from the private sector could be problematic, as public sectors, are more representative than the private sector, particularly in terms of the numbers of women and older persons employed- two key demographics which tend to have higher absenteeism rates regardless of sector.
The essence of this paper is to examine the proposal put forward by the government and the potential policy instruments being advocated to reduce the cost of absenteeism in the public sector. By defining absenteeism as a wicked problem, which is multifaceted, unpredictable, fluid and/or intractable, this paper seeks to demonstrate how the proposed quick fix solutions will likely evoke grave repercussions. A much more nuanced, complex, and multifaceted solution is of essence, and requires a deeper understanding of absenteeism as not just a simple problem, but as a difficult problem that requires the participation and action of numerous organizations and individuals to deal with it.
