COMPARING ABSENCE

Comparing Absence In The Public And Private Sector



Comparing Absence In The Public And Private Sector

Introduction

Attendance and absence are receiving increasing attention, as organisations attempt to maximise productivity from all organisational resources. This paper will consider whether the public/ private sector differs from broader patterns of absence, through an analysis of existing data on several public services. One clear trend is that the rates of absence tend to be higher in public/ private services, for a range of factors related to the nature and conditions of employment. In relation to economic and demographic variables, the trends are mixed, with similarities both within and across sectors, and at other times no discernible pattern.

Purpose of the study

The purpose of the proposed study is to highlight absence in the public and private sector and differentiate between them.

Literature Review

Absent employees represent a cost to organisations. There are obvious direct costs, if organisations have to pay replacement staff. However, there may be a range of less obvious costs, through lost productivity or business, and when absence is a sign of deeper problems within an organisation. The issues are of "fundamental importance to industrialised society … affecting those in industry as a cost of production, yet lost productivity also affects the whole economy and society directly and indirectly" (RACP 1999:6).

Most countries report staggering estimates of the cost of absence. A 2005 Australian study estimated that "2.4% of Australian workers will be absent from work for some reason not anticipated by their employer", and that this may cost employers in excess of $7 billion per annum (Riedel and Preston 2005: 85). In the US, research in 2001 and 2002 estimated that the average cost of unscheduled absence was around AUD$1360 per employee, and that employers put aside an average of 4.2% of their budgets to finance absenteeism (ANAO 2003:26; CCH 53:880). A 2003 British study estimated that the incidence of absence had risen from 7 days per annum in 2002 to 7.8 days in 2003, with the average cost of absence at approximately AUD$1400 (£588) per employee and a total cost of billions to the economy (Silcox 2004:19).

However, sickness absence can be a sensitive issue. A review of the non-academic and practitioner literature suggests a traditional reluctance to discuss it or attempt to address it in some organisations. Further, sickness absence tends to be treated differently to other forms of absence. For example, absence as a result of industrial disputes receives much media attention, even though it is relatively minor in scale and cost when compared to sickness absence (Preston 2005:95). However the competitive pressures in recent decades have led to absence issues receiving increasing attention, particularly from human resource practitioners seeking to contribute to maximising organisational performance.

This paper presents some preliminary findings from a broader and continuing project on absence in the Queensland public service. (Queensland is the third largest state in the Australian federal system of government.) The purpose of the paper is to consider whether the public sector differs from broader literature and ...