Search
00
GBAF Logo
trophy
Top StoriesInterviewsBusinessFinanceBankingTechnologyInvestingTradingVideosAwardsMagazinesHeadlinesTrends

Subscribe to our newsletter

Get the latest news and updates from our team.

Global Banking and Finance Review

Global Banking & Finance Review

Company

    GBAF Logo
    • About Us
    • Profile
    • Wealth
    • Privacy & Cookie Policy
    • Terms of Use
    • Contact Us
    • Advertising
    • Submit Post
    • Latest News
    • Research Reports
    • Press Release
    • Awards▾
      • About the Awards
      • Awards TimeTable
      • Submit Nominations
      • Testimonials
      • Media Room
      • Award Winners
      • FAQ

    Global Banking & Finance Review® is a leading financial portal and online magazine offering News, Analysis, Opinion, Reviews, Interviews & Videos from the world of Banking, Finance, Business, Trading, Technology, Investing, Brokerage, Foreign Exchange, Tax & Legal, Islamic Finance, Asset & Wealth Management.
    Copyright © 2010-2025 GBAF Publications Ltd - All Rights Reserved.

    ;
    Editorial & Advertiser disclosure

    Global Banking and Finance Review is an online platform offering news, analysis, and opinion on the latest trends, developments, and innovations in the banking and finance industry worldwide. The platform covers a diverse range of topics, including banking, insurance, investment, wealth management, fintech, and regulatory issues. The website publishes news, press releases, opinion and advertorials on various financial organizations, products and services which are commissioned from various Companies, Organizations, PR agencies, Bloggers etc. These commissioned articles are commercial in nature. This is not to be considered as financial advice and should be considered only for information purposes. It does not reflect the views or opinion of our website and is not to be considered an endorsement or a recommendation. We cannot guarantee the accuracy or applicability of any information provided with respect to your individual or personal circumstances. Please seek Professional advice from a qualified professional before making any financial decisions. We link to various third-party websites, affiliate sales networks, and to our advertising partners websites. When you view or click on certain links available on our articles, our partners may compensate us for displaying the content to you or make a purchase or fill a form. This will not incur any additional charges to you. To make things simpler for you to identity or distinguish advertised or sponsored articles or links, you may consider all articles or links hosted on our site as a commercial article placement. We will not be responsible for any loss you may suffer as a result of any omission or inaccuracy on the website.

    Business

    Absence days lost to illness fall

    Absence days lost to illness fall

    Published by Gbaf News

    Posted on July 6, 2018

    Featured image for article about Business

    Employers are losing fewer working days to sickness absence, a report from HR website XpertHR finds.

    Analysis of data for 2017 shows that, at the median, employers lost 5.6 days for each employee over the course of the year. This was down from a median 6.6 days for 2016, but a return to the levels that have held sway since the beginning of the decade (see table).

    In financial terms, the median cost to employers rose from £455 in 2016 to £570 in 2017. But even this is likely to be an underestimate, with many employers not counting anything beyond the direct salary costs of the individuals on sick leave.

    With HR professionals keen to make the business case for effective approaches to managing sickness absence, however, organisations need to start counting the cost of reduced levels of customer service and missed business opportunities, and to include these in truer costings.

    XpertHR has now been collecting and analysing employee absence data for 12 years, with this year’s findings based on data from 287 organisations covering 398,453 employees across all industries.

    Among the headline findings, in the XpertHR report:

    • Median absence rates stand at 5.6 days or 2.5% of working time;
    • Mean average absence rates stand at 6.1 days or 2.8% of working time;
    • Excluding long-term absences (periods of more than four weeks’ continuous absence), the median is 3.3 days and the mean 3.1 days; and
    • Absence rates are highest in large organisations and in the public sector.

    By region, median absence rates are highest in Wales (3%), the North West of England (2.8%) and the South West of England (2.8%). They are lowest in London (2%), the South East of England (2.3%) and the North East of England and Scotland (both 2.5%).

    Commenting on the findings, XpertHR Senior HR Practice Editor Noelle Murphy said:

    “Sickness absence has a direct impact on business, and employers are consistently interested in initiatives to measure, manage and tackle the problem. But many HR departments fall at the first hurdle – not knowing the true cost of absence or the reasons underlying it. Better measurement of sickness absence and its associated costs should in turn make it easier to persuade managers to engage with absence management initiatives.”

    Absence rates for all employers, 2006-2017
    Calendar year Median, % of working time Median, days per employee
    2017 2.5% 5.6
    2016 2.9% 6.6
    2015 2.6% 5.8
    2014 2.5% 5.7
    2013 2.3% 5.2
    2012 2.6% 5.9
    2011 2.5% 5.7
    2010 2.8% 6.4
    2009 3.0% 6.8
    2008 3.1% 7.1
    2007 3.2% 7.4
    2006 3.5% 8.0
    Source: XpertHR.

    Employers are losing fewer working days to sickness absence, a report from HR website XpertHR finds.

    Analysis of data for 2017 shows that, at the median, employers lost 5.6 days for each employee over the course of the year. This was down from a median 6.6 days for 2016, but a return to the levels that have held sway since the beginning of the decade (see table).

    In financial terms, the median cost to employers rose from £455 in 2016 to £570 in 2017. But even this is likely to be an underestimate, with many employers not counting anything beyond the direct salary costs of the individuals on sick leave.

    With HR professionals keen to make the business case for effective approaches to managing sickness absence, however, organisations need to start counting the cost of reduced levels of customer service and missed business opportunities, and to include these in truer costings.

    XpertHR has now been collecting and analysing employee absence data for 12 years, with this year’s findings based on data from 287 organisations covering 398,453 employees across all industries.

    Among the headline findings, in the XpertHR report:

    • Median absence rates stand at 5.6 days or 2.5% of working time;
    • Mean average absence rates stand at 6.1 days or 2.8% of working time;
    • Excluding long-term absences (periods of more than four weeks’ continuous absence), the median is 3.3 days and the mean 3.1 days; and
    • Absence rates are highest in large organisations and in the public sector.

    By region, median absence rates are highest in Wales (3%), the North West of England (2.8%) and the South West of England (2.8%). They are lowest in London (2%), the South East of England (2.3%) and the North East of England and Scotland (both 2.5%).

    Commenting on the findings, XpertHR Senior HR Practice Editor Noelle Murphy said:

    “Sickness absence has a direct impact on business, and employers are consistently interested in initiatives to measure, manage and tackle the problem. But many HR departments fall at the first hurdle – not knowing the true cost of absence or the reasons underlying it. Better measurement of sickness absence and its associated costs should in turn make it easier to persuade managers to engage with absence management initiatives.”

    Absence rates for all employers, 2006-2017
    Calendar yearMedian, % of working timeMedian, days per employee
    20172.5%5.6
    20162.9%6.6
    20152.6%5.8
    20142.5%5.7
    20132.3%5.2
    20122.6%5.9
    20112.5%5.7
    20102.8%6.4
    20093.0%6.8
    20083.1%7.1
    20073.2%7.4
    20063.5%8.0
    Source: XpertHR.

    Why waste money on news and opinions when you can access them for free?

    Take advantage of our newsletter subscription and stay informed on the go!

    Subscribe