Public holiday absences: managing employee sick leave to ensure workplace efficiency

March 21, 2024

Share on LinkedIn Share on Facebook Share on X

As Easter approaches, workplaces often find themselves grappling with the challenge of employee absenteeism. While time off is essential for rejuvenation and work-life balance, there is a growing concern about employees taking unnecessary sick leave to extend their holiday public holiday or significant sporting events. This trend not only affects productivity but also poses a significant risk to the overall well-being of the workplace.

A look at the numbers

According to Direct Health Solutions’ (DHS) 2023 absence management and well-being survey, there has been a noticeable increase in employee absenteeism. Overall, employee absenteeism increased by just over 2.6 days (23%) from 2019, with the most common amount of sick leave taken in 2022 being 14 days. 58% of companies surveyed believed their absenteeism increased during 2022. These increases led to disruptions in workflow and can negatively impact the morale of those who diligently fulfill their responsibilities.

Furthermore, the statistics from the survey indicate organisations that believe absence is underreported rose from 36% in 2019 (pre-COVID) to 55% in 2023 (post-COVID). This poses a clear risk to workplace efficiency and underscores the need for proactive strategies to address and mitigate the impact of unnecessary sick leave.

Next steps for employers 

Workplaces must recognise the multifaceted nature of this challenge, understanding that employees may feel compelled to take sick leave for various reasons during the holiday seasons. These reasons may range from burnout and stress to the desire for an extended break. Addressing these factors requires a holistic approach. In addition, some workplaces believe the stress of the pandemic fundamentally changed how employees feel about absences and led to a more prominent entitlement mentality.

DHS’ absence management and well-being survey study also reveals that absenteeism not only affects individual productivity, but also costs businesses billions of dollars. If left unchecked and unmanaged, it can have adverse impacts across a business, as well as signal wider problems in workplace health, safety and culture.

One effective way to tackle the issue of rising ingenuine employee absenteeism is by implementing a comprehensive well-being program that promotes a healthy work-life balance throughout the year. By fostering a supportive and inclusive work environment, companies can reduce the likelihood of employees resorting to unnecessary sick leave as a means of coping with stress or exhaustion.

It is important for organisations to provide tailored tools and implement practices to help workplaces navigate these challenges efficiently. One such tool is a proactive well-being platform that enables organisations to monitor and address potential issues before they escalate into extended sick leave. Such a platform leverages data analytics and employee feedback to identify patterns and trends, allowing companies to intervene and provide support when employees need it most.

Guidance from DHS 

DHS’ absence management solutions empower workplaces to implement fair and transparent policies around sick leave. By clearly communicating expectations and consequences, companies can discourage the misuse of sick leave while fostering a culture of accountability.

DHS’ absence management and well-being survey also emphasises the importance of communication in managing employee absenteeism. Clear communication channels between employers and employees help create an environment where individuals feel comfortable discussing their well-being and seeking support when needed. DHS’ communication tools facilitate open and honest dialogue, contributing to a workplace culture that prioritises the mental and physical health of its employees.

Furthermore, DHS offers targeted training programs for managers to equip them with the skills and knowledge needed to identify signs of burnout or stress in their teams. By providing managers with the tools to address well-being concerns proactively, companies can create a more resilient workforce that is less likely to resort to unnecessary sick leave.

As the Easter break approaches, workplaces must be proactive in addressing the risk of employees taking unnecessary sick leave to extend their time off. The statistics from DHS’ recent absence management and well-being survey underscore the urgency of implementing effective absence management strategies. By leveraging DHS’ tools and practices, workplaces can foster a culture of well-being, reduce unplanned absences, and ensure a more efficient and productive workforce. It’s time for workplaces to focus on employee well-being and take proactive steps to navigate holiday seasons without compromising workplace efficiency.

Learn more > For information or assistance with absence management, contact Christina Wunder [email protected]

Christina Wunder – Head of Direct Health Solutions (DHS), Australia

Riding the railways of FMLA and ADA

March 18, 2024

Share on LinkedIn Share on Facebook Share on X

For anyone who has ever played the game ‘Monopoly’, collecting the four railroads is considered quite the achievement. But dealing with the tracks can be tricky — as noted by two cases that the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear regarding railroads and both FMLA and ADA. 

Investigating an interference claim 

Our first case is in relation to an FMLA interference claim in Justin Adkins v. CSX Transportation, Inc. that was dismissed by the 4th circuit. In 2017, the employer began a series of furloughs to some of its employees. Over the next few weeks, 65 employees submitted claims for FMLA and medical leave for soft tissue injuries that were all approved by the same two chiropractors. The company suspected fraud because under the union agreement, employees who were furloughed with medical reasons were allowed to keep benefits for two years versus only four months for those who didn’t. Following an investigation, hearings were held per the union agreement and ultimately, the choice was to terminate these employees for violating workplace rules for dishonesty. 

When the plaintiff’s sued, they argued that the administrative process used under the collective bargaining agreement violated their rights under FMLA for multiple reasons. The courts disagreed because as they noted, in their opinion, the employer did not violate the employees’ rights because it had an honest belief that the employees were seeking leave for an improper purpose. The court also noted that while the plaintiff’s argued that the reason they were fired was based on CSX Transportation’s suspicion that there was foul play, the suspicion was enough to warrant the employers honest belief that the leave claims were not legitimate based on the volume of claims and the timing in which they were submitted. 

Reasonable accommodations in review 

Our second case also deals with the railroads and reasonable accommodations under ADA. The case, Hopman v. Union Pac. R.R. involves a conductor who sued over a denied accommodation request to have his service dog accompany him in the train cab to help with flashbacks, migraines and other PTSD symptoms related to his service in the military. Initially, the trial court found for the employee and awarded him $250,000. This award was vacated by the judge and validated by the Eight Circuit who noted that the accommodation request by Hopman wasn’t covered by ADA because he was seeking to manage the worst of his symptoms of his disabilities while at work. The trial judge noted that ADA doesn’t define reasonable accommodation and that accommodations are not required to provide freedom from psychological or mental pain as a job benefit.

The court noted that the employee could still perform the essential functions of his job without his service animal present. In addition, the court agreed with the company’s position that having a service dog aboard a train would be unsafe and inconsistent with federal safety regulations.

While neither plaintiff was successful, it does offer some insights into the courts thinking about how employers should approach concerns with leaves and or accommodation requests. If an employer has reason to doubt the validity of a claim, the best course of action is to investigate and document those suspicions. In the CSX case, the terminations were because of company policies surrounding dishonesty in applying for what the company felt was illegitimate leave. They based this on the fact that the same two doctors sent in virtually identical paperwork for the plaintiffs and then held hearings for each employee to document their concerns before a course of action was taken. 

Decision making 

The ADA case also affirmed the courts belief that just because an employee feels that a request is reasonable and can help them manage their job, its ultimately up to the employer to make that determination. Given that ADA doesn’t truly define reasonable accommodation but rather provides examples, employers should note that it is better to ensure that you have a process in place to validate where the employee can perform the functions of the job with or without an accommodation. 

The key in both cases was properly documenting and following a process before any employment decisions or actions are taken. Failure to do so could mean that you wind up in court defending your circumstance and find yourself on the losing end to an opponent who has successfully captured all four railroads. Just like in Monopoly, this situation could wind up costing you the game. 

Learn more > Explore our disability and absence management flyer.

David Setzkorn, MBA, CPCU, Senior Vice President Workforce Absence & Disability Practice Leader

Could paid family and medical leave become the new norm?

January 10, 2024

Share on LinkedIn Share on Facebook Share on X

The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) offers leave with job and benefit protection to eligible employees for qualifying events. However, employers are not required to pay employees when they take leave under FMLA or similar leave laws. In response to the absence of a federal paid leave law, multiple states throughout the U.S. have enacted their own programs to provide employees in their states with paid family and/or medical leave. The challenge is that these mandates differ widely from one another, resulting in a confusing patchwork of benefit and leave policies that creates major compliance challenges for employers that have employees in multiple jurisdictions. 

Learn more in this podcast featuring two of our workforce absence experts: Brice Caswell, director of product compliance and statutory administration and David Setzkorn, SVP, workforce absence and disability practice leader.

FMLA and the pitfalls of overtime

December 4, 2023

Share on LinkedIn Share on Facebook Share on X

A recent article discussed how workers are increasingly being asked/required by employers to work overtime. Meanwhile, those same employers are facing challenges when it comes to FMLA. 

While organizations reap some benefits when employees work beyond their typical hours, doing so introduces several cons to consider as well. As we approach the holiday season and employees clock more hours, it’s as good a time as any for employers to review how overtime and FMLA works — and what this means for employees. 

FMLA entitlement 

Before we address the overtime issue, we need to consider how FMLA calculates the amount of entitlement available to an employee. §825.205 (b) Calculation of Leave outlines how leave is to be calculated. Per the regulations, an employee’s workweek is the basic foundation of the leave entitlement. For example, if an employee works five days per week, eight hours per day for a total of 40 hours per week, the employer will calculate their available entitlement by multiplying the employees’ scheduled hours by the maximum number of weeks available under FMLA. In this example, an employee working a 40-hour week would have 480 hours available to them (40 hours x 12 weeks). Whereas an employee who works 30 hours a week would receive 360 hours (30 hours x 12 weeks).

Overtime considerations 

When considering overtime, let’s look at §825.205 (c) Overtime, which details how we address overtime as it relates to the amount of entitlement available. Per the regulations, if an employee is regularly scheduled, that time can count towards FMLA entitlement. For example, if an employee is regularly scheduled for 48 hours per week, the amount of available entitlement would be available to the employee would be 576 hours (48 hours x 12 weeks) and if they are unable to work the overtime because of a qualifying FMLA reason, it would count against their entitlement. 

The key here is to determine whether the overtime is regularly scheduled or voluntary. Some employers are requiring their employees to work mandatory overtime because of staffing shortages. These shifts are not optional and are being considered part of an employee’s normal workweek. That means if an employee takes FMLA leave, that mandatory overtime could be eligible for FMLA coverage. Conversely, if an employer asks an employee to voluntarily work overtime, meaning that it is not regularly scheduled, and the employee is unable to work the requested overtime due to an FMLA reason, it would not be covered by FMLA.

Next steps for employers 

Employers should recognize how they approach overtime when they are using it to schedule employees. The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued an opinion letter earlier this year that addresses how employees could use intermittent or reduced schedule leave to avoid working mandatory overtime and have it protected under FMLA. This can have a significant impact on industries like healthcare and public safety where mandatory overtime is a common practice. If an employer says that scheduled overtime is voluntary to avoid adding into FMLA entitlement calculations, they cannot hold that against an employee should they choose to not work the overtime. 

While the use of overtime is a common business practice in several industries, employers should be aware of the impact these extra hours may have on their employees, not only from a compliance standpoint but their mental well-being as well. Additionally, employers should consider their obligations under FMLA and the potential for employees to use overtime hours to extend their FMLA entitlement indefinitely from year to year. 

Learn more > Explore our disability and absence management solutions or contact [email protected].

Source: NBC news, November 2023

A new day has dawned: what employers need to know about religious accommodations

November 9, 2023

Share on LinkedIn Share on Facebook Share on X

A recent Supreme Court case will have wide-ranging implications for employers as it relates to religious accommodations. The ruling established a new standard for employers to meet if claiming that a requested religious accommodation would unduly burden the organization if granted. 

Out with the old

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, an employer must provide a reasonable accommodation for an employee’s sincere religious practices unless that accommodation would pose “an undue hardship” on the employer. In 1977, in TransWorld Airlines v. Hardison, the Supreme Court clarified “undue hardship” in this context, ruling that employers could avoid having to provide an accommodation if doing so would impose “more than a de minimis cost” — defined (by dictionary) as something trifling or of little importance — or burden.

So began the adoption of the “de minimis cost” test as a burden, the valuative meaning of which has long been argued over and speculated about. In practice, the de minimis cost test as burden proved easy for employers to overcome; any minimal cost claimed as an undue hardship generally sufficed. Between 1977 and a recent ruling, employees were rarely granted religious accommodation requests due to the low burden. 

But in the 2023 case of Groff v. DeJoy, the Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, struck down the de minimis standard. Instead, the court said, Title VII requires employers who deny such religious accommodation request to demonstrate that the accommodation would result in “substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business.” Under this heightened standard, it will be significantly more difficult for employers to deny religious accommodation requests. 

In with the new 

According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), 2,111 individuals filed charges in 2021 alleging religious discrimination. In 2022, that number jumped to 13,814. Much of this 600% increase can likely be attributed to employees challenging their employers COVID-19 vaccine mandates. Regardless, the increase, in addition to this transformative Groff ruling, leads to the question: what will this new landscape look like? How will it affect employers?

Employers, as well as absence management professionals, must grapple with the reality that religious accommodations may be requested more often. And unlike before, those requests may now be exceedingly difficult to deny. 

For one, how can an employer confirm if a religious accommodation stems from a sincerely held belief? Employers who argue against this are in for a tall task – how do you prove such a thing? 

Another possibility: an employer may assert that the accommodation will put unduly burdensome financial constraints (“substantial cost”) on the organization. However, this approach should be taken cautiously because, in doing so, an employer will have to demonstrate a significant expense regarding its business – and this will vary greatly from organization to organization depending upon the size, structure and operational workings of each business. For example, allowing an employee to miss work for a religious observation might pose a significant expense to an employer with 17 employees. However, a multi-billion-dollar corporation with thousands of employees might struggle to prove that a similar request would be significant for them. 

One thing that most likely won’t be different for both of those organizations: neither will want to will subject its financial books to inspection. But arguing that the request is cost-preclusive will do just that should the litigation continue. 

Title VII is not ADA

While “undue burden” is a term used in both employee disability (under the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) ) and employee religion (Title VII ) contexts, the laws are different and provide different thresholds for employers to meet when asserting that an employee’s request can’t be granted. As discussed earlier, religious accommodations under Title VII must cause substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business to be unduly burdensome. 

Compare this to undue burden in the disability accommodation context. The ADA requires employers to show not only financial difficulty, but also that the request would be “substantial, or disruptive, or would fundamentally alter the nature or operation of the business.”

Thus, while it will be years before we know how courts will interpret the meaning of substantial increased costs in the Title VII context, the wording appears to indicate that it will still be a less daunting challenge than in the ADA context. Therefore, employers must be careful not to discriminate against an employee’s religious beliefs by approaching religious accommodations through an ADA lens. There must be a separate standard for each type. 

Tips for employers 

Looking ahead to 2024, employers should review their existing accommodation policies and/or consider updating them to ensure compliance with the new standard. Upon receiving a religious accommodation request, it’s advisable to consult with legal counsel throughout the process. Education and training can help ensure that human resource professionals and front-line managers and supervisors are aware of the heightened burden and how to respond to employees appropriately. 

And, as with all accommodation requests , documentation of interactions surrounding religious accommodation requests is of utmost importance. And, in the end, due to the sensitive nature of such requests, employers should treat each case individually – as well as approaching each case with curiosity rather than judgment.

The missing link: using absence data to transform employee well-being

June 7, 2023

A dejected man sitting at a desk with his head in his hand.
Share on LinkedIn Share on Facebook Share on X

Absence utilization in the U.S. is at an all-time high. In January 2022, approximately 4.2 million employees worked part time because of illness, injuries, and other medical problems — the second highest percentage since data collection began in 1976 (Bureau of Labor Statistics). In response to the growing demand, employers must be proactive and seek innovative ways to address employee well-being. There’s one resource that many employers already possess but might not be leveraging to its fullest potential: data. Analyzing data to curate comprehensive well-being programs that address your employees’ critical health needs is essential for retention and supporting productive lifestyles.

The power of data

Historical absence data is one of many tools used to understand employee health and wellness. Other options like biometrics screening are also advantageous. In fact, 24% of small firms and 45% of large firms ask workers to complete biometric screenings that ultimately help employers better understand health and wellness needs of their workforce (KFF). However, employers can get a clearer understanding of employee needs by tapping into absence data points like condition trends, leave reason and average absence length. Because today’s employees consider well-being a top employment factor, it’s critical that employers harness all available data to create wellness programs that create a workplace where people feel supported. . Research shows that companies with higher levels of employee well-being report higher revenue per employee, lower healthcare costs, fewer days lost, and 70% less stress among employees. Additionally, they achieve two times higher levels of engagement than other companies (Willis Towers Watson).

Absence data can also guide in the development of preventive intervention programs that address employee needs. Primary prevention programs are commonly offered by employers as a way to provide support before the onset of disease, injury or illness. An estimated 54% of small firms and 85% of large firms offer primary prevention in their wellness programs. This includes voluntary benefit options like smoking cessation, weight management and behavioral or lifestyle coaching (KFF) programs. Secondary prevention includes proactive measures like screening before disease onset, while tertiary prevention is designed to reduce disease involvement with established patients.

Using absence data to build a well-being program may positively impact productivity and absenteeism. Consider a high-cost condition like diabetes. Without regard for trending leave reasons and conditions, a company might decrease coverage for prescription drugs or cancel a health coach preventative program to cut costs. Without reviewing absence data, the employer could unknowingly increase out-of-pocket expenses and contribute to poor prescription adherence for diabetes patients — resulting in increased absenteeism and decreased productivity.

Consider a leading absence driver nationwide, mental health. Absence data can tell us a lot about employee mental health needs. Data can be leveraged to identify mental health needs andguide in the building of a well-being program that sufficiently addresses preventative and tertiary benefit options. Providing access to the appropriate tools is critical to reducing absenteeism, confronting mental health stigmas in the workplace, and improving overall well-being.

The cost of absenteeism

The cost of absenteeism is significant: Productivity losses related to health problems cost U.S. employers $225.8 billion annually, or $1,685 per employee, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In fact, the indirect costs of absenteeism, disability or reduced work output due to medical issues may be several times higher than a company’s direct medical costs. Understanding absence trends and eliminating barriers to employee resources can reduce health and productivity costs and support the well-being of your workforce.

This content was originally published by the Disability Management Employer Coalition (DMEC) in @Work magazine.

Learn more > explore our disability and absence management services 

Sedgwick releases the 2023 absence management and wellbeing report for Australia

June 5, 2023

Share on LinkedIn Share on Facebook Share on X

SYDNEY, 6 June 2023 – Sedgwick, a leading global provider of technology-enabled risk, benefits and integrated business solutions, and Direct Health Solutions (DHS) have published the 12th edition of their absence management and wellbeing report, featuring benchmark data and key trends to help employers better manage employee absenteeism in Australia. The results reveal the latest trend in absences, the industries faced with the highest absenteeism levels, the importance of effectively managing absenteeism, and the steep costs companies incur when it’s not managed effectively.

The annual report, produced by DHS, which was acquired by Sedgwick in 2022, is based on a survey of data and absenteeism levels recorded from January 1 to December 31, 2022 for 132 companies across Australia who collectively employ over half a million employees.

Highlights from the 2023 absence management and wellbeing report:

· Overall employee absenteeism increased by just over 2.6 days (23%) from 2019, with the most common amount of sick leave taken in 2022 being 14 days. 58% of companies surveyed believed their absenteeism increased during 2022.

· The most common reasons for absenteeism were carer’s leave, needs related to COVID-19 and taking sick leave when not sick.

· Organisations that believe absence is underreported rose from 36% in 2019 (pre-COVID) to 55% in 2023 (post-COVID).

· Many believe the stress of the pandemic fundamentally changed how employees feel about absences and led to a more prominent entitlement mentality.

· Absenteeism in contact centre roles remains higher than for roles outside of contact centres. This could be due to the stressful environment within a contact centre, driven by challenging phone calls, a high volume of calls and dealing with highly emotional or aggravated customers.

Effective ways to manage employee absenteeism

“With effective tools and management strategies in place, employers can better understand the reason behind these absences and work with employees,” said Paul Dundon, Sedgwick’s general manager of workforce absence in Australia and founder of DHS. “Furthermore, it can prevent employees from becoming overworked and potentially disgruntled and stressed due to unplanned absenteeism.”

According to the report, the three most effective methods of managing absence are escalation to senior management, followed by return to work interviews and formal trigger review points to review absences. Managing and understanding employee absences are essential to creating a healthy and productive workplace where employees can thrive. By prioritising employees’ physical and mental health and wellbeing, especially in the aftermath of COVID-19, employers can create workplace cultures that value and support employees’ needs.

“Our study reveals that absenteeism not only affects individual productivity, but also costs businesses billions of dollars,” Dundon said. “If left unchecked and unmanaged, it can have adverse impacts across a business, as well as signal wider problems in workplace health, safety and culture.”

Surprisingly, almost all survey respondents (93%) said absenteeism was either lower or the same for employees working from home, but 80% of organisations believe COVID-19 led to increased absences. “Managing employee absenteeism should be a priority for any company, as it plays a major role in maintaining a productive organisation,” Dundon said. “Not only does it reduce an organisation’s overall absence rate, but it also helps businesses mitigate the associated costs.”

Sedgwick and DHS work with many of Australia’s leading employers to implement efficient absence management programs based on data, research and technologically advanced systems. Sedgwick is well-equipped to offer a combination of services covering any scenario where people are taking time away from work. Resources and solutions — such as the AbsenceAssist telehealth centre providing advice and support 24/7 and the AbsenceTrack system offering online absence reporting in real time, return to work interview tracking, and absence triggers and alerts — have helped businesses reduce their rates of employee injury and absenteeism.

For more information about the 2023 report and to download, visit Sedgwick’s absence management and wellbeing report site.

About Sedgwick

Sedgwick is a leading global provider of technology-enabled risk, benefits and integrated business solutions. The company provides a broad range of resources tailored to clients’ specific needs in casualty, property, marine, benefits, brand protection and other lines. At Sedgwick, caring counts; through the dedication and expertise of 33,000 colleagues across 80 countries, the company takes care of people and organizations by mitigating and reducing risks and losses, promoting health and productivity, protecting brand reputations, and containing costs that can impact performance. Sedgwick’s majority shareholder is The Carlyle Group; Stone Point Capital LLC, Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (CDPQ), Onex and other management investors are minority shareholders. For more, see sedgwick.com.

About DHS

Direct Health Solutions (DHS), a Sedgwick business, is a leading specialist provider of employer-based telehealth solutions and absence and injury management programs in Australia and is one of the largest tele-triage organisations in the country. DHS handles over 500,000 absence and injury calls per year and has a dedicated 24/7 telehealth centre driving its absence management programs. DHS works with many of Australia’s leading employers to help implement efficient absence management programs based on data, research and technologically advanced systems. DHS assists businesses in reducing employee absenteeism rates by an average of 20% to 40% using its nurse-led absence assist program and reducing injuries by up to 60% through its DHS InjuryAssist triage programs.

Baby steps toward greater certainty around parental leave

April 12, 2023

Share on LinkedIn Share on Facebook Share on X

Preparing for parenthood is no easy feat — and pregnancy is a significant undertaking. Expectant parents know the importance of researching family history and prenatal vitamins, but there are many aspects of the journey that are not as clear. Everyone’s experience is unique, and, for most people, navigating what comes next – not only the changes a baby brings, but also immediate questions about leave and health benefits – can be an unfamiliar and complicated process.

Short-term and long-term disability 

Under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), pregnancy is covered as a serious health condition. Mothers are entitled to up to 12 weeks of time away from work to prepare for and recover from delivery, which includes time away from work for prenatal visits. But the FMLA only provides job and benefits protection. What about income replacement? 

Some U.S. employers offer short-term disability (STD) benefits, and a handful of states provide state disability insurance (SDI) benefits for pregnancy. Typically, maternity leave eligibility will begin either when a healthcare provider states the mother can no longer work or approximately two weeks prior to the estimated delivery date. Coverage continues for six weeks following a normal delivery and 8 weeks following a C-section. 

Of course, complications can arise and derail plans — creating an added stressor for expectant parents. For instance, if a pregnant person’s due date is mid-March and she goes into labor early, she may need to transition to long-term disability (LTD) if the allotted time isn’t enough to recover fully. 

Job protection 

Typically, a “normal” pregnancy is not considered a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). However, if a complication should occur, the condition would likely rise to the level of a covered disability. Not to mention, in many states, reasonable accommodation of pregnancy-related conditions is required by law. So technically, leave could be provided as an accommodation if there is evidence you are able to return to work in the near future. 

Increasingly, employers are offering paid parental leave so that new mothers can bond with their child after they are born. Fathers are entitled to a similar benefit, but it varies by company whether this time is paid or unpaid. Some states offer job-protected leave beyond the 12 weeks FMLA guarantees. States across the U.S. continue to introduce and reevaluate laws for families. In June 2023, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act becomes effective. This act was designed to protect pregnant job applicants and employees. 

Healthcare coverage 

Healthcare coverage is important for a growing family. Babies need nine well-baby visits and 16 immunizations during the first year. These preventive services are generally included at no additional cost under most insurance plans. Having a baby is a qualifying event which allows the ability to change benefits outside of the open enrollment period. Most plans typically require changes to occur within 30-60 days of the event; coverage is retroactive to the child’s date of birth. After that, waiting until open enrollment is the only option.

At Sedgwick, taking care of people is at the heart of everything we do. Navigating the nuances of pregnancy and parental leave can be stressful. Whether an employee wants to understand their benefits or needs to take time off work, our disability and absence management teams work together to get them the care and resolution they deserve – listening to their concerns, acting with empathy, setting expectations and assisting at every turn. Because caring counts. 

> Learn more — read the flyer to learn more about our disability and absence management services.

Imagine the possibilities at the 2023 DMEC Compliance Conference

March 27, 2023

Share on LinkedIn Share on Facebook Share on X

The Disability Management Employer Coalition (DMEC) will host the 2023 DMEC FMLA/ADA Employer Compliance Conference March 27-30 in Orlando, Florida.

An array of stakeholders will begin a dialogue and exchange ideas about paid family and medical leave laws, hybrid workplace accommodations, DEI’s impact on leave programs, digital accessibility and more. Throughout the conference, Sedgwick’s experts will be at booth #200 and lead an educational session.

DEI’s impact on leave

Wednesday, March 29, 2023 | 8:15 AM – 9:15 AM

Brice Caswell, JD – director, product compliance and statutory administration, Sedgwick; Adam Morell, JD – AVP, product compliance, Sedgwick; and Melissa L. Kirkland – manager, leave administration, Darden

Rightfully so, diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) have become increasingly important concepts to improve and support company culture, but how can they impact leave? In this session, we’ll examine what DEI means and how embracing the principles of DEI strengthens compliance and eases administration of your company’s leave and accommodation programs for all employees.

Find us at booth #200 to connect with leaders throughout the conference, but until then…

Accounting for absenteeism: optimizing leave programs with a focus on care and engagement

March 15, 2023

Share on LinkedIn Share on Facebook Share on X

If 2022 was the year of returning to work, 2023 is about keeping workers engaged.

The global shift to remote work triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic may have shown us that employees can be productive without setting foot in an office, but both remote and hybrid models have given rise to new workplace trends like “quiet quitting” and increased absenteeism. In January 2022, approximately 4.2 million of the country’s 129.7 million employees worked part-time because of illnesses, injuries or medical problems—the second highest percentage since 1976, when data was first collected.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, productivity losses related to health problems cost U.S. employers $225.8 billion annually, or about $1,685 per employee. The CDC also notes that the indirect costs of absenteeism or reduced work output due to poor health may be several times higher than the medical costs associated with treatment or prevention.

At the same time, labor shortages and talent migration trends have increased employees expectations regarding the benefits they receive. For example, many are taking advantage of options like paid leave to preserve their health or the health of loved ones. Understanding the trends of your workforce and identifying barriers to employee well-being is critical for managing costs and promoting engagement and productivity.

Viewing employee benefits as employer obligation

It’s become more clear which positions require an in-office presence versus those that can be conducted remotely, but workers are still juggling a number of unprecedented factors that may affect performance or lead to absenteeism. This includes the effects of long COVID and a rise in anxiety- and stress-related disorders. With mental health front and center, now more than ever it’s important to ensure your leave and accommodation programs are designed to meet employee needs.

Mental health has become a leading driver of absenteeism. How employers choose to approach their support for employees’ mental health is a current key focus area in both talent recruitment and engagement. The Disability Management Employer Coalition (DMEC) reports that 66% of workers believe their employer has an obligation to help with their mental health needs, while 41% of employees feel their workplace offers no programs for mental health support. Fortunately, we have an idea where employers should begin: The American Psychological Association (APA) says that 41% of workers want flexible work hours, followed by 34% who say they want a workplace culture that respects time off.

In designing an effective benefits and leave program, employers must be mindful of worker expectations for mental and physical health support while adhering to increasing protections from states. By 2026, 15 states will add protections requiring paid family or medical leave, up from six in 2016.

A successful leave program means setting people up for success by encouraging staying at work or alleviating the stress of taking leave if it’s necessary. Oftentimes, employees will heal more quickly if they are working part-time compared to sitting at home. This will pay dividends to the employee and the employer.

Bridging the gap: solving for accommodation and flexibility

As we move from pandemic to endemic, many employers are bringing people back to the office. However, employers don’t have the level of discretion that they did pre-pandemic when it comes to employees’ accommodation requests to work from home.

Specifically, until the pandemic, courts allowed companies to call the shots when it came to the importance of onsite presence. A 2016 6th Circuit case (EEOC v. Ford Motor Company) did a good job of typifying this. In this case, the court said that “regular, in-person attendance is an essential function—and a prerequisite to essential functions—of most jobs.”

However, the first post-pandemic EEOC remote work case serves as a harbinger of things to come; it’s now harder for companies to require employees to come into the office without individually assessing an employee’s accommodation request. In EEOC v. ISS, Civil Action No. 1:21-CV-3708-SCJ-RDCEEOC, the employer shut down onsite operations four days per week in March of 2020 and brought employees back to the office a few months later. As employees were told to come back onsite, one employee, with a documented disability, requested to continue working from home two days per week. The company denied her request, and subsequently fired her. Rather than fight this decision in court, ISS settled the case for $47,500.

In that case (and with all accommodation requests) the employer should interactively dialogue with an employee and explore accommodations, including remote options. The reason for this is simple: at the onset of the pandemic, employees were forced to work from home – resulting in a “trial basis” for remote work. And, many companies experienced either the same, or increased, productivity.

Now, in the “after times,” if an employer wants to refuse a work-from-home accommodation request, they should be able to answer some questions: Why is in-person work necessary? What hardships would be created by a specific employee working from home? To substantiate the refusal to work from home, an employer should be prepared to explain that although remote work was required during the shutdown, it was not effective (e.g., problems with technology, decreased productivity, lost sales, etc.)

Flowing from this remote-work new world order: an increased employee expectation that they should be able to work how they want, when they want — and employers must be prepared. Many have responded by making hybrid work the norm – employees coming in a couple days a week, while working the balance of the week at home. This model, most likely, isn’t going away any time soon.

Another consideration: Long COVID. Millions will develop disabling long COVID, creating market conditions that are expected to have significant impact not just on the healthcare system, but employers and workforce absence vendors and insurers. With diagnosis of long COVID remaining inconsistent, and symptoms presenting differently for each individual, advisory bodies like the Disability Management Employer Coalition (DMEC) are developing a set of best practices and resources for employers to use as they manage long COVID cases and return employees to the workplace. This includes developing a consistent definition and timeline of long COVID for use in workplace accommodation and return to work discussions.

In addition, the DMEC has categorized long COVID into four phases and issued considerations for employers experiencing a high volume of cases or facing barriers to employee disclosure of symptoms. Their message to employers is simple: To avoid defaulting to leave as the employee’s only option, assess the situation using traditional stay-at-work absence management strategies while focusing on the individual’s functional and cognitive abilities.

By working together, employers and employees can identify solutions and support options that allow all to continue moving forward toward their shared mission.

The 4 building blocks of a strong return to work program

August 4, 2022

Share on LinkedIn Share on Facebook Share on X

By Adam Morell, JD, assistant vice president, product compliance

When an employee is unable to work due to an illness or injury, employers are responsible for creating a safe, supportive environment for them to return to. But it doesn’t have to be an “all or nothing” approach. There are several ways to take care of employees who are temporarily unable to do their assigned duties to the fullest. It starts with a strong return to work (RTW) program.

A return to work program allows organizations to bring employees with a short-term illness or injury back to the workplace before they are released to full duty. Generally, a return to work program is designed around temporary, modified, light or transitional duty options for an employee who is unable to complete their typical job functions. In some cases, a reduced work schedule may be temporarily offered as an employee regains endurance, increases their stamina or improves their mental health.

Employee benefits

Being at work can improve morale – not just for the injured or sick employee, but for their colleagues, as well. Studies show that when an employee stays at work or returns sooner, they recover more quickly than if they were sitting at home. Feeling included in something meaningful can go a long way for injured or sick employees during their recovery.

Employer benefits

Could access to a strong disability and return to work program increase employee loyalty? According to a recent study, over half believe that it could. Employers should consider the costs associated with recruiting and onboarding new talent. It could potentially be more than what it would cost to retain current talent. Not to mention, when an employee is working, rather than being on leave, an employer saves on the high costs associated with short term disability (STD) payments. Additionally, a strong RTW program has benefits from a time perspective. If an employee can return to work following a temporary, modified, light or transitional duty arrangement, the employer may not need to engage in the interactive dialogue that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires.

Building block #1: Define a shared purpose between both the employee and the employer: keeping employees at work or getting them back to the workplace as soon as safely possible.

Building block #2: Ensure managers, supervisors and leadership are policy proficient and understand their role in the RTW process — and hold them accountable. This will help avoid confusion among employees about how to take advantage of the organization’s RTW program should they need access to resources or accommodations.

Building block #3: All responsible departments, including human resources, risk management and workers’ compensation, must be partners in success. Promoting a collaborative atmosphere is essential.

Building block #4: Training and preparing managers, supervisors and leadership provides the tools to reduce litigation risk and ensure that the organization and employees receive the benefits that RTW programs and the ADA afford.

A purposeful return to work program can benefit employers and employees alike. As the largest provider of disability and absence management solutions in the U.S., Sedgwick offers a combination of services covering every possible time away from work scenario. Our clients count on us to support and improve the health and productivity of their workforce in a way that is cost-effective, efficient and compliant. To learn more about Sedgwick’s disability and absence solutions, visit our website.

Sedgwick to introduce new global productivity solutions

December 9, 2021

Share on LinkedIn Share on Facebook Share on X

Offerings designed to meet current needs of benefits, accident and health buyers

MEMPHIS, Tenn., Dec. 9, 2021 – Sedgwick, a leading global provider of technology-enabled risk, benefits and integrated business solutions, announced it will launch new and enhanced productivity and benefits services in international markets throughout 2022. With this initiative, Sedgwick aims to sharpen its focus on advocacy and client support at both the local and global level in direct response to new challenges that companies, carriers and consumers have faced over the past several years.

With its history of success in administering benefits solutions, the company will extend its international reach and offer global productivity solutions including absence management, workers’ compensation and travel claims administration, as well as travel-related medical assistance to new regions. Sedgwick will share information about each service as it becomes available regionally. These technology-backed solutions are built for modern and flexible benefits programs and accident and health policy coverages in order to address the evolution of the workplace and current needs of corporates, carriers, human resource teams, consumers and more.

“Our world has changed so rapidly that the challenges of even a few years ago are dramatically different from the challenges our clients and consumers face today. Sedgwick’s solutions must evolve and grow as well, leveraging customized technology tools and services for today’s benefits managers,” said Kimberly George, Sedgwick’s global head of product development and innovation. “Our expanded and new global solutions are built to streamline benefits programs for efficiency, flexibility, compliance and ease of use, all while ensuring our clients’ employees and consumers get the timely care they need.”

Sedgwick is committed to building collaborative and customized partnerships, scaling and redesigning programs to meet dynamic business needs, implementing agile processes, and the ongoing investment in technology in order to continuously improve the claims journey and enhance the client and consumer experience.

To learn more, visit sedgwick.com.