Skip to comments.
Go Ahead, Call In Sick -- It Prevents 'Presenteeism'
Los Angeles Times ^
| 11/29/05
| Molly Selvin
Posted on 11/29/2005 12:09:27 PM PST by bloggodocio
Employers have long worried about workers who call in sick so they can surf or watch TV. Now some experts say companies should pay attention to the flip side of that problem: employees who show up feverish and sneezing.
They even have a word for this behavior, which can hurt productivity just as absenteeism does: "presenteeism."
Though the worry isn't new, it has gained momentum with fears of a bird-flu pandemic. Should the disease mutate into a strain that passes from person to person, public health officials say, it could thrive in offices.
"I wish employers would make it possible for sick employees to stay home," said Dr. Jonathan Fielding, public health director for Los Angeles County. "Certainly from a public health standpoint that makes sense."
Yeah, right, many workers say. In the real world, calling in sick is often not an option.
"We're in an environment where they just need the bodies to keep things going," said Candace Greene, 35, who oversees substitute teachers for the Los Angeles Unified School District. And if you do take a sick day, "you pay for it in attitude when you come back the next day."
Even highly paid employees may not get any slack, precisely because they are highly paid, said Dana Cephas, a Los Angeles labor and employment lawyer.
"A partner can't call a client and say, 'I can't get what you want today, because my key attorney is sick,' " he said. "Employers say, 'We're paying you $100,000 or $200,000 you don't get sick.' "
But many workers cannot afford to call in sick. The federal Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that 42% of all workers in private industry are not entitled to sick time.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: soccermomsinhr
To: bloggodocio
Presenteeism does happen. In my former job with a Dutch company which I won't name but starts with a P, we were told that we had only a few 'occurrences' which means not being at work, before we would be summarily terminated. It didn't matter if you were really sick or injured. You just had to be there or else.
I came to work several days with fever, coughing and sneezing. Even though I had weeks of unused sick time. I didn't feel sorry for them either. It's their stupid policy.
2
posted on
11/29/2005 12:14:59 PM PST
by
Sender
(Team Infidel USA)
To: bloggodocio
I think most people goto work even if they are sick. My company like most values attendance almost above all else. Screw em infect the whole place. So they get what they deserve in terms of lost productivity.
On the flipside I need to save that sick day to go fishing. ;-)
3
posted on
11/29/2005 12:15:16 PM PST
by
Smogger
To: bloggodocio
My current employer would rather that I call in sick (which I rarely do) than come in sick and get everyone else sick. It's a small company. The company I used to work for had an even more sensible policy. They simply rolled all time off -- vacation, personal, sick, and floating holidays -- into a single paid time off category. Take lots of sick days? You have less vacation days. Aren't sick very often? As a bonus, you get more vacation days. The only silly part about it was that it was "use it or lose it" which created a rush to take time off at the end of the year. Other than that, I think it was the most sensible policy I've seen.
To: Question_Assumptions
I had a similar system at an old employer of mine, I got two weeks of vaction and one week of "personal days" Personal days could be used to call in sick if you were sick, or you could use them by scheduling time off ahead of time for a "mental health day" or other reason.
It worked well, people only called in sick if they really were sick.
5
posted on
11/29/2005 12:46:48 PM PST
by
GreenLanternCorps
(8-3 Marvin and Carson rule!!! Who Dey! Who Dey! Who Dey Think Gonna Beat Dem Bengals!!!)
To: bloggodocio
My company's proposed solution is to give each employee a bottle of disinfectant hand cleaner for his/her desk!
I kid you not!
6
posted on
11/29/2005 12:50:58 PM PST
by
Redleg Duke
(9/11 - "WE WILL NEVER FORGET!")
To: Question_Assumptions
I had that once, with a little better. Time off was accumulated based upon a percentage of time worked, maybe 7.5%. If you worked overtime, you got more time off. And when you accumulated too much time (like 160 hrs) they would buy you down to 80 at your hourly rate.
7
posted on
11/29/2005 12:56:40 PM PST
by
thackney
(life is fragile, handle with prayer)
To: Redleg Duke
A friend who works at a local college used to order disinfectant as an office supply. They stopped approving it, on the grounds that it promoted resistant bacteria. She wound up getting sick shortly after they cut her off...
To: Smogger
I think most people goto work even if they are sick. My company like most values attendance almost above all else. Screw em infect the whole place. So they get what they deserve in terms of lost productivity. On the flipside I need to save that sick day to go fishing.
With me, there's no way I'm staying home to deal with the kids when I'm sick - my wife thinks my sick days are her vacation days :-)
9
posted on
11/29/2005 1:23:54 PM PST
by
jaj_dad
To: bloggodocio
"A partner can't call a client and say, 'I can't get what you want today, because my key attorney is sick,' " The partner doesn't have a phone at home?
10
posted on
11/29/2005 1:30:07 PM PST
by
AppyPappy
(If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson