STAFF ABSENCES REPORT

Occupational and Non-Occupational Incidents

HUMAN RESOURCES SERVICES
MARCH 2004

Why We Analyze Data Analysing absence data is important for two reasons: • The process enables an organization to determine whether or not it has an absence problem It can help the organization to understand what is driving absenteeism • .

percentage lost time is the better overall measure of absenteeism. Days lost per employee. however. For this reason. Days lost per employee = total days lost number of employees Percentage lost time = number of days lost through absence x 100 (# of employees) x (# working days) Technically.Assessing the Magnitude of Absenteeism Days lost per employee and percentage lost time are the two metrics used to gain an overall understanding of the magnitude of the problem. has an advantage in terms of simplicity of calculation. it is the metric most commonly used by organizations to assess absenteeism .

Assessing the Nature of Absenteeism Two other metrics are important in understanding the nature of absenteeism: • • Incidence or Frequency Duration .

Absence Incident An absence incident is any continuous absence from commencement until return to work e. Absence incidence is related to: • • • • • Psychosocial factors Job satisfaction Workplace factors Organizational factors Health risk factors . Likewise. a consecutive 12-day absence is also one incident. a 1 day absence is 1 incident.g.

e. i. the longer the absence the more severe the health issue.Absence Duration Absence duration is the total number of days absent from work per absence incident. modified work accommodation Sentinel effect Sick leave and disability plan designs . Absence duration is related to: • • • • • • Timely reporting and follow-up Quality medical care Rigorous case management Responsive. Generally. duration is considered to be a measure of severity.

. According to Statistics Canada (Perspectives on Labour and Income. 13 No. while not serving as a perfect source of comparison. at least provide a crude benchmark against which a school board can compare its employee absenteeism levels with those of the education sector in general. 04) Education Services employees lost 6. Winter 2002.8 days of work in 2001 due solely to their own illness or disability. Catalogue 75-001. Vol.BENCHMARKING ABSENTEEISM MAGNITUDE Benchmarking Against Statistics Canada Statistics Canada’s absenteeism statistics.

secondary teachers.88 6. In the school boards that have participated in the needs assessment. The following chart illustrates the average number of days lost per employee per year due to personal illness in the other boards.15 11.82 .54 9.BENCHMARKING ABSENTEEISM MAGNITUDE Benchmarking Against Other School Boards Benchmark data has been compiled for the four largest employee groups: elementary teachers. educational assistants and custodians. Days Lost per Employee Per Year Due to Personal Illness Elementary Teacher Secondary Teacher Educational Assistants Custodians 7. these four groups represent 85-90% of the employee population.

STAFF ABSENCES REPORT List of Employee Groups Assoc of Business Professional Non-Union Board Office Managers. Resource Secondary Teachers Department Heads. Attendance. Classroom. Education Assistants. Audio-Visual Tech. Secondary Secretaries. Attendance Princ & Vice Principals CPCO Members – Principals and Vice Principals Custodial Maintenance Custodial and Maintanance Employees CUPE 10 Month Elementary School Secretaries. Speech & Lang. Coordinators. ESL. Guidance. SPST. Chaplains CUPE 12 Month Professional Support . SPST. Head Secretaries. Union Board Office Elementary Teachers Classroom. Administrators Assoc Prof Student Services Personnel Psycho-Ed Consultants. Analysts. Supervisors. Social Workers. Librarians. Resource . Coordinators. FSL.Computer Support Technicians.

00 8.00 0.26 2.00 3.00 1.75 8.00 7.02 7.VP's Custodial Maintenance CUPE 10 Month 1.00 8.00 6.00 9.00 Assoc Business Prof Assoc Prof Student Support Principals .18 Average Sick Days 5.01 3.37 5.Average Sick Days / Employee 2001-2002 School Year 10.40 CUPE 12 Month Elementary Teachers Secondary Teachers Employee Group .13 8.00 4.00 2.

00 7.65 Employee Group .06 2.00 8.00 1.00 6.14 4.46 8.26 9.00 5.25 8.00 Assoc Business Prof Assoc Prof Student Support Principals .79 7.00 9.00 0.00 3.Average Sick Days / Employee 2002-2003 School Year 10.00 2.31 Average Sick Days 5.00 4.VP's Custodial Maintenance CUPE 10 Month CUPE 12 Month Elementary Teachers Secondary Teachers 2.

0 0 2.Wo r k p l a c e S a f e t y a n d I n s u r a n c e B o a r d ( WS I B ) 1 2. 5 % r e ma i n o n WS I B 2 0 01 -2 00 2 2 0 02 -20 0 3 . 0 0 1 0. 0 0 0. 5 % o f E mp l o y e e s o n WS I B h a v e R e t u r n e d t o Wo r k 1 . 0 0 4. 0 0 6. 0 0 8. 0 0 1 99 9 -20 0 0 2 00 0 -20 01 Sc hool Ye ar s Note : 9 8 .

Wo r k p l a c e S a f e t y a n d I n s u r a n c e B o a r d ( WS I B ) b y E mp l o y e e Gr o u p 35 30 25 As s oc o f B u s i n e s s P r o f C u s t od i a l M a i n t e na n c e 20 15 C UP E 1 0 M on t h C UP E 1 2 M on t h E l e me nt a r y T e a c he r s 10 Se c o nd a r y T e a c h e r s 5 0 1 99 9 -20 00 2 0 00 -20 0 1 2 00 1 -20 02 2 0 02 -2 00 3 Sc hool Ye ar s .

00 0.00 10.00 1999-2000 2000-2001 School Years Note: 65% of Em ployees on STD have Returned to Work 23% of Em ployees on STD continued into Long Term Disability 12% of Em ployees on STD becam e Inactive Early Intervention Program w as applied to 15% in 2001-2002 and 28% in 2002-2003 2001-2002 2002-2003 .00 20.00 40.00 60.00 Average Days Lost / Incident 50.00 30.Short Term Disability (STD) 70.

00 0.Short Term Disability (STD) by Employee Group 120.00 CUPE 10 Month CUPE 12 Month 60.00 Custodial-Maintenance Elementary Teachers Secondary Teachers 40.00 20.00 1999-2000 2000-2001 School Years 2001-2002 2002-2003 .00 Average Lost Days / Incident 80.00 100.

Long Term Disability (LTD) 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1999-2000 2000-2001 School Years 2001-2002 2002-2003 Number of Incidents .