GridThe group of the group risk sector industry, noted that more than a third (36%) of employers finance the support of a newly injured or sick personnel member on a case -by -case basis. Although it may seem generous and very suitable, the grid warns that it is not a practical approach and can cause a certain number of challenges.
Katharine Moxham, Grid spokesperson, said: “Each employer naturally hopes that their staff will be able to return to work and total productivity as quickly as possible after an absence. However, it is not always reality. Employers are likely to undergo prolonged and potentially expensive support obligations, often without a final termination if they finance support on a case -by -case basis. ”
Four key problems when employers finance the support of employees on a case -by -case basis:
- It is based on the employer knowing that a staff member has a problem in the first place – something that employees are not always willing to disclose.
- It can be expensive. It is not unknown for employers to pay hundreds of thousands of books to support their staff in this way.
- It is difficult to plan and budget, because the number of employees requiring support can vary each year and raises the question of what is happening after exhaustion of the annual budget.
- It creates the risk that different employees receive significantly different levels of support, in turn, exposes the company to potential criticism or a legal challenge to make an unequal manner.
When asked on which scene the employers provide support for a new disease or a new injury, a quarter (26%) said the offer after a certain number of weeks of absence, as indicated in business policy. A fifth (20%) provides support from the first day and 19% after a number of months of absence, as indicated in business policy. Only 12% said their goal was to focus on preventive care to prevent employees from becoming sick in the first place.
Preventive support for government's agenda
Preventive care is a key objective of Keep Britain's work examination, an initiative led by Sir Charlie Mayfield for the British government, so that employers who already offer this type of support can be ahead of the curve when the results and recommendations of the examination are shared later in the year.
There is a wide range of employee service options – such as the protection of group income (GIP) – which meet the needs of employers and employees by offering complete and fair support. GIP not only provides critical support to the point of injury or illness, but also offers significant value thanks to preventive measures and continuous support, meeting the financial needs of employees and their health and their well-being.
Katharine Moxham concluded: “Employers should adopt a wide approach to employee support, recognizing that preventive, immediate and permanent interventions are interconnected rather than isolated efforts. Although these forms of support can Being financed directly, taking advantage of the wide range of service options for available employees is a more financially and complete solution. Organizations that incorporate support through the benefits of employees will also be better placed to meet the needs of their staff and will probably be better prepared for all policies or recommendations resulting from the work of Great Britain. »»
