The Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment reports that one third of absenteeism due to illness is caused by work-related psychological complaints. This makes Psychosocial Workload (“PSA”) occupational disease number 1 in our country. How did it come to this? The Ministry cites high workload and unwanted behavior from colleagues as causes.
Next to this, I see two causes that also seem to play an important role. Firstly, private problems with the employee (divorce, death, debts) causing the employee to experience stress and perform less well. It can be useful and sometimes even necessary (for example in the case of an addiction) to offer a helping hand and to explore with the employee how to solve these problems.
A remarkable offshoot of this tree is the increasing number of burnouts and the long-term absenteeism resulting from it. According to the “Insurance Medical Protocol for Overstrain,” if properly treated and supervised, about 95 percent of people who experience burnout or are overstrained can function normally again within six months (except in cases of personality disorders or serious complications). The employee must then subject themselves to activating and structuring guidance. My tip for employers and employees in this situation is to seek this activating, structuring guidance for the employee and not to settle for less.
The second cause which in my opinion contributes to the high PSA absenteeism is the legal system of the obligation to continue paying wages during illness for 104 weeks. In practice, labor disputes often lead to reporting sick. From that moment, a ritual dance begins with visits to the occupational health service, second opinions, mediation. Gradually, the employee loses contact with the workplace, and the complaints no longer decrease. The relationships become disturbed and there is no way back.
The purpose of the continued payment obligation during illness is, of course, that employer and employee resolve the conflict together. In practice, this proves difficult and there is (too much) passivity. An active approach by the employer to resolve the conflict, and by the employee to address their performance issues, combined with a quick resumption of work, should in my opinion be able to significantly reduce absenteeism due to a labor conflict. In fact, with such an active approach, it may become clear within a few weeks whether the employee can resume work or whether a termination arrangement must be made.
However, at this moment the employee has insufficient incentive to cooperate with this, since the Sickness Benefits Act classifies cooperating with a termination of the employment contract as culpable unemployment, and the employer is required to continue paying wages during illness for 104 weeks. In my opinion, this system is due for revision.
http://www.st-ab.nl/wetwiaor1rvpa-03.htm
