Back to the overview
May 2, 2008 - Richard Donkin
Mervyn Davies, chairman of Standard Chartered bank, said at a recent London seminar that he regarded employee well being as one of the most pressing issues facing employers as they approach the end of the decade.
Governments of all western economies are grappling with spiralling health spending that historically has been focused on health treatments typically concentrated in the final few years of people's lives.
Employers too are sharing the burden of ill health through absenteeism. For this reason increasing numbers of employers are abandoning a passive approach to health and adopting instead more interventionists policies aimed at promoting fitness and health issues, thereby reducing costly absenteeism.
The importance of health management in the workplace was highlighted in the Adecco Institute's 2007 Demographic Fitness Survey (http://www.adeccoinstitute.com/research2007.htm).
The survey found that less than a fifth of companies across Europe were offering sports facilities for their employees. Less than 10 per cent overall were offering dietary advice although 76 per cent of companies were offering medical check ups with Italy leading the way among the larger European nations.
But check-ups can vary enormously, ranging from a quick visit to the company doctor to the kind of detailed examination often offered only to the most senior executives.
The problem with comprehensive health screening is that it is expensive and time consuming. Even when senior people have the option to undertake screening, many do not make time in their diaries to visit clinics.
But measuring your blood pressure - one of the most important indicators of potential heart problems - takes very little time. The equipment is relatively inexpensive, simple to use and the readings can be easily explained. Even in the smallest companies, blood pressure equipment and heart monitors could be stored with any member of staff competent in first aid who could be given responsibility (with some additional pay in recognition of their expertise) for helping staff to monitor themselves.
One of the most important health contributions a company can make to its workforce is in health education. Why is cholesterol important? What is the difference between good cholesterol and bad cholesterol? What are triglycerides? Why is it helpful to know your body mass index? If chief executives don't know the answer to these questions, how can they expect their staff to be taking more care of their health?
Why should companies and employees be worrying about health, you may ask? Isn't it something for the family doctor and hospitals?
The Royal Mail found the answer to this question in the UK when it launched a series of management interventions on employee health, including weekly discussions with staff and back-to-work interviews after people had been absent through sickness.
Research undertaken by the London School of Economics found that the new health policies had saved the Royal Mail as much as £227 million over three years by reducing absence across its 180,000 strong workforce from 7 per cent to just under 5 per cent between 2004 and 2007.
Workplace health management, therefore, is not some kind of worthy intervention, it's all about good business, feeding through to the bottom line.
The best way for human resources professionals to approach workplace health is to link the monitoring of health to metrics that might be included in an annual report. Yet very few companies across Europe are reporting on the health of their workforces.
In the UK a campaign launched by the charity, Business in the Community, is seeking to address this issue with a target of persuading at least 75 per cent of Britain's largest public companies (those in the FTSE 100) to report on series of health-related metrics by 2011. Currently just seven companies of the FTSE 100 are including employee health indicators in their annual reporting.
One of the most obvious metrics is the annual rate of employee absenteeism. But there are other ways to learn more about the health of your staff. One way is to carry out an annual survey asking people how many times they have visited the doctor that year plus a few questions about specific health problems.
If companies already carry out staff surveys, these health questions can be added to the list. This sort of questioning enables a company to get an idea of the kind of health issues facing its staff. If heart disease is an issue it might begin to promote exercise and fitness regimes. If a survey exposes high levels of stress there may be a need to look at workloads and staff ratios.
The point I'm making is that workplace health should not be approached in a piecemeal fashion but in an integrated, managed way that understands the benefits of health promotion. In fact I'm not sure how helpful it is to think about workplace or occupational health. Health is a lifestyle as much as a workplace issue.
Nevertheless it is in the interests of employers to be doing their bit. Think of it another way: as the demographic trends begin to squeeze the market for recruits, are people more or less likely to be attracted to a company that seems to care about the health of its employees?
Back to the overview