Running through the daily list of Google alerts looking for something interesting to post about is getting a bit dreary. Everything I pull up has something to do with how bad the economy is. I'm not saying that in some instances people (you financial types know who I'm talking about) don't deserve to be slapped down a bit for reaching just a hair past what should have been acceptable and intelligent, but the conversations around the idea of bailouts is bothering me. In some instances I can see where a bailout makes sense, but the idea that companies and people are no longer accountable for what I would have thought were some basic working truths, is getting commonplace. I thought of this when I read an article (link below) about employee absenteeism. I don't know about you, but when I get paid by a company - I kinda figure I should earn my money and show up.
To illustrate this I point you to this article in the Dallas Morning News today.
The article highlights the cost of employee absenteeism and how to influence employee behavior relating to taking days off - not for vacation - but for illness, etc. As we all know, when an employee is absent there is a cost and it can add up.
The Good
J.C. Penney has a process whereby a customer service rep who normally talks to customers will staff a "PowerLine", an employee hot-line for reporting when an employee will be absent. The person on the phone will determine the nature of the absence and forward the appropriate paperwork. They are not directing the conversation to mitigate the absences - simply assisting the person taking the time off with the correct process for a given situation. But the big, big, big AHA that comes into play is that this group of phone reps on the PowerLine follow up to see how the folks who are absent are doing. Not to push them to come back - but simply to check in and see if they need something and when they plan on returning. To quote the J.C. Penney benefits manager...
"I've found that when someone goes out on disability, that person undergoes a significant event in their life, and if no one checks on them to see how they're doing, they could stay out longer than necessary," said Jim Cuva, Penney's benefit manager. "It's letting them know we care."
Wow. Caring about sick employees is good business - who would have thunk it? I think this is inspired in its simplicity and genius in its application. I'm guessing most employees that have to take a leave of absence are more willing to get back to work if they think someone actually cares how they are doing. I'm betting this reduces the number of "extra" days that sick people take at the end of their absences - saving J.C. Penney a boat load of money.
The Bad
Contrast that approach to the one that the Dallas Independent School District used for their 2006/2007 school year. They spent nearly $12 million on substitute teachers, and the average teacher (their words - what about above-average teachers? - I'm guessing they meant "on average" each teacher) was absent 10 days. Their solution - pay people to come to work! What a novel idea.
The plan is designed as follows: If a teacher has only one absence in the year, the district matches 100 percent of the teacher's contribution to a retirement account, up to $1,000 a year. Teachers out two days in the year can get a 75 percent match, up to $700. Those with three to five absences earn a 50 percent match, up to $500 a year.
Here's how this is going to go... first of all - every teacher will now take one day off for illness, then each teacher will mentally do the math and decide how much the additional contribution is worth and miss the number of days needed to get to the number in their mind. In effect, this program creates a way to calculate acceptable absence. Not only that - linking their absence to a reward that in some cases could be 40 years down the road is insane (remember temporal discounting anyone?)
Next they may actually have salaries and benefits for those that show up. Wait.... they already do that.
