The most convenient answer to the question of why there is a big discrepancy between average sick leave taken by employees in the private and the public sectors – with the latter being far higher – is that there is rampant abuse by public sector employees.
However, the answer may be more complex than that. The public sector is not composed of homogenous workplaces. Certainly, there is an element of clear abuse, in the same way that there is in the private sector, yet there may be other reasons which merit further study.
Sick leave could be a result of stress caused by boredom (yes, boredom can be stressful to some) in areas where employees have considerable idle time. In such cases, employees may feel that it does not really make a difference to the functioning of the department if they do not turn up for work.
At the other extreme, there are certainly pockets in the public sector where employees have to take on more than they can handle, and some of them collapse under the strain.
Another reason is that employees may lack motivation to attend work due to personal characteristics – which may be why they were attracted to the public sector in the first place – or due to circumstantial factors. These can include vindictive transfers, discriminatory treatment, being unfairly overstepped in promotions, and a belief that any initiative which they might take would be futile or at times even work against them. This leads to inertia, which is fertile ground for sick leave abuse.
The compact salary structure in the public sector, where the highest paid earn just four times the lowest grade, also kills initiative, particularly at professional and middle management grades. The Minister of Education has acknowledged that there is a need to increase teachers’ salaries, for example.
This is how the public service has operated during successive administrations and it is not easy to change such an ingrained culture when there is an evident lack of control
Managers may not feel empowered to take action against abusive practices, as any decision they take may be overruled by higher authorities and could even lead to a negative backlash in their regard. I know of clear cases where this has happened.
Other people may have been appointed to managerial posts for reasons unrelated to merit and may be incompetent to occupy these positions. How can they be expected to curb abusive practices and earn respect from their subordinates if their appointment was abusive in itself?
This is how the public service has operated during successive administrations and it is not easy to change such an ingrained culture when there is an evident lack of control. Thank God that there are many public servants who, through personal initiative, do their job diligently, at times at personal sacrifice. In many cases, they are also the ones who end up taking the added workload that frequently arises from the negligence of their colleagues.
What surprises me is that among those who are so outspoken about so-called precarious work practices in the private sector, few take up the same issues with government – the country’s largest employer – where the taking of sick leave may be partially due to poor management or as a silent protest against unfair treatment which employees may be afraid to complain about.
Some may argue that there are many people in the public sector who are social cases and may take more sick leave due to their personal situation. I doubt this, as in most cases in the private sector, people with disability, for example, take less sick leave than the average.
On top of this, it is known that there are doctors who issue certificates too easily. However, it is unreasonable to expect the long-term solution to sick leave abuse to originate from the doctors. It is ultimately a management challenge and from my experience, companies that empower, motivate and control their employees are less likely to suffer from abusive practices. Where they exist, such practices are concentrated in a small part of the labour force.
I am certain that if one looked at the complete scenario, the Malta Employers’ Association proposal for a waiting day – which could be paid by the government – is not as outlandish as it was made out to be. There is a need for all stakeholders to pool their collective energies to find solutions that are practical and equitable to all parties involved.
Joseph Farrugia is director general of the Malta Employers’ Association.