Bradford factor and absenteeism

[FunkyGibbon]

Anybody got any experience of this and how it is sensibly applied in the real world.

My boss has told me that my department has an "awful" BF and is amazed that anything gets done - it would appear from the BFs that most of my staff are absent most of the time.

Which is bozwellox 'cause I can see them from where I sit.

cheers

FG

[V8 EOL - Rich]

FunkyGibbon said:

My boss

Was/is he a merchant banker?

Perhaps you could tell him about the 'Bingley Factor' for Presenteeism that took the number of people employed X working hours in a year x 1,000,000. I wonder which would be better!

Seriously though, I cant help, sorry. I would try and find out what the average is for the industry and type of work you are in and compare.

[Timja]

The BF is a way of highlighting disruptive persistent short-term absence as opposed to more manageable occasional longer spells of absence. The Bradford scores are a way of identifying individuals with serious absence and patterns that should be looked into more closely.

Calcualtion of BF

S x S x D = points score

S=number of occasions of absence in last 52 weeks.
D=number of days absence in last 52 weeks.

E.g. an employee with a total of 10 days absence in a 52 week rolling period, the Bradford score can vary enormously, depending on the nu,ber of occasions involved.

1 ten-day absence: 1x1x10 = 10
2 five-day absences: 2x2x10 = 40
5 two-day absences: 5x5x10 = 250
10 one day absences: 10x10x10 = 1000

The number of points that trigger an absence review as your boss is asking will vary widely between employers, but I would say over a year would range between 75-350 points.

Of course bearing in mind that each employees case may be different and take into account things such as disability etc..

Hope this helps,

Tim.

[FunkyGibbon]

cheers Tim.

My concern is that we already know that our HR's track record of keeping personnel data accurate is very poor. Now they are quoting statistics from possibly suspect data that may have some serious implications.

I just hope I get to see my staff's data so I can sort out any issues (not that I believe there are any as I run quite a tight ship) rather than senior bods wielding any axes prematurely.

FG

[Timja]

Obviously, the BF is only any good if the data going in is ok, so may be worth checking HR has the correct info!

I believe it is more to do with unauthorised absence and sickness which as a manager you probably have a good feel for who is in when and who pulls lots of sickies.

Also worth looking at what a particular employees record has been like in previous years. We are often more flexible with people who have had no time off in 3 years, then need to take 15 days in 1 year etc.

We always used to pay for sick days, but some people seemed to be having quite a few, so now we have restricted the number of days we pay for and then they are not paid for days off. Sure that must focus the mind when they start receiving less pay!

Good luck.