What do I speak of, well it is an unfair method of measuring Employee short term sickness.
The formula is simple which is why HR software companies and HR departments love it so.
Number of spells of absence multiplied by itself then multiplied by the total days off in a 12 month period - (SxSxD)
For example to show how unfair it is:
- Jack has five days off twice in a 12 month period which gives him a total of: 40 - (10 days off)
- Jill has two days five times in a 12 month period which give her a total of: 250 - (10 days off)
- Bob has one day ten times in a 12 month period which gives him a total of: 1000 - (10 days off)
The "formula" is weighted against the Employee and it makes some extremely basic assumptions which have never been true ever:
- All sickness is the same
- All people are the same
- All businesses are the same
It is also linked to disciplinary procedures, apparently a score of over 600 is considered is a sacking offense. How many Bob's have been fired I wonder.
Companies that use this will say it is a fair measure because it applied to all Employees but that is like saying Racial Cleansing is fair because you apply it to everyone using the measure of a particular race. Unfair measures stay unfair no matter how many people you apply it to.
I have read number of forums whereby people are complaining about the use of this formula and from what I can tell they have legitimate issues. Some people would say they have an ax to grind but not from what I have read so far. One lady was caught because her medical procedure was cancelled at the last minute and she had re-book another day's sick leave although I personally would have just booked a day's holiday. If I have a sick day it is because I am ill but that's just me.
Companies that use this will say it is a fair measure because it applied to all Employees but that is like saying Racial Cleansing is fair because you apply it to everyone using the measure of a particular race. Unfair measures stay unfair no matter how many people you apply it to.
I have read number of forums whereby people are complaining about the use of this formula and from what I can tell they have legitimate issues. Some people would say they have an ax to grind but not from what I have read so far. One lady was caught because her medical procedure was cancelled at the last minute and she had re-book another day's sick leave although I personally would have just booked a day's holiday. If I have a sick day it is because I am ill but that's just me.
What I also find extremely curious is that since this formula has been in use for last thirty odd years nobody in Academia has written a paper supporting its use or building upon the original work probably because they cannot find it. They have not debunked it either though I suspect Conspiracy Theorists would point at that and say our Universities are bought and paid for by Big Business.
Another curiosity is the lack of legal cases that mentions it, I found only one see link below from 2012.
You would of thought there would be more perhaps Ron Tocknell's comments below have been heeded or perhaps companies have enough common sense to use other methods of firing their staff.
Ron Tocknell a health professional has highlighted the Dark Side of the Formula used within the Bradford Factor, He said “Where the Bradford Factor Can be counter-productive”, “We shouldn't attend work if we have a viral infection, if we have had a bout of diarrhoea..... The company has recently implemented the Bradford factor.... Absenteeism has noticeably dropped. However, sickness among those we are supposed to be protecting has increased and, although absenteeism has reduced, it would appear that staff sickness has actually increased as so many staff members are constantly complaining about feeling ill. Staff feel pressured into coming into work when they really should be at home”
This is clearly an example of the formula being mis-used. To tell staff that they will be penalised for many short term absences in an environment where they are required to miss work under circumstances that may have the rest of us ‘grinning and bearing it’, is irresponsible management. “Employees are as unique as the organisations they work for. If the Bradford Factor is used to its full potential, as a disciplinary tool that will automatically trigger a warning, a final warning and ultimately dismissal then it is flawed, unethical and, in the opinion of this commentator, an employment tribunal waiting to happen.”
The only thing the Bradford Factor truly creates is Stress in the Employees and Stress is a vicious circle. It makes people unpredictable, they break diets, drink more and/or smoke more basically do things which can increase the possibility of getting ill. Employees are forced to come into the work because they do not want to increase their Bradford score which Stresses them out further. According to the links below:
- Work related stress has climbed to its highest rate in 16 years, according the latest batch of statistics published by the HSE.
- 526,000 workers suffering from work-related stress, depression or anxiety (new or long-standing) in 2016/17
- 12.5 million working days lost due to work-related stress, depression or anxiety in 2016/17
Whilst I cannot blame this mythical beast of a formula on all the Stress in the workplace it is definitely a factor!
The article below is a little bit more in depth than my brief posting above but that was two years ago and nobody has shone a light on the blatant abuse of Employee rights since then.
If anyone finds evidence of scientific, mathematical and/or statistical analysis of this formula please leave a link in the comments. I would be very interested to read it.
