Remote and hybrid working have made it possible for employees to answer emails, attend virtual meetings and complete urgent tasks without entering the workplace, even when they are unwell. Researchers say this flexibility has made the traditional understanding of working while sick increasingly outdated.
A paper published in Health Psychology Research proposes a broader definition of “presenteeism”, the practice of continuing to work despite experiencing physical or mental health problems.
The research was conducted by Sir Cary Cooper, professor at the University of Manchester, Professor Luo Lu of National Taiwan University and Professor Shu-Fang Kao of Soochow University.
Working from home does not mean switching off
Presenteeism has traditionally been associated with employees physically attending their workplace despite being ill. Remote working, however, means employees can now continue working from home by checking messages, joining meetings or dealing with urgent requests.
According to the researchers, being physically absent from the workplace does not necessarily mean an employee has stopped working.
Digital technology can also make it more difficult to disconnect. Employees may feel pressure to remain available through email and workplace messaging platforms, including outside their normal working hours.
The paper argues that this “always-on” culture can blur the boundary between work and recovery, particularly when employees are already experiencing health problems.
A broader definition of presenteeism
The researchers propose that presenteeism should be assessed through three separate dimensions: health, location and level of engagement.
Health refers to whether an employee is experiencing a physical or mental health problem. Location considers whether the person is working remotely or on-site, while engagement examines whether they are completing a full working day or reducing their hours and workload.
This approach goes beyond simply asking whether someone attended work while sick. It considers where they worked, the nature of their health problem and how much work they completed.
The authors also argue that greater attention should be paid to mental health-related presenteeism, as previous research has largely focused on physical illness.
Eight ways of working while unwell
Combining the three dimensions produces eight possible forms of presenteeism.
An employee with a physical illness might attend the workplace and complete a normal working day. Another employee could remain at home and respond only to urgent requests.
The same distinction applies to people experiencing anxiety, depression or other mental health difficulties. They may work either remotely or on-site while maintaining their usual workload or reducing their level of engagement.
According to the researchers, this framework could help identify when working while unwell is damaging and when flexible arrangements may allow an employee to protect their health while meeting essential responsibilities.
Not all employees have the same options
The paper also highlights inequalities in access to remote and flexible working.
Some employees can adjust their location, hours or workload when they are ill. Others, particularly those whose jobs require a physical presence, may have little choice but to attend their workplace or take the day off entirely.
This means that the ability to manage illness through flexible working arrangements is not available equally across the workforce.
Making flexibility work for employees
The researchers say working while sick should not automatically be treated as either positive or negative. Its effects depend on the employee’s health, working conditions, workload and level of control over their arrangements.
Employers should therefore consider whether staff can temporarily reduce their hours or responsibilities when unwell, rather than expecting them to maintain their usual performance from home.
The paper concludes that organisations must balance operational needs with employee wellbeing as technology continues to reshape working life. Flexibility should help employees protect their health, not create an expectation that they must always remain available.
Source: Phys.org
