Absenteeism in the workplace
BY GRETCHEN ANKER
ABSENTEEISM refers to frequent or habitual absence from work without valid or approved reasons. While occasional absence is inevitable, persistent absenteeism disrupts operations, reduces productivity, and places additional strain on colleagues who must cover for absent employees.
Absenteeism can stem from illness, stress, burnout, poor morale, lack of engagement, personal challenges, or ineffective management practices. At times, it may signal deeper organisational issues such as unsafe working conditions, unclear expectations, or unresolved conflict.
Effective management requires a balanced approach.
Employers should:
• Monitor attendance patterns.
• Communicate expectations clearly.
• Address issues early through supportive engagement rather than punitive measures.
• Foster a healthy work environment, promote employee well-being, and offer reasonable flexibility. Such measures can significantly reduce absenteeism and improve workplace morale.
In Litha Malimba v Sun International Management Limited (JR1594/18, 23 January 2021), the employee was absent for one day without authorisation and failed to inform his employer of his whereabouts or expected return. He was already on a final written warning for absenteeism. The Labour Court upheld his dismissal, emphasising that absenteeism requires fault and that repeated disregard for workplace rules can justify termination.
The Court found that:
• A clear rule existed requiring employees to notify management before the start of a shift.
• The employee was aware of the rule, which had been consistently applied. The employee had followed the rule in the past.
• The sanction was appropriate given the offence, as the court had regard to the impact the employee’s absence has on the employer.
The judgment noted that “The Applicant had clearly failed to display candour regarding his absenteeism and conjured improbable versions as to the reasons he was absent. He deliberately chose not to call management when he knew that he would not report for duty. Clearly, the applicant had scant consideration for the employer’s needs in that regard.”
This case underscores the importance of consistent rule enforcement and the principle that absenteeism, when wilful, can justify dismissal.
The Consolidated Plastic Industry Main Collective Agreement sets binding rules for employers and employees, including:
• Ordinary hours, overtime, sick leave, family responsibility leave, and parental leave.
• Mandatory reporting procedures for sick leave and absences.
• Disciplinary action for failure to provide valid medical certificates or notice.
• CCMA and bargaining council procedures for resolving disputes, including absenteeism-related dismissals.
The Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (“LRA”) provides the overarching framework. Section 185 of the LRA states that employees have the right not to be unfairly dismissed. Schedule 8 (Code of Good Practice: Dismissal) is clear that dismissal must be substantively and procedurally fair. Employers must follow progressive discipline (warnings → hearing → dismissal). In this instance, absenteeism may justify dismissal if repeated and unjustified.
Plastics industry practice
In terms of industry practice, most plastics companies require employees to notify their line manager before the start of a shift if they intend to be absent and to provide proof of the reason. Progressive discipline is generally applied for such transgressions, although dismissal may be considered appropriate for first-time offenders who are absent for more than 3–5 consecutive days, depending on the provisions of the company’s disciplinary code.
Practical tips for employers to manage absenteeism
• Set clear rules: Ensure attendance and reporting procedures are written into contracts, policies, and induction training.
• Track attendance patterns: Use registers or digital systems to identify recurring trends (e.g., absences on Mondays, Fridays, or around public holidays).
• Apply progressive discipline: Start with verbal and written warnings coupled with counselling, escalate to hearings, and only dismiss when repeated misconduct or serious absence occurs.
• Differentiate misconduct vs. incapacity: Treat willful absenteeism as misconduct. Where absence is due to illness or incapacity, follow incapacity procedures.
• Consistency is key: Apply rules fairly across the workforce to avoid claims of unfair discrimination.
Conclusion
Consistent attendance is a shared responsibility. Employees are expected to report for duty reliably and follow company procedures when they cannot. Employers, in turn, must enforce rules fairly and consistently, while also recognising that absenteeism can sometimes be linked to health, stress, or personal challenges. By combining firm discipline with reasonable support, organisations can reduce absenteeism, maintain productivity, and build a workplace culture that is both accountable and sustainable.
