This year’s Absence Management survey published by the CIPD reveals that stress has taken over from back problems as the top cause for both manual and non-manual workers. Nearly four in ten of employers say that absence due to mental health problems has gone up in the last year.
There appears to be a clear link between the rise in mental health problems and job security. The survey reports that employers who are planning redundancies are significantly more likely to report an increase in stress-related absence (51 percent) than other employers (32 percent).
Unsurprisingly perhaps given the significant budget cuts and the anticipated redundancies in much of the public sector, job insecurity is a more common cause of stress in the public sector this year compared with last year and is higher than in the private or non-profit sectors.
I wonder how many people absent from work due to stress have turned to their short-term income protection or mortgage payment protection policy as a financial lifeline, only to find their condition is excluded under the terms and conditions of their policy.
Given one of the common criticisms laid at the door of payment protection insurance by its detractors is that stress or back complaints are often not covered, there could be a fair number of disappointed policyholders.
Quite how many policies now contain such exclusions is hard to say, however there are more - dare I say - ‘enlightened’ policies on the market such as those provided by Assurant Intermediary.
These policies provide cover for any condition of a mental or nervous origin including stress, anxiety or depression as well as backache and related conditions.
These policies generally require that the policyholder has to have been referred to and receive treatment from an appropriate medical specialist on the recommendation of their doctor for both mental health and back related issues, and that the specialist in the condition certifies that it prevents the policyholder from working.
In addition, claims for back problems usually require supporting medical evidence such as an MRI or x-ray. As the policyholder would have to provide such evidence to their employer, it’s hardly an onerous requirement.
In light of the CIPD’s findings, I would encourage intermediaries to check what accident and sickness cover their existing clients have in place.
If the policy excludes mental health conditions, it might be wise to advise them to consider looking at a different policy that provides a broader level of cover.
