Short term sickness absences were already stretching employers before the changes to Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) in April 2026. Since the pandemic, there was a rise in short, intermittent absences, driven by changes in health behaviours, attitudes to work, expectations around flexibility and wellbeing.
Recent changes to SSP, introduced through the Employment Rights Act, are adding further complexity. At Strategi Solutions, we are already seeing a noticeable trend across our clients and the wider market, a rise in reported short‑term absences and increasing concern about how to manage them effectively.
In this blog, I share my perspective on the impact of these SSP changes and what businesses can do to regain control of absence levels while minimising cost and risk.
Understanding the impact of the SSP changes
Under the new rules, SSP is now payable from the first day of sickness, removing the previous three unpaid waiting days. At the same time, the lower earnings limit has been abolished, extending entitlement to the lowest paid workers.
In practical terms, this means:
- More absences will be paid
- More employees will qualify for SSP
- Sick pay will more closely reflect actual earnings
For employers, this means, higher SSP costs and greater exposure to frequent, short-term absence.
Previously, many short absences went unreported or managed informally. With SSP now payable from day one, those informal approaches quickly become liabilities. Absences that would once have gone unnoticed are now being formally recorded, giving employers better visibility but also exposing weaknesses in existing absence management processes.
This shift can make it feel as though absence levels are rising sharply. In reality, it is often a combination of increased reporting and a behavioural change, where employees may feel less financial pressure to attend work when unwell. Without clear controls, that behaviour can quickly become embedded.
Why short‑term absence presents a greater challenge
Short‑term absence is significantly harder to manage than long‑term absence. It is more frequent, more fragmented, and often sits in a grey area between genuine illness, wellbeing issues and disengagement.
Without clear, consistently applied processes, short‑term absence quickly becomes inconsistent. Managers may handle similar cases differently, overlook patterns, or delay conversations due to discomfort or lack of confidence.
This inconsistency does not just increase SSP costs. It also exposes employers to:
- Allegations of unfair treatment
- Discrimination claims
- Employee relations disputes
Where similar absences are handled differently across teams, the legal and reputational risks rise sharply.
Adjusting processes for the changes
One of the key issues we are seeing is that while employers understand the pay change, they are less clear on how it should shape their absence management approach. Policies and practices have not always evolved to reflect the new reality, leaving managers unsure how to respond to more frequent short‑term absence.
So what should businesses focus on?
First, absence must be recorded and monitored from day one. Accurate data allows organisations to spot patterns early, such as repeated absences on certain days, trends within teams, or emerging wellbeing concerns.
Second, return to work conversations need to be strengthened. Even after short absences, these discussions are crucial. They demonstrate that attendance matters, provide insight into underlying issues, and allow reasonable adjustments to be explored before absence becomes habitual. In our experience, early intervention is one of the most effective ways to prevent repeated absence.
Finally, absence management policies should be reviewed to ensure triggers, thresholds and escalation processes remain fair, consistent and fit for purpose in light of the SSP changes.
The importance of management training
Process alone will not solve this issue. One of the biggest risk factors in people policy execution is manager capability.
Where managers lack confidence, training or authority, even well‑designed policies fail in practice. Difficult conversations are avoided, warning signs are missed, and absence levels drift upwards.
Without clear guidance and confident managers, employers lose control of attendance and simultaneously increase their exposure to claims. In contrast, organisations that invest in manager training see more consistent decision‑making, earlier interventions and better outcomes for both employees and the business.
This is where many employers benefit from additional support, whether through policy reviews, manager training, or using an impartial third party for welfare and absence discussions. In some cases, access to wellbeing and mental health support can also address root causes before absence escalates.
Looking ahead
Doing nothing is no longer a neutral option. With SSP payable from day one and entitlement expanded, the financial and operational impact of unmanaged short‑term absence will continue to grow.
Employers that act now by strengthening processes, investing in manager capability and taking a consistent, proactive approach will be far better placed to manage absence fairly, control costs and protect employee relations in the long term.
If you’d like support with absence management or broader HR needs, please feel free to drop me an email, Megan Oliver, HR Services Manager, at megan.oliver@strategisolutions.co.uk.
