UK businesses are facing a mounting financial burden as long-term sickness absence now costs an average of £20,735 per employee, according to new research from employee benefits provider MetLife UK.
The figure reflects both direct and indirect costs, including lost productivity, temporary staff cover, training expenses, administrative time, and the strain placed on remaining team members.
Even short-term sickness absences are proving costly, with the average impact per employee reported at £13,800. The study, which surveyed 1,000 UK business owners, HR directors, and senior decision-makers, also revealed that employees took an average of 6.38 days off due to illness in the past 12 months.
While many employers attempt to calculate the cost of absence, there is no single approach. Forty-three percent of businesses said they measure the financial impact as a loss in productivity, while 41% focused on average daily absence costs, such as wages. A further 39% cited reduced business efficiency, and 35% noted a direct hit to overall profitability. A fifth of employers pointed to lost commercial opportunities due to staff sickness, and 16% admitted they do not currently calculate the cost of sickness absence at all.
Charlotte O’Brien, Head of Employee Benefits at MetLife UK, warned that these figures highlight the importance of early intervention to manage the financial and operational impact of sickness absence. “Acting quickly allows employers to minimise time off, reduce the risk of long-term ill health, and ensure employees feel genuinely supported and cared for,” she said.
O’Brien emphasised the importance of proactive, preventative services, such as access to virtual GPs, employee assistance programmes (EAPs), and counselling services, which can help tackle health concerns before they become serious. “Left unmanaged, these issues can lead to prolonged absence, higher costs, and greater disruption for the business,” she added.
According to MetLife, early intervention is highly effective, with 96% of employees reporting a positive outcome when support is provided at an early stage of absence. The company’s Group Income Protection (GIP) policy is designed not just to offer financial protection, but also to deliver additional wellbeing services. These include access to gamified health and wellness tools, rehabilitation and return-to-work support, and sustained engagement with preventative care.
O’Brien said that integrating wellbeing into employee benefits makes commercial as well as ethical sense. “A GIP policy that puts wellbeing first helps keep work working. Early support not only helps individuals recover faster but also reduces the wider business impact and builds a culture where people feel genuinely cared for,” she said.
As businesses continue to navigate a challenging economic landscape, MetLife’s research underscores the need for employers to treat employee wellbeing as a strategic priority. The cost of doing nothing is now too high to ignore—and the benefits of timely support are both human and financial.
