Occupational Health Services

The introduction of the Fit for Work service is no substitute for Occupational Health Service (OHS) involvement of the kind that many employers have used at their own initiative for many years. As the CIPD 2014 survey noted, OHS is commonly reported to be among organisations’ most effective methods for managing long-term absence.

Three-quarters of organisations in the 2014 CIPD survey (96% in the public sector) were using OHS in their approach to absence management. Most use an external provider, although a third of the public sector employers provided in-house services. The point at which employees are referred varies. For two-fifths of organisations it depends on the condition but a similar proportion say it is at the company’s discretion. Smaller proportions refer employees when triggered by a certain number of days of continuous or non-continuous absence.

Compared with Fit for Work, the TUC says existing OHS providers are likely to have a better knowledge of the workplace; close links with the employer; be far more comprehensive; cover a wider range of services such as sickness monitoring, health surveillance, and advice on prevention; and provide important information to the employer on the health of their workforce and possible problems in the workplace: “There is no reason why employers should reduce the level of occupational health support because of the introduction of Fit for Work”, the TUC says.