Three pro tips for employers: How to set healthy boundaries around absenteeism

A new study by Techleap and Panteia on bottlenecks in the labour market and the social security system paints a clear picture: Dutch startups and scaleups are running into a system that can’t keep up with their growth. The two-year continued salary payment during illness and the rigid dismissal laws are cited as major barriers to growth and investment decisions.

But what we also see in practice is that employers often trap themselves unnecessarily. They create policies that are stricter, heavier, or more generous than needed. Sometimes out of good intentions, sometimes out of habit. And that ends up magnifying the very risks they already struggle with.

Part of the solution therefore doesn’t lie solely with policymakers — employers themselves have more influence than they think. Especially when it comes to absenteeism, organisations can take far more ownership than is often assumed. And that matters, because everyone who deals with absenteeism knows: not every sick report feels equally clear-cut. Sometimes personal issues play a role, sometimes conflict, sometimes motivation, and sometimes misuse.

So the real question becomes: how do you navigate this wisely? In a way that’s fair to your employee and to the team that keeps things running?

Below are three pro tips from the field — insights that the startups and scaleups interviewed in the Techleap study can also benefit from.

1. Stop using “calling in sick” as the default

We need to take a more critical look at the words we use. People don’t always report illness; they report absence. And absence can have many causes: stress, personal problems, conflict, motivation — and yes, sometimes misuse.

By putting everything under the label “sick,” you create a culture in which illness becomes the standard explanation. Everything that is not illness stays invisible and unspoken. Yet these are often exactly the issues that are solvable — and usually much faster and more effectively.

Pro tip: Start talking about absence rather than illness, and normalise the fact that multiple causes can exist. It makes conversations more open, honest, and productive.

2. Create a separate conflict policy

One of the biggest blind spots in organisations is conflict being “wrapped” as illness. Many employers have a solid absenteeism policy, but no conflict policy — even though conflict often contributes to absence or becomes entangled with it.

Follow the STECR and NVAB guidelines and split your policy:

• one process for illness
• one process for conflict

Also make clear agreements with your occupational physician about lead times, interventions, and cooling-off periods. This prevents conflicts from disappearing under the umbrella of illness and allows you to deploy the right interventions sooner — such as mediation. It keeps conflicts from slipping under the radar and prevents unnecessary absenteeism.

Pro tip: Don’t treat conflict as a footnote of absenteeism. It’s a separate issue that requires its own rules and interventions.

3. Stop treating your occupational health provider like an insurance policy

Many organisations use their occupational health provider the way you use insurance: you hope you won’t need it and you’d rather not look at it. But that’s a missed opportunity.

Your occupational health provider is not a checkbox requirement — it’s a critical partner in preventing long-term absenteeism. So make clear agreements about how they work and when they step in.

People who are genuinely ill? Leave them in peace as much as possible in the early stages — it supports recovery.

Signs of potentially long-term absence? Ask for fast action and personalised, appropriate care. This can prevent escalation and unnecessary harm.

Pro tip: Make your occupational health provider your extension. Actively request absenteeism data, push for early interventions, and ensure employees have access to the right support.

Absenteeism is about more than percentages

The Techleap study shows that the system does not always move with the reality of fast-growing companies. But that does not mean employers are powerless.

Absenteeism is about more than percentages, rules, and costs. It’s about ownership, culture, and clear processes.

As an employer, you have both the responsibility and the ability to strike the right balance: truly supporting employees who are genuinely ill, without being naive toward those who use the system strategically. That combination makes your organisation fairer, more agile, and more future-proof.