EAPs are now moving away from this type of measuring and relying more on outcome-based information. This is often done in the form of pre- and post-testing. People using the service are asked how they feel before and after, and how the service has helped them. Although individual results are never disclosed, once there is enough data, it’s pooled and given to employers. Employers also receive, or should receive, utilization reports so that they know how well the service is being used and can ensure that the EAP goals and expectations are still aligned with the workplace issues.
Hébert says an EAP is a good start toward controlling the costs of group insurance, and reducing absenteeism and the occurrence and duration of disability in the workplace. But, he notes, “a total health management approach with strong education components should be taken” in order to really see an increase in productivity and profitability. “One of the benefits that people overlook so often with EAPs is the communication programs that increase awareness around factors that contribute to health issues,” Seward adds.
Understand the Bigger Picture
EAPs are key components in addressing workplace issues and promoting the health and well-being of employees, but they are not the only tools. “I think that some employers think if they have one, they have everything covered,” says Gilbert.
The goal of an EAP is to support employees with issues that may arise in their working or personal lives—be it physical health, mental health, relationship problems or financial issues—on a short-term basis. EAPs are not set up as, nor are they intended to be, long-term treatment resources.
However, Gilbert says that with the “ongoing challenges to the healthcare system, there has been an offloading of the provision of mental healthcare back to the private sector,” and it is expected that EAPs will pick up the slack. He adds, “This can be particularly true in small or remote communities with a lack of public mental health resources.” While EAPs have certainly evolved, they’re not designed or equipped to address serious mental health issues.
And, as much as EAPs are not for long-term care, they aren’t enforcers either. If someone goes to the EAP provider and says he or she is being harassed at work, a counsellor can help the client work through any issues the harassment is causing and advise the client to report the incident to HR—but the counsellor can’t report the incident directly. EAPs are voluntary and confidential. Although reporting the incident to HR would help the client, it breaks the program’s confidentiality policies.
The same applies to someone with an addiction or mental health issue. The counsellor can suggest treatment outside of the EAP and follow up to see if the employee has acted on the advice, but the counsellor can’t force the person to go into treatment, and the employer can’t be informed that the employee is struggling with the issue—even if it’s in the employee’s best interest.
For some employers, lack of two-way communication and soft performance measurements make them leery of investing significant amounts of time, effort and money into an EAP. But, providers say to those employers, consider the costs of doing nothing.
“We are the first line of defence against those more serious costs,” says Cayley. “It’s a good time in our industry to help, lead and assist employers around some critical workplace issues.”
April Scott-Clarke is assistant editor at Benefits Canada. april.scottclarke@rci.rogers.com
> click here for a PDF version of this article
© Copyright 2008 Rogers Publishing Ltd. This article first appeared in the July 2008 edition of BENEFITS CANADA magazine.
