Policy Check

Recent concerns about Influenza A(N1H1) have caused organizations to revisit their pandemic planning policies. The effects of the pandemics of 1918, 1957 and 1968—and SARS in 2003—have been well documented.

Typically, the number of virus cases peaks in two or more waves, lasting about six to eight weeks each and separated by three to nine months. Vaccines are rarely available until after the first wave takes its toll. Unprepared organizations will have little time to react to the impact of employee absences, affected suppliers and reduced consumer demand before the next wave begins.

The SARS epidemic in Toronto resulted in thousands being quarantined, hundreds becoming ill and 44 reported deaths. The World Bank has estimated a global economic impact of US$800 billion for the next pandemic. So why did a 2008 study by GlaxoSmithKline find that while more than 80% of large Canadian companies were concerned about the impact of a flu pandemic on their businesses, half of them had no pandemic plan? Of those that did have a plan, only 1% had the recommended 15 key components, such as minimizing direct interaction between employees.

Survival of the Fittest
In a presentation on disaster management, Amin Mawani, a professor with the Schulich School of Business at York University in Toronto, noted that organizational survival in a pandemic means being prepared, which provides a competitive advantage. This is particularly important when considering the sometimes-hidden demons of a crisis. For example, if the company’s leaders are the first to fall ill, no one may be available to make decisions. Also, standard business interruption insurance does not usually cover incidents where damage has not occurred, leaving organizations affected by absenteeism without an economic safety net.

Mawani also reminds us that the real drivers of revenue and profit in most corporations are the employees. Yet data collected by Higgins, Duxbury and Lyons highlight the fact that less than half of the Canadians who work for larger employers have access to progressive family-friendly benefits that provide flexibility and support, and few have access to telework programs to help them do their jobs at home.

If employees are worried about being exposed to infectious colleagues who are forced to come to work because of a lack of policy, absenteeism rates will likely increase. Research on hospital healthcare workers by Irvin, Cindrich, Patterson and Southall shows that when employees question the safety of the workplace in a pandemic, for many, not even triple pay will entice them to come to work.

In a study of a North Carolina Influenza B outbreak a few years ago, only 39 of the 218 adults surveyed (18%) had occupations that permitted them to work from home. Data suggest that those who have access to appropriate family-friendly benefits are better able to cope with work/life conflict and are less likely to take time off work than those without this support.

Where to Go for Help
Advice to help organizations start the planning process is available through many channels. For example, the Canadian Public Health Association and the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety have developed tool kits on pandemic planning, which are posted on their websites.

A good place to start is to gather the people in primary functions within the organization into an Emergency Preparation Committee to assess the threats that a pandemic might pose and identify what resources must be in place to address them. It’s also important to plan how business operations will be maintained under different scenarios and to put in place a sound process for helping staff to cope through education and personal planning. Having a list of employees to call on if others are incapacitated is crucial.

Employees are more likely to stick around if they feel their organizations are caring communities with policies that help them to effectively balance the demands of work and family. Implementing sound work/life balance policies now, and testing and re-testing them for effectiveness, will make the difference between the organizations that sink or swim when—and not if—the time comes.

Gillian Joseph is owner/director of Clear Pane Research Services.
info@clearpane.ca

> click here for a PDF version of this article

© Copyright 2009 Rogers Publishing Ltd. This article first appeared in the July 2009 edition of BENEFITS CANADA magazine.