The employers cry out against work absenteeism. With recent reports, it warns of an “unsustainable” cost and demands urgent measures. CCOO denounces an interested manipulation of data and the dangerous recipe of blaming the worker for their illness and privatizing health control. We want to dismantle lies and focus on the degradation of working conditions and the collapse of the health system.
The employers consider “absenteeism” any absence, including the exercise of fundamental rights such as union credit, death, maternity or vacation leave. But reality is stubborn: absenteeism without legal coverage is anecdotal and is around 1%. The vast majority of hours not worked correspond to situations protected by law, mainly temporary disability prescribed by a doctor. To talk about absenteeism here is to question the right to health and rest.
The employers say that when the economy is going well, casualties increase, insinuating “abuse” on the part of the workers. The reading of CCOO is radically opposite: it is not whim, it is presentism. In times of crisis, the fear of losing their jobs forces thousands of people to go to work sick. The Quality and Working Conditions Survey shows that 51.3% of those surveyed went to work sick at least one day. This forced assistance worsens health, makes pathologies chronic and increases the risk of infections and accidents.
One of the star arguments is the increase in the duration and costs of sick leave. It should be remembered that these costs are assumed first by the workers (the first three days of sick leave do not usually receive benefits). Catalonia is one of the communities with the highest incidence of sick leave, certainly, but with a shorter duration than the Spanish average. This suggests reincorporations without being fully recovered, causing relapses. The bottleneck is in public health: at the end of 2025, more than 93,000 people were waiting for a trauma visit, with an average wait of 178 days. Blaming the patient for the inefficiency of the system due to lack of investment is cynicism.
The “solution” proposed by the employers is to grant mutual insurance companies – private associations of businessmen – the power to issue medical discharges for common contingencies. That’s putting the fox to guard the henhouse. Experience shows that mutual insurance companies act with economic criteria, forcing premature discharges, referring work-related illnesses to the public system and putting health at risk to reduce business costs.
The employers cry over the costs of absenteeism, but remain silent about their responsibility for illnesses. Osteomuscular and mental pathologies (main causes of sick leave) are directly related to the organization of work and the aging of staff. Investment in prevention is minimal: only 19.86% of companies have a specific ergonomic evaluation, and only 5.55% have evaluated psychosocial risks.
Thus, the drift of the Department of Health of the Generalitat is serious. He must decide if he is on the side of public health or if he prefers to act as a boss for the bosses, applying a medicine that treats the patient as a suspect. At CCOO we are clear: health is neither played nor marketed.
Belén López Sánchez is the secretary general of CCOO of Catalonia
