As human needs continue to evolve, it is essential for our systems to adapt accordingly. One perplexing question is who bears the cost of human work. Do the systems pay for human labor, or do humans contribute to the systems, which, in turn, pay for their work? From an economic perspective, it boils down to humans paying for humans to work through human-devised systems. We won’t delve into the idea of environments paying for humans’ expanding needs, as that discussion can be saved for another time.
The primary focus here is on how workers can be compensated during their leaves of absence, possibly with leave insurance, and how systems can remain financially stable during periods of absent workers, possibly through absence management.
To provide a clearer perspective, let’s consider two familiar scenarios. Vehicle insurance is obligatory for vehicle owners, but some might choose not to file claims to avoid the risk of increased premiums. Instead, they might pay for vehicle repairs out-of-pocket if it’s more cost-effective. However, for planned maintenance and repairs, they may opt for additional coverage like mechanical breakdown insurance or a vehicle service contract (extended warranty) if not already covered by a powertrain or bumper-to-bumper warranty.
Similarly, employees taking leaves of absence might carefully opt for unpaid leave if they can receive payments from their leave insurance companies without facing higher premium rates.
Another example involves interstate freeways with four lanes in each direction being reduced to two lanes due to year-round construction. This causes a slight increase in daily commute time for commuters but creates ongoing construction job opportunities. To offset the inconvenience, commuters could be offered toll discounts during the construction period, with the possibility of toll premiums after the freeway upgrades are completed.
Similarly, non-absent employees who take on extra workloads due to absent colleagues’ unpaid leaves of absence may also be compensated if financially solvent employers benefit from the cost-saving measures during those times.
Employees can take leaves of absence without leaving their jobs due to planned and unplanned absences. Firstly, they can plan their leaves well in advance, and employers can schedule these as allowable paid vacations. Secondly, if employees plan for more leaves than the allowed paid vacations, employers can set upper limits on allowable unpaid leaves, considering potential paid overwork for non-absent employees or payments for temporary locums.
Thirdly, while adhering to evolving leave insurance and absence management laws and bylaws, employees can autonomously decide the frequency and duration of their unpaid leaves based on the tolerable changed work environments upon their return, as per the conditions set by their solvent employers. Fourthly, appropriately paid premiums to leave insurance companies may financially support employees during their unpaid leaves, while their employers can utilize the saved funds to compensate overworking non-absent employees or hire temporary substitutes.
Finally, employees should have the flexibility to take any number of leaves of absence, if employers and non-absent employees do not bear the consequences of their absence. Similarly, employers should be able to welcome back absent employees without disruptions to other employees’ work environments, as long as the prior periods of absence are managed effectively.
Deepak Gupta is an anesthesiologist. Sarwan Kumar is an internal medicine physician.
