Skip to main content

Table 2 Change estimates used within the Workplace Health Savings Calculator

From: Development of the Workplace Health Savings Calculator: a practical tool to measure economic impact from reduced absenteeism and staff turnover in workplace health promotion

Change estimate Source Measurement Assumption
Absenteeism (% decrease) PWC 2008 [21]a Average 30–40 % reduction, based on 45/55 case studies The other 10 studies did not measure the perceived benefits of AB, so average holds for all that do
Staff turnover (replacement cost) ABS 2008 [26] 75–150 % salary as replacement cost
Industry types: engineering, construction, professional services (e.g.: finance, admin), public service, resources (e.g.: agriculture, mining) retail and entertainment
75 % a conservative assumption used in place of conclusive evidence
Staff turnover (% decrease) PWC 2008 [21] 10–25 % decrease in staff turnover, based on 18/55 case studies.
On average this retention range was 20–25 % (from 4 industry categories: finance, utilities, business service, and other)
That 37 case studies did not report on turnover, average based on the 18 studies that did. Average holds as an average for all
  1. aThese were extracted from the source review [21] of 55 case studies that had varying durations of implementation. It has been shown in the literature that benefits from reduced absenteeism and staff turnover may not be realised before 2 and 5 years after implementation of a successful workplace health promotion program [22]. We wish to reiterate an assumption outlined in this study that the calculated potential annual savings is a long-term benefit