BAuA: Presenteeism Costs

What are presenteeism costs — and why can they exceed absenteeism costs according to BAuA?

Note: based on German occupational health research (BAuA). Its literature review GD 60 (285 studies) shows that several studies find the productivity loss from presenteeism — employees working while sick — to be higher than from absenteeism for ten common illnesses; the estimates vary widely, however. WHP programs that target only sick-leave days systematically underestimate the need for action.

BAuA GD 60: Presenteeism vs. Absenteeism

Metric	BAuA GD 60 Finding	WHP Implication
Cost ratio presenteeism : absenteeism	For ten illnesses, higher productivity loss from presenteeism than from absenteeism (several studies, wide range)	WHP must not use sick days as the only success metric
Study base	285 studies reviewed	Broad literature analysis — not a single isolated finding
Measuring presenteeism	Difficult — no uniform standard	Work Ability Index (WAI) or presenteeism scales recommended
Main drivers of presenteeism	Psychological strain, pain, exhaustion	GBPsych + stress management address these drivers directly
Invisibility of the problem	Presenteeism does not show up in sick-leave statistics	Employee surveys + productivity metrics are needed
Intervention approach	Reducing strain beats one-off measures	A structured WHP system, not isolated actions

What is presenteeism — and why can it cost more than absenteeism?

Presenteeism describes the phenomenon of employees being physically present at work but significantly less productive than usual due to illness, exhaustion, or psychological strain. Unlike absenteeism (sick days), presenteeism is invisible in sick-leave statistics.

The BAuA literature review GD 60 evaluated 285 studies. Several of them find that the productivity loss from presenteeism is higher than from absenteeism for ten illnesses — including depression, migraine, arthritis, and high blood pressure; however, cost estimates for the same illness vary widely between studies. Anyone who targets WHP only at sick-leave days underestimates the total damage — and therefore also the possible benefit of structured health promotion.

Concrete example: An employee with chronic back pain is absent 5 days/year (absenteeism = 5 × continued wage payment = measurable) — but is present 80 days at 60% capacity (presenteeism = 80 × 40% productivity loss = not captured in sick-leave statistics). Here, the presenteeism burden is clearly higher.

Which conditions cause the highest presenteeism?

The BAuA GD 60 analysis lists depression and mental illness among the conditions for which presenteeism causes a higher productivity loss than absenteeism. Depression, anxiety disorders, and burnout lead to especially severe performance losses despite formal attendance — precisely because these conditions affect cognition (concentration, decision-making, creativity) and are not immediately visible from the outside.

Also relevant: chronic pain conditions (back pain, migraines), states of exhaustion (not yet recognized as a formal sick-leave case), and premature return to work after sick leave without full recovery. This last point is especially relevant for WHP: returning to work too early after illness raises the risk of relapse and prolongs the overall burden.

For WHP practice, this means: GBPsych (Section 5 ArbSchG) is not just a sick-leave prevention measure — it addresses important drivers of presenteeism directly. Stress management, leadership culture, and decision latitude affect presenteeism as well as absenteeism.

Mental illness: high share of presenteeism (cognitive, not visible)
Chronic pain: back pain, migraines — a more widespread and underestimated factor
Early return after sick leave: relapse risk increases the presenteeism burden long-term
Exhaustion (before any sick-leave diagnosis): an early warning sign
GBPsych + stress management: direct interventions against the main drivers

How can presenteeism be measured and factored into the WHP ROI?

Presenteeism is measured through surveys — research uses various approaches such as the Work Ability Index (WAI), the Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (HPQ) or the Stanford Presenteeism Scale (SPS-6). The BAuA GD 60 identifies the main challenge in measuring presenteeism: there is no uniform measurement instrument. For WHP practice, what matters is that whichever instrument is chosen, it must be collected regularly and anonymously.

For your board report: combine sick-leave days (absenteeism) with employee survey data on work productivity. If a survey shows employees frequently report “I often work at half capacity,” that is your presenteeism measurement. A simple question works as an approximation: “On how many days in the last 4 weeks did you work while sick?”

Factoring it into WHP ROI: there is no fixed conversion — estimates vary widely between studies. One model cited in the literature (Iverson/Krause) splits health-related productivity loss roughly 35% to 65% between absenteeism and presenteeism. For the management report, this means: show sick days against the national average (German Federal Ministry of Health statistic KM1, 2025: 5.66%) as the measured part, and presenteeism as a survey value alongside it — not extrapolated. The study benchmark is 1:2.7 (according to the iga.Report, on average, with structured implementation); it describes the approach in general, not your result — the proof is your own measurement.

Related measures & topics

Key takeaways

Note: findings are based on German occupational health research (BAuA). BAuA GD 60 (285 studies): according to several studies, the productivity loss from presenteeism is higher than from absenteeism for ten illnesses.
Mental illnesses are among the conditions with a high share of presenteeism — GBPsych addresses the causes.
Presenteeism is invisible in sick-leave statistics — WHP needs employee surveys as a complement.
WHP benefits are underestimated when only sick-leave days are counted — presenteeism belongs in the report as a survey value.
GBPsych (Section 5 ArbSchG) addresses the main drivers of presenteeism directly.

Frequently asked questions

Why is presenteeism mentioned less often in the discussion than absenteeism?+

Because absenteeism is visible and measurable: sick-leave days show up in payroll, in sick-leave reports, in company audits. Presenteeism doesn't automatically show up anywhere. The BAuA GD 60 makes this explicit: this invisibility systematically leads companies to underestimate the true productivity damage caused by health impairments — and therefore to set WHP ROI expectations too low.

Can presenteeism be pursued as a legal claim?+

No — presenteeism is not a legal concept under German law. There is no statutory obligation to measure or report presenteeism. Its relevance is economic, not legal: companies that fail to address presenteeism lose productivity without a visible trigger. There are indirect legal touchpoints: the German psychosocial risk assessment requirement (GBPsych, per Section 5 ArbSchG) obligates employers to assess psychological strain — the main driver of presenteeism.

What is the difference between presenteeism and quiet quitting?+

Quiet quitting is a motivation problem — the employee deliberately does only the minimum. Presenteeism is a health problem — the employee wants to perform but cannot fully do so due to exhaustion, pain, or psychological strain. The measures differ: quiet quitting calls for engagement, leadership, and a sense of purpose. Presenteeism calls for reducing strain, WHP, and GBPsych.

What does the BAuA specifically recommend against presenteeism?+

The BAuA GD 60 recommends systemic approaches rather than isolated measures: (1) A strain analysis through GBPsych — to identify the main drivers. (2) Measures against psychological strain: stress management, leadership culture, job autonomy. (3) Promoting occupational rehabilitation: avoiding premature return after sick leave. (4) Establishing presenteeism as a WHP metric: regular surveys to complement sick-leave statistics.

Reduce Presenteeism and Absenteeism Together

EasyWHP brings GBPsych, BEM deadlines, and WHP documentation into one system — so you see absences and workloads together.

Try EasyWHP for Free Start the WHP Compliance Check

Sources

Last updated: 2026-06-27. Not legal or tax advice — have your specific case reviewed by a professional.

Psych Risk Assessment for SMEsDoes a small or mid-sized business (SME) have to conduct a risk assessment for psychological workload?GBPsych FinesViolating the GBPsych Requirement: What Fines Are at Stake — and How Can Employers Protect Themselves?iga.Report: WHP ROIDoes WHP really pay off? What iga.Report 40 shows about the ROI of workplace health promotion TK Health Report 2025What does the TK Health Report 2025 say — and what does it mean for employers?Measuring WHP Success: KPIs and ROIHow do I measure the success of my WHP program — and how do I calculate ROI for leadership?