TORONTO, September 11, 2025 Sedgwick, the world’s leading risk and claims administration partner is accelerating its North American strategy with the expansion of delegated authority services in Canada.

Sedgwick’s North American strategy builds on the success of the company’s work with Lloyd’s of London-backed MGAs, cover holders, and syndicates as an approved delegated claims administrator. Sedgwick has responded to hundreds of thousands of Lloyd’s related losses, leveraging experts in claims management, general adjusting, surveying, forensic accounting, environmental and fire investigations, and major and complex losses. 

“The significant success of Sedgwick’s TPA work with Lloyd’s has driven cross border partnerships and global opportunities, and we’re pleased to bring these additional capabilities in Canada,” said Michael J. Alwyn, President of Sedgwick in Canada. “Clients in Canada, and globally, will be able to utilize local, national, and global expertise, and see the true impact of Sedgwick’s North American strategy.” 

“Sedgwick has proven itself in its work with Lloyd’s of London and its ability to deliver industry-leading service across work streams,” said Paul Burns, Vice President, Sedgwick Delegated Authority, Canada. “This expertise is now available across North America, and clients will see that expectations are exceeded for the portfolio’s financial performance and service levels.” 

Sedgwick Canada’s Lloyd’s clients will have access to a team of dedicated, in-house claims experts averaging more than 25 years of account management and claims handling experience, customizable data feeds and enhanced Management Information (MI) reporting capabilities supported by an established company with the size and experience to meet any need.

Sedgwick is the leading third-party administrator (TPA) with delegated authority, and has expertly managed claims for insurers, syndicates, brokers, and associations for more than half a century. The company’s solutions have earned the coveted SSAE 16 (SOC 1) Type II certification, giving all parties the confidence that they, and their customers, are in full compliance with regulatory requirements. This position in delegated authority has been further supported by Sedgwick’s development of innovative mobile technology to power virtual adjusting services, which have proven to expedite claims processes and lower costs. In turn, Sedgwick has delivered accurate, timely, and transparent bordereau tailored to all financial reporting needs.

About Sedgwick

Sedgwick is the world’s leading risk and claims administration partner, helping clients thrive by navigating the unexpected. The company’s expertise, combined with the most advanced AI-enabled technology available, sets the standard for solutions in claims administration, loss adjusting, benefits administration and product recall. With over 33,000 colleagues and 10,000 clients across 80 countries, Sedgwick provides unmatched perspective, caring that counts, and solutions for the rapidly changing and complex risk landscape. Sedgwick’s majority shareholder is The Carlyle Group; Stone Point Capital LLC, Altas Partners, CDPQ, Onex and other management investors are minority shareholders. For more, see sedgwick.com.

Listeners will gain a deeper understanding of the challenges companies face today—from rising enforcement actions to the increasing complexity of global supply chains. Chris shares how regulatory shifts, cost pressures, and supplier changes are creating new risks for manufacturers and distributors. He also highlights the critical importance of speed, transparency, and empathy in managing recalls effectively and protecting brand reputation.

The conversation touches on real-world examples, including recent civil penalties and even prison sentences for executives who mishandled product safety issues. Chris emphasizes the need for proactive planning, robust recall strategies, and ongoing training to mitigate risks before they escalate.

Kimberly and Chris also explore Sedgwick’s comprehensive approach to recall readiness and execution, including mock simulations, stakeholder collaboration, and the value of Sedgwick’s Recall Index – a powerful tool for tracking trends and identifying emerging risks across industries and regions.

Whether you’re in compliance, legal, quality assurance, or executive leadership, this episode offers essential insights to help safeguard your organization in today’s high-stakes environment.

 Click the link to listen to the full episode and learn how your company can stay ahead of the curve in product safety and brand protection.

Historical legal statuses and liability

The classification system used to determine legal status originated from English Common Law and divided guests on the property into three categories for the purpose of establishing a degree of duty owed to them:  

1. Invitees
   • Example: Customers of a store.
   • Duty owed: The highest duty of care, which would include having regular inspections of the premise and remediation of any potential dangers, or warnings of potential dangers if they cannot be remediated immediately
2. Licensees
   • Example: Social guests or service-related vendors employed by other companies who provide services on the owned property
   • Duty Owed: Moderate duty to warn of known dangers that are not easily seen, but there is no duty to inspect
3. Trespassers
   • Example: Burglars or anyone on the premises past permitted hours
   • Duty Owed: Least amount of duty, typically only to refrain from intentional harm

When an adjuster is handling a premise liability claim it can be critical to understand the injured party’s status on the property.  Unfortunately, an individual’s status on the property can change multiple times during a single visit, thereby creating complexity in the investigation. 

For instance, a visitor to a local retail establishment would be considered an invitee, to whom the highest degree of case is owed, while they are browsing the public areas of the premises. However, should they venture into areas designated as “Employees Only” or “Private,” their status could change to trespasser, which carries the least amount of duty. 

It becomes even more complicated when the trespasser is a minor child. Some states have adopted the doctrine of “attractive nuisance” to move away from the rigidity of duties owed to trespassers and allow for the introduction of reasonableness in deciding negligence. The trick, however, is trying to assess what is “reasonable.”

Negligence and shifting standards

Because of these challenges, there is a shift away from these common law practices and towards a “reasonable person standard” when assessing negligence. As of the date of this writing, at least 9 states have abolished the use of all 3 status types (AK, HI, IL, IA, LA, NV, NH, NY, NC), and another 14 states have abolished invitee and licensee statuses but retained the use of Trespasser (FL, KS, ME, MD, KS, MA, NE, NM, ND, OR, RI, TN, WI, WY). At least one other state, Georgia, has retained the use of legal status but changed the level of proof from “clear and convincing evidence of foreseeability” to “reasonably should have known” thereby coming more into alignment with states shifting away from the traditional common law practices and towards a reasonable person standard.  

The implications for claims professionals can be significant. This shift towards a “reasonable person standard” requires a much more in-depth understanding of not only the facts of the incident, but of the condition of the premises and surrounding environment in order to answer the core question of whether a property owner/occupier acted reasonably to prevent harm. A liability adjuster should explore at least three areas of actions:

1. Foreseeability of harm
2. Reasonableness of the property owner’s actions
3. The condition of the premises including security and safety measures 

Accounting for foreseeability of harm

Foreseeability of harm is not new to tort liability. The landmark case often cited with regards to American tort law goes back to 1928 with the Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Company. In this case, two employees of the railroad were attempting to help a late passenger board an already moving train. One employee was pushing the soon-to-be-passenger from the platform and the second employee was pulling from inside the train itself. During the transition, the passenger dropped his package which was full of fireworks. The fireworks exploded with sufficient force that it rattled the entire platform and a set of tall scales at the other end of the platform fell and injured the plaintiff. The plaintiff sued the railroad for negligence. Eventually, the New York Court of Appeals ruled the plaintiff’s injuries could not be a reasonably foreseeable consequence of attempting to help the man board the train and ruled in favor of the railroad.  

Key features of foreseeability vary by state but generally have the following aspects:

1. Reasonable prediction: Would a reasonable property owner/occupier have predicted harm given the circumstances?
2. Knowledge of risks: Normally includes some aspect of whether the owner/occupier knew about, or should have known about, the risk under a reasonable person perspective.
3. Preventative measures: Would a reasonable person be expected to perform periodic inspections or have reasonable security measures in place, including calling 9-1-1 for potential threats?
4. Similar incidents: Have there been similar incidents at the premises or in close proximity to the premise that a reasonable person would believe in higher risk levels? This can include local crime rates and history of similar crimes in the area.

Claims professionals and negligence today

Claims professionals can no longer rely upon legal status when assessing negligence. They will need to ask probing questions using critical thinking skills and a curious mindset to fully assess negligence. Judges frequently take the position that a “reasonable person standard” is a question for the jury rather than a question for the law. This will bring greater focus on the negotiating skills of claims professionals to demonstrate their knowledge of the facts and craft a persuasive argument to reach settlement prior to reaching a jury. Otherwise, businesses and their insurers can expect to see increased litigation rates and costs.

Click here to read the full commentary paper.

The scene brought back memories of a similar incident in 2017, when the UNITE-Tomorrowland stage in Barcelona caught fire, forcing the evacuation of 22,000 attendees in under three minutes.

Separated by eight years, both events offer more than dramatic visuals — they prompt a serious reflection on risk management, prevention and resilience in large-scale temporary events.

Summer: high season for risk

Summer is synonymous with festivals, concerts and outdoor gatherings — but it also brings improvisation, tight schedules, and limited foresight. Large-scale festivals depend on temporary infrastructure, often built under pressure and with little room for error — a perfect storm for incidents like the one at Tomorrowland.

Behind the scenes, the reality is complex:

• First-time builds with no prior testing.
• Compressed timelines that lead to shortcuts, sometimes compromising safety.
• Technical teams working in close quarters without proper coordination.
• Incomplete installations overlapping with last-minute rehearsals and adjustments.
• Safety protocols relaxed due to time constraints.

This combination creates fertile ground for fires, structural failures, human error or unforeseen natural events.

Anatomy of a foreseeable fire: what went wrong at Tomorrowland

Initial investigations suggest a technical fault during lighting and pyrotechnic tests. Flames rapidly engulfed over 30 metres of polystyrene set pieces, thousands of LED panels, and sound equipment valued at €7 million.

The silver lining: no injuries were reported. The evacuation of 1,000 workers was executed swiftly and efficiently, thanks to a well-rehearsed emergency plan.

The Tomorrowland fire might have been accidental, but it drives home the same message: resilience can’t be theoretical. Response protocols need to be rehearsed, routes tested and staff trained. When a crisis hits, it’s too late to be writing a plan — you need one that’s already lived, understood and ready to deploy.

When every second counts: the importance of preparedness

In an emergency, every second matters. At Tomorrowland, priorities were clear: protect lives, contain the fire and minimise losses. Having a protocol is vital — but knowing how to apply it is even more so. Teams must be clear on:

• Who to contact.
• What actions to take.
• How to shut off supplies.
• The safest evacuation routes.

Coordination with fire services and security forces was critical. While they lead the response, a trained internal team can make a decisive difference — and sometimes even prevent the need for external intervention.

Events like Tomorrowland are a reminder that no production operates in a vacuum. At Sedgwick, we’re increasingly coordinating cross-border losses — with teams in the UK, Spain and across EMEA and the Far East working together on complex claims for festivals, films and live events. 

Whether it’s a multi-stage build or a three-camera shoot, understanding the production context and the insurance structure is essential. In reality, the show only goes on when the response is aligned, credible and fast.

Crisis management: beyond the flames

The impact of a disaster extends beyond financial loss. For recurring events, reputational damage can be harder to recover from than a cancellation.

Tomorrowland responded swiftly, thanks to three strategic decisions:

• Alternative stage: Within 48 hours, a modular Mainstage was constructed, preserving the festival experience despite the loss of the original set design.
• Operational split: If the new stage wasn’t ready by Friday, headline DJs would perform in DreamVille, a separate area of the site. This “Plan B” would have ensured a positive experience for attendees regardless.
• Insurance cover: Property and event cancellation policies absorbed direct costs (rented equipment, set design, ticket revenue) and mitigation expenses.

Insurance lessons that must not be forgotten

Insurers are asking tougher questions now — rightly so. In the UK, there’s growing scrutiny around risk documentation: method statements, rehearsal schedules, inspection records, even drone footage of rigging or fireproofing. The gap between what’s written in a risk assessment and what actually happens on-site can be the difference between a swift settlement and a prolonged coverage dispute. If protocols exist on paper but aren’t followed in practice, expect questions — and delays.

These incidents underscore a fundamental truth: no matter how thorough the planning, not everything can be prevented. That’s why having the right insurance is not optional — it’s strategic.

Key takeaways:

• Risk assessments are legally required and essential for safety. They must be tailored to the event and go beyond standard evaluations.
• Preventive measures identified during the assessment must be implemented — both to meet regulatory requirements and satisfy insurers.
• A comprehensive emergency protocol must be in place — and more importantly, all staff (especially team leaders) must understand it and know who to contact in the event of an incident.

Every incident should be analysed to determine its root cause and to implement measures that prevent recurrence.

The role of insurance: softening the blow

Having insurance in place is one thing; getting it to respond under pressure is another. We’ve handled major claims where everything from ignition timelines to the comparability of replacement kit was challenged. Business continuity doesn’t just rely on having a Plan B, it depends on being able to justify the spend, show your workings, and evidence that your mitigation was proportionate, necessary, and covered. That’s where experienced adjusters and coordinated broker support come into their own — especially when coordination spans multiple borders.

Even with robust precautions, some incidents are unavoidable. That’s why, from an insurance perspective, thorough risk analysis and comprehensive cover are essential — not only for material damage, but also for loss of income, event cancellation and liability.

Risk management culture: the cornerstone of business continuity

Tomorrowland’s experience shows that a genuine risk management culture goes beyond written protocols — it must be embedded in daily operations. Anticipation, rehearsals, staff training, and coordination with emergency services were key to avoiding casualties and containing damage.

The UK is also entering a new regulatory era. With Martyn’s Law set to come into force, event organisers will face a statutory duty to embed counterterrorism and major incident planning into every stage of their operations. This goes way beyond fire drills; it’s about having credible, dynamic response plans for a range of threats, from accidental incidents to deliberate attacks.

This proves that risk planning must be lived, not just documented. Teams must be trained, drilled and confident in their response — because when every second counts, agility is everything.

Business continuity doesn’t hinge on goodwill or improvisation, it depends on deliberate preparation, including operational alternatives and appropriate insurance cover. The rapid setup of an alternative stage, combined with a pre-planned logistical and artistic Plan B, ensured the festival could continue and the audience experience was preserved.

This proactive approach, supported by policies covering everything from material damage to lost revenue, shows that while prevention helps reduce impact, only anticipation with concrete solutions guarantees that the show can go on.

Not one-size-fits-all

In the workers’ compensation arena, prosthetics are often categorized as durable medical equipment (DME), like a wheelchair or crutches. However, this oversimplified approach is not in the best interest of either the injured worker or their employer. Simply sending an employee to their nearest orthopedist or prosthetics clinic is not likely to yield the best outcome or most cost-effective solution.

Here’s why: In the U.S., most amputations in the general population are of lower extremities. This is due to the prevalence of cardiovascular and circulatory conditions that hinder blood flow, especially to parts of the body far from the heart. When tissue dies due to lack of blood flow, it must be removed. In contrast, most work-related amputations are of upper extremities. Because people primarily work with their hands, the upper extremities are far more susceptible to workplace injuries — especially when handling heavy objects and operating dangerous machinery is part of the job.

Due to this disparity, U.S. providers of prosthetics and medical practitioners in related fields spend much of their time and training focused on lower extremities. Many providers do not have the experience needed to properly meet the short- and long-term care needs of an upper extremity amputee. A certified upper extremity specialist is best suited to help an injured worker get the right device (or combination of devices), heal physically and emotionally, return to work safely and productively, and function independently in all aspects of their lives. The sooner an injured worker can connect to the right specialist and be fitted for a device appropriate for their needs and stage of recovery, the better their chances of a positive claim outcome.

More is not always better

Some prosthetists see dollar signs when they learn a patient is a workers’ compensation claimant. They may get excited about the opportunity to fit an injured worker with the latest cutting-edge device, knowing the cost will be covered by the employer. 

However, the prosthesis with the highest price tag and the most bells and whistles is not necessarily what’s best for the amputee. Do the prosthesis’s features align with the employee’s stage of recovery, lifestyle, job responsibilities and physical capabilities? Are there specialists near the employee who can train them on how to use it, provide maintenance care, and perform physical/occupational therapy appropriate for the individual and their device? 

Understanding these nuances requires specialized expertise, beyond what most practitioners of medicine, utilization review and medical bill review are equipped to handle.

Innovating how workers recover

Recent advancements in prosthetic technology have introduced lightweight materials like carbon fiber and advanced polymers, which offer improved strength and flexibility. These innovations enhance comfort and functionality, especially for upper extremity amputees, and allow for greater customization in design and aesthetics.

Modern prosthetics now include myoelectric control systems and sensory feedback mechanisms. These technologies allow users to operate their devices with muscle signals and even experience tactile sensations, improving both safety and dexterity in daily tasks.

Surgical innovations such as osseointegration, where prosthetics are anchored directly to the bone, are gaining traction for their durability and improved range of motion. Additionally, virtual reality platforms are being used for pre-prosthetic training, helping injured workers visualize and practice using their devices before fitting.

AI-driven analytics are increasingly used to forecast prosthetic replacement cycles and rehabilitation outcomes. This helps employers and claims professionals plan more accurately for long-term care and reserve funding.

Timing is everything

On the flip side, it’s also not good when the employee does not receive a proper prothesis in a timely way. While not providing any device may at first glance appear to save the employer money, this can cause multiple issues. Without proper support and equipment, the employee may be inclined to simply learn how to do things without their amputated extremity; however, this can lead to serious safety concerns, especially on the job. A lack of motivation to adapt won’t yield the best outcome for the individual’s physical or emotional recovery. Further, it’s dangerous for the employee to have a weight imbalance in their upper body, as it can cause neck pain, scoliosis and other issues — and because these conditions stem from the original injury, they are covered under workers’ comp. It’s critical to get the right device on an injured employee within 90 days to keep recovery on track, promote acceptance of the prosthesis, and support a positive outcome.

Benefits of a workers’ comp prosthetics program

To protect their people and their financial interests, employers — especially those with employees at risk of catastrophic injury — have much to gain from adding a specialized prosthetics program to their managed care services for workers’ compensation. When a workplace accident involves a life-altering amputation, you want the right ancillary care experts on your side to support the employee and their family through every step on the difficult road ahead. An experienced team of prosthetic specialists works to ensure the employee receives just the right device(s) for their particular needs, knows how to use the equipment, and has the tools they need to return to work and productive living. (It’s worth noting that amputees have the highest return to work rate among employees who experience catastrophic injuries; they just need the right motivation and the right device to facilitate a smooth transition.)

A well-established prosthetics program gives injured workers access to a nationwide network of clinicians experienced in working with amputees, with the added benefit of strong relationships with the companies that manufacture and service prosthetic devices. Program coordinators help guide amputees so they know what to cover during their appointments; they also connect amputees with peer support, so injured employees can speak to others who truly relate to their circumstances.

Another significant advantage of a specialized prosthetics program is accuracy in reserve funding. Because amputation is a lifelong injury, the employer is responsible for providing lifetime medical care under workers’ comp. In addition to the high cost of the initial prosthesis, the device needs to be replaced approximately every five years. Replacements of sockets and liners, along with other clinical care, quickly add up to a lot of expenses. Having prosthetic experts involved in the claims process from the outset ensures the appropriateness of costs for devices and care, as well as projected costs based on the employee’s anticipated needs and lifespan.

Higher care is more than just replacement parts

A comprehensive prosthetics program is the right thing for employees experiencing a traumatic injury and for employers supporting them throughout the process. Enlisting specialized expertise in prosthetics is the best way to ensure an amputee receives the right device at a fair price, as well as the skilled care and empathy they need to resume living a full and productive life.

> Learn more — read about Sedgwick’s best-in-class prosthetics program, part of our suite of ancillary managed care services for workers’ compensation.

Since 2021, Buch held the role of Executive General Adjuster at Sedgwick in Canada. Prior to joining Sedgwick, he held regional management roles overseeing claims operations. With over 30 years of loss adjusting experience and a proven track record of managing large-scale, complex claims across a broad spectrum of sectors, his expertise spans commercial and residential property, general commercial liability, municipal liability, automobile claims, and appraisal services. In addition to his technical proficiency, Buch has developed specialized capabilities in fraud investigations, leading high-stakes inquiries with discretion and precision. 

“Dan’s comprehensive understanding of the operational and strategic aspects of claims management makes him a trusted leader at Sedgwick and in the industry at large,” said Michael Galea, Senior Vice President National Operations, Sedgwick Canada. “With more than three decades of hands-on expertise, he brings an unmatched level of insight and precision to every claim he manages. His leadership in complex loss adjusting and fraud investigations sets the gold standard for our industry.

“I’m honored to step into the role of Regional Vice President and continue building on the strong foundation we’ve established at Sedgwick,” said Buch. “Over my last several years, I’ve seen firsthand how critical it is to lead with integrity, support our teams, and help our clients navigate the unexpected. I’m eager to drive meaningful innovation and bolster our leadership in the region.”

Buch is a licensed all-lines adjuster. He also holds the Chartered Insurance Professional (CIP) designation, along with memberships in the Canadian Insurance Adjusters Association (CIAA), Ontario Insurance Adjusters Association (OIAA), Insurance Institute of Canada (IIC), Ottawa Brokers Association, Eastern Ontario Adjusters and Canadian Special Investigations Units Association. He earned a bachelor’s degree from Carlton University.

About Sedgwick

Sedgwick is the world’s leading risk and claims administration partner, helping clients thrive by navigating the unexpected. The company’s expertise, combined with the most advanced AI-enabled technology available, sets the standard for solutions in claims administration, loss adjusting, benefits administration and product recall. With over 33,000 colleagues and 10,000 clients across 80 countries, Sedgwick provides unmatched perspective, caring that counts, and solutions for the rapidly changing and complex risk landscape. Sedgwick’s majority shareholder is The Carlyle Group; Stone Point Capital LLC, Altas Partners, CDPQ, Onex and other management investors are minority shareholders. For more, see sedgwick.com.

Absenteeism isn’t just a violation of attendance policies, it’s a significant problem for employers and employees alike. When someone doesn’t show up for work, managers may have to rush to fill their shift, or other employees may have to cover their work for them. Over time, absenteeism creates a dissatisfied or even hostile work environment where lower productivity, decreased morale and higher costs are the norm. 

Simply put, absenteeism impacts everyone in the workplace, and data shows that it’s not getting any better. So what’s driving this trend, and what can employers do to get ahead of it?

The current state of absenteeism

Human resources experts consider an acceptable absence rate, or the percentage of time an employee is absent from work, to be around 1.5%. In 2024, the national absence rate was 3.2%, up 0.10% from 2023. This increase in absences signals a growing challenge for employers across industries.

When employees are frequently absent, it takes a serious financial toll on employers. The CDC reports that absenteeism costs U.S. employers $225.8 billion annually, with Sedgwick data showing that lost productivity alone can reach $11,000 per employee each year. Beyond productivity losses, absenteeism also leads to operational downtime and forces employers to spend more on hiring, onboarding and overtime pay.

Absences today are also following a pattern. According to Sedgwick data, Mondays are the most common day for intermittent absences, with volume decreasing as the week goes on. Absence spikes are also common around major events and holidays. In fact, roughly 1 in 5 surveyed Americans reported planning to miss work the Monday after the 2025 Super Bowl. On that day, Sedgwick data shows that 9.5% of employees with an open intermittent absence case didn’t show up for work.    

What’s driving absenteeism today?

There are many reasons why employees may unexpectedly miss work. Sickness and injuries remain the leading cause of absences, especially in industries with physically demanding roles. However, even in office settings, seasonal illnesses and chronic conditions are forcing employees to take time off work without advanced notice. 

A lack of flexible work options and support systems is also contributing to absenteeism. When an employee struggles to find child care, needs to care for a loved one or has transportation issues, they may have to miss work that day if they don’t have a flexible work option. In 2024, more than 3.6 million absences in the U.S. were attributed to family or personal obligations. Sedgwick’s book of business in 2025 shows that 33.9% of leaves are for family reasons and 12.8% are personal, projecting 875,000 new family or personal leaves by the end of the year. This suggests that many employees today aren’t being given the support or flexibility they need to manage their life outside work — and it’s impacting their ability to show up.

Poor mental health is another key driver of absenteeism. Stress, anxiety and depression can significantly impact an employee’s ability to work consistently. Data shows that employees with poor mental health have nearly four times more unplanned absences within a year than others. And according to a Sedgwick study, 30% to 55% of employees with a mental health disability claim submit more than one claim in a 36-month period. Sedgwick also found that claims for mental health last 24% longer than the average claim. Together, these trends tell us that many employees aren’t getting the help they need during their leave — resulting in longer recoveries, higher relapse rates and more time away from work.  

How employers can manage absenteeism

While employers can’t control what happens in their employees’ personal lives, they can implement strategies to support them and help them better manage the problems they may be facing. Here are some ways employers can help keep absenteeism under control:

• Have regular check-ins with employees: There are often red flags for absenteeism before the pattern starts. Having consistent, informal check-ins with employees can help employers build trust, identify signs of burnout or stress and offer support before an absence occurs.
• Equip frontline managers with training and resources: Managers are often the first to notice any attendance patterns with their employees. Giving them the right tools and guidance can help them spot signs of absenteeism and know how to respond to unplanned absences while maintaining team morale.  
• Foster a culture of trust and flexibility: Employees with busy personal lives may benefit from flexible work options like remote work or alternative shifts. Additionally, offering mental health resources like counseling, peer support groups or colleague assistance programs can create a more supportive environment and help reduce absences.  
• Partner with a third party administrator (TPA): It can be difficult to manage absenteeism without the right tools, support and expertise. Finding a trusted TPA to help track time off, identify absence patterns and plan for disruptions can help employers stay ahead of absenteeism.

Simplifying the complexity of absences

Absenteeism isn’t just a disruption for employers – it can be a signal that something larger is going on. With absenteeism tied to so many factors, it can be hard to identify its cause and know how to respond. That’s why employers partner with our team at Sedgwick to simplify their employees’ absences for them. 

We work with employers to create comprehensive leave and disability management programs that help them stay compliant, reduce the impact of absences and maintain their workforces’ productivity. With mental health and well-being programs, return to work planning and accommodations support, we ensure employees get the help they need to return to or keep thriving at work. 

Our technology plays a critical role in making this possible. With AI-powered tools, our examiners can quickly identify opportunities for early intervention, like matching employees with modified work options or connecting them with clinical resources. But more importantly, these tools help our examiners be powerful advocates, guiding employees through a complex recovery process with empathy and care. Our technology streamlines workflows so examiners can spend less time on administrative tasks and more time supporting those in need. This not only improves return to work outcomes for employees but stronger program outcomes for our clients. 

Final thoughts

Absenteeism may be on the rise, but it doesn’t have to be a constant challenge. With the right strategies, resources and a trusted partner in place, employers can do more than just respond to absences – they can reduce them. By fostering a culture that supports well-being and flexibility, employers can empower their workforce to keep showing up, stay engaged and continue doing what they do best. 

To learn how Sedgwick can help administer leave and manage absences for your organization, click here.