LoFlexRedPro

Low flexibility work contexts may trigger the appearance of employee profiles where, although they have made an effort to work while sick, there is low productivity because of the characteristics of the work environment. Some organizational policies, such as payment for sick leave, attendance control and downsizing have been associated with enhanced presenteeism (Johns, 2010).

Although presenteeism is seen as a behavioural response to perceived sickness, the extent to which it affects individuals’ productivity may be related to the perception of their work environment characteristics (Jensen, Andersen & Holten, 2017). Therefore, workers who perceive their work environment as negative may make an effort to go to work while sick, although they areincapable of being productive since they feel confined. An employee feels that their work environment is negative when the physical and psychological working conditions are inadequate (Ali, Ali & Adan, 2013). Increased workloads, stressful work environments, poor relationships with colleagues and lack of support from supervisors are features of a negative work environment that have been linked to lower levels of productivity (Johns, 2010; Ma et al., 2018; Musich et al., 2006).

In low-flexibility work environments, higher bureaucracy, structural limitations and lack of resources are features that can lead workers to feel frustrated about their jobs, which can negatively affect their productivity levels (Jensen et al., 2017). One example can be found in public service jobs where there can be an increase in the occurrence of presenteeism behaviours because the act of absenteeism directly affects the cost and the quality of public service provision (Jensen et al., 2017). Likewise, employees with this presenteeism profile can have a tendency to be unsatisfied within their jobs, which can lead to a higher tendency for employee turnover (Ali et al., 2013; Sanderson & Cocker, 2013).

Thus, in work contexts with lower flexibility, presenteeism behaviours may arise as a coping behaviour to deal with the negative features of the work environment (Musich et al., 2006), although with negative consequences for employee productivity levels.

LoFlexHiPro

LoFlexHiPro is a label attributed to those work environments where there is no flexibility and which require that employees go to work while sick and still maintain high levels of productivity, despite the possible negative health consequences.

The reasons that lead employees to go to work even when experiencing moderate levels of physical and psychological discomfort, to the detriment of their own health, may be motivated by a stringent work environment that encourages a presenteeism climate. In such circumstances, the lack of social support from peers and supervisors can make employees feel they are ‘slaves’ to their own work environment and under pressure to not take sick leave or the appropriate time to recover (MacGregor & Cunningham, 2018). In work environments with low flexibility, individuals’ motivations for presenteeism are related to a desire to avoid punishment from others (Ma et al., 2018), or team responsibilities (Bierla, Huver & Richard, 2013). Workplace settings where workers’ own productivity determines team performance and goals can push individuals to maintain higher levels of productivity despite health problems, inducing workers to behave in ways contrary to their own will. Supervisors can also play a determinant role: if a supervisor is present at work despite their own health condition, their behaviour sets a standard for the team to meet, so employees will be constrained to act similarly (Bierla et al., 2013).

There are also organizational-related factors, such as organizational policies, job insecurity and time pressure (Johns, 2010) that can drive employees to be forced to increase their productivity despite the absence of a flexible work setting. For example, companies may have restricted policies regarding sick leave, such as an attendance bonus or punishment for certain amounts of sick leave (Ma et al., 2018).

However, this kind of extreme commitment regardless of an individual’s health problems may have strong implications for the person and also for their colleagues and employers. Working when sick is a consequence of a more immediate health problem (for instance, migraines or allergies) but can in itself be a forthcoming risk for future adverse health problems (Sanderson & Cocker, 2013). Individuals who feel obligated to go to work while sick can be at increased risk of accidents or mistakes due to fatigue or difficulty in concentrating, not meeting deadlines and not being able to think clearly (Sanderson & Cocker, 2013). In the case of contagious diseases such as influenza, they could possibly infect their colleagues, resulting in further absences in the team (Bierla et al., 2013). Moreover, working while sick can develop the risk of a poor quality of life (Lopes et al., 2018), and thus increase the risk of future absence for ill health. Taking into account the dynamic nature of this model, individuals who work in contexts that promote these types of presenteeism behaviours may also be more likely to develop higher levels of burnout and work-related stress (Jensen et al., 2017). This could lead to the transition from levels of higher productivity to levels of low productivity, which could result in greater risk for the emergence of LoFlexHiPro presenteeism profiles.