Day One Statutory Sick Pay Has Changed the Cost of Short-Term Absence

As of April 2026, changes to Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) have altered how sickness absence is treated in the UK. SSP is now payable from the first day of absence, and the removal of the Lower Earnings Limit means many more employees are eligible than before.

These changes sit alongside wider measures in the Employment Rights Bill, which together point towards earlier access to workplace protections. While early discussion focused largely on legal compliance, many organisations are now taking a closer look at what the changes mean in practice. Paying SSP from day one has made short periods of absence more visible, both operationally and financially, prompting employers to think again about how absence shows up day to day.

Rethinking short‑term absence

Most employers are experienced in managing sickness absence linked to genuine ill health. Less straightforward are situations where absence is recorded as sickness, but the underlying cause is something else entirely.

Research has consistently shown that care breakdowns, such as an unwell child, an unexpected school closure, or the sudden loss of childcare or eldercare, are often logged as sickness absence even when the employee themselves is well. When alternative arrangements are not available, taking time away from work may simply be the most realistic option.

Under the previous SSP framework, these shorter absences often included a period without statutory pay before SSP applied. From April, that distinction has gone. Each day of recorded sickness absence now carries a direct employer cost from the outset, regardless of the reason behind it.

As a result, organisations are beginning to reflect on short, unplanned absence slightly differently. What was once viewed mainly as a productivity issue increasingly has a financial dimension as well.

The rising cost of avoidable absence

SSP is a direct payroll cost and is not reimbursable. At around £125 per week, pro‑rated across absence days, employers are now paying roughly £25 per day for short periods of sickness absence. On its own, that figure can seem manageable, but the wider picture is shaped by knock‑on effects.

Short‑notice absence can also bring lost productivity, overtime or temporary cover, management time spent reorganising work, disruption for teams and customers, and increased pressure on colleagues. When spread across whole organisations, these costs can add up quickly. This is often felt most acutely in workforces with higher numbers of working parents, carers, or frontline roles.

For some employers, day‑one SSP has increased overall absence spend before secondary impacts are even considered. Increasingly, the question is not whether SSP should be paid, but how often absence needs to reach that point in the first place.

A growing focus on absence prevention

In response, many employers are taking another look at absence prevention, with more attention on short periods of absence linked to caring responsibilities rather than illness.

This is not new territory. Many organisations already support employees through flexible working, manager capability training, wellbeing initiatives, and formal absence management processes. What has changed is the context. Preventing even a single day of absence now has a clearer and more immediate value, offsetting statutory pay costs while helping teams maintain momentum.

As workforce policy continues to evolve, the focus is increasingly on predictability and resilience. Planning ahead for disruption, and having alternatives in place, can reduce the need for absence to be the default response.

What employers are telling us

These themes surfaced clearly during Bright Horizons’ Policy into Practice session on day one employment rights towards the end of last year. While the discussion covered a range of forthcoming reforms, employers repeatedly returned to one practical question: how new rights translate into workable, sustainable day‑to‑day practices.

Caroline Prosser, Employment Partner at Hill Dickinson, noted that as day‑one rights expand, policies alone are unlikely to be sufficient. Systems and processes also play an important role in helping organisations manage operational impact in a consistent way.

This reflects a broader shift in thinking. Compliance remains essential, but many organisations are also considering what sits around policy to support attendance, continuity, and effective workforce planning.

Revisit our session: Day 1 Employment Rights.

Where Back‑Up Care fits in

Against this backdrop, employer‑supported Back‑Up Care is increasingly part of conversations about absence prevention. It is often seen not as an added wellbeing benefit, but as practical support that can help maintain continuity.

Back‑Up Care is designed to respond to situations that frequently lead to short periods of absence. These include a child being unwell and unable to attend school or nursery but not needing one‑to‑one parental care, an unexpected school or childcare closure, a regular childminder cancelling at short notice, or an ageing parent needing same‑day support.

In many of these situations, employees are willing and able to work. Without alternative care, taking time off may be unavoidable. When support is available, some employees are able to remain at work instead.

Employers who offer practical care supports often report a positive impact on attendance. Employees describe being able to work on days that might otherwise have resulted in absence, helping teams reduce disruption and maintain continuity. Back‑Up Care does not remove SSP obligations. Its effect is to reduce how often those obligations are triggered.

A changing decision framework for employers

Day‑one SSP has not created new absence challenges, but it has changed how those challenges are felt. Short absences that might previously have gone largely unnoticed now carry an immediate financial signal alongside operational disruption.

This leaves employers with a clearer choice: absorb higher levels of paid absence as part of the cost of doing business or invest in support that helps employees stay at work when caring responsibilities arise.

For organisations already focused on inclusion, wellbeing, and workforce resilience, this strengthens rather than replaces the existing case. Supporting working parents and carers is not only a cultural choice. It increasingly plays a role in cost management, productivity, and organisational stability.

As SSP reform beds in, many employers are taking a closer look at where absence really begins, and what, if anything, can prevent it from reaching payroll.

What next?

→ Explore how employers are reducing unplanned absence linked to caring responsibilities
→ Read our analysis of the Employment Rights Bill and what it means for employers
→ Track legislative progress with Hill Dickinson’s Employment Rights Tracker