Absenteeism Article in a Collective Agreement

[Aleesha Van Damme]

#97349

Forum: Private

Good morning,

I am currently negotiating a collective agreement, and we have a high absenteeism rate amongst our team. We must reflect on the article, and one of the pieces I am looking to include is as follows:

3. Repeated or excessive absenteeism beyond statutory or agreed-upon entitlements, or failure to follow established reporting procedures, may result in progressive disciplinary action up to and including termination of employment.

Do we have grounds to argue that this should be included, or is there a difference in wording that we could suggest, which still gives the same flexibility but might be more palatable?

[Haley O’Halloran]

#97351

Yes, you do have grounds to include a clause addressing absenteeism, as long as:

It aligns with statutory entitlements (e.g., ESA, human rights accommodation obligations, and collective agreement leave provisions).

It does not create ambiguity that could be seen as overriding those statutory or agreed leaves.

The language is consistent with progressive discipline principles already recognized in arbitral jurisprudence.

Many collective agreements include similar provisions, often under “Attendance Management”, “Discipline”, or “Employee Responsibilities”. The goal is to clearly set expectations about attendance and reporting, while still recognizing legitimate absences.

Risks in the Current Wording

Your proposed wording is clear but may raise union pushback on two fronts:

“Repeated or excessive absenteeism” — can be seen as subjective unless defined or contextualized.

“Up to and including termination of employment” — signals a disciplinary framing, which unions may argue should instead be addressed under existing discipline or attendance management policies.

The union might counter that attendance issues should be managed through a non-disciplinary attendance management process (e.g., counselling and accommodation steps) rather than as a disciplinary matter unless there’s misconduct (e.g., failure to report).

Suggested Alternative Wording

Here are a few softer, but still enforceable alternatives that preserve management’s flexibility:

Option A — Balanced with “May Be Addressed”

“Employees are expected to maintain regular attendance and adhere to established reporting procedures. Repeated failure to meet attendance expectations, without reasonable justification, may be addressed through the employer’s attendance management or progressive discipline process, as appropriate.”

-Keeps flexibility but uses a less punitive tone.
-Recognizes that not all absenteeism is disciplinary.
-Links to existing policies rather than creating a new standalone rule.

Option B — For Inclusion under “Attendance and Reporting”

“Employees are required to attend work regularly and follow established reporting procedures when absent. Unexplained or repeated absences beyond statutory or agreed-upon entitlements may be subject to review and appropriate action, which may include progressive discipline.”

-Emphasizes accountability.
-Uses “may be subject to review” to soften disciplinary tone.
-Maintains the employer’s right to act if attendance problems persist.

Option C — For a Policy Reference Clause

“The parties agree that attendance expectations and procedures shall be outlined in the Employer’s Attendance Management Policy. Repeated failure to meet these expectations may result in appropriate corrective action.”

-Defers specifics to policy (which can be amended later without reopening the agreement).
-Keeps the CBA language general but enforceable.

Recommendation

If the union is resistant to disciplinary language, Option A or C is most likely to pass — they retain your flexibility to discipline when misconduct occurs (e.g., no-shows), while emphasizing fairness and consistency.

If your organization’s culture or operational impact of absenteeism is severe (e.g., safety-critical, small teams), you could keep “progressive discipline” explicit but balance it with “as appropriate” or “in accordance with established policies.”

I hope this helps!

-HRInsider Staff

[Author]

Posts