Injury and Illness Cost Employers £861m a Year: The Risk Isn’t Equal
Workplace injury and illness in England could link to an estimated £861.6 million a year in Statutory Sick Pay alone.
When we talk about workplace harm, serious accidents often dominate headlines. But when you look at the data more closely, a bigger financial burden arises, namely long-term illness and sickness absence, and the risk profile looks very different for men and women.
A new analysis by our experts examines how workplace risk extends beyond fatalities alone, comparing accident rates, illness prevalence, and employment patterns across sectors.
The £861m cost: Where is it coming from?
Estimated Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) equivalent costs (2024/25 rate):
Injury-related absence: £98.1m
Illness-related absence: £763.5m
Total: £861.6m
Illness-related absence accounts for nearly 90% of the total estimated SSP cost.
This suggests the financial impact of workplace harm is not primarily driven by high-profile accidents, but by ongoing work-related ill health. That includes stress, anxiety, and musculoskeletal conditions.
While injury-related absence represents a smaller share at £98.1m, it still reflects significant disruption and operational risk for employers.
Injury vs illness: A clear gender split
The data reveals a sharp contrast in how workplace harm affects men and women.
Working Days Lost
Men: 2.8 million days lost to injury
Women: 1.4 million days lost to injury
Men lose twice as many days to injury as women.
However:
Men: 16.1 million days lost to illness
Women: 16.6 million days lost to illness
Women lose around 500,000 more days to work-related illness each year.
Stress is driving the illness gap
Stress-related illness is a major differentiator.
Stress cases (Men): 350,000
Stress cases (Women): 536,000
Stress accounts for:
56% of women’s work-related ill health
42% of men’s work-related ill health
This shows a clear divide. Men face higher exposure to physical injury risk, often concentrated in sectors such as construction, manufacturing, and transport. Women, while less exposed to fatal physical risks, report higher levels of stress-related illness.
When workforce size is taken into account:
All work-related ill health (per 100,000 workers):
Men: 4,680
Women: 5,770
Stress, depression, or anxiety (per 100,000 workers):
Men: 1,980
Women: 3,220
Women are significantly more likely to report work-related illness overall, and particularly stress-related conditions.
The fatality gap remains stark
Although illness drives most absence costs, the fatality data highlights another serious imbalance.
Men are almost 20 times more likely to die at work than women.
This reflects employment patterns across higher-risk industries. Sectors dominated by male workers continue to account for the majority of fatal injuries.
For employers operating in physically hazardous environments, this reinforces the importance of:
Robust risk assessments
Equipment maintenance and safe systems of work
Ongoing training and supervision
Clear incident reporting processes
What this means for employers
The figures show that workplace risk is not one-dimensional.
If you focus only on accidents, you miss the much larger financial exposure linked to illness-related absence. If you focus only on well-being, you may overlook critical safety risks in physical environments.
A balanced approach is essential.
1. Accidents still matter
Reducing injuries remains a legal and operational priority. Lost-time injuries increase costs, reduce productivity, and damage morale.
Key actions include:
Regular risk assessments
Clear documentation and version control
Accessible reporting systems
Consistent staff training
2. Illness is the bigger financial driver
With illness-related absence accounting for nearly £764m in estimated SSP impact, employers should also review:
Workload management
Stress risk assessments
Line manager training
Reporting culture and early intervention systems
Long-term absence often builds gradually. Without visibility, small issues can become sustained periods of absence.
3. Gender risk profiles differ
Understanding workforce demographics helps employers tailor interventions.
For example:
Male-dominated operational teams may require enhanced physical safety controls.
Office-based or care-sector teams may benefit from stronger stress management frameworks.
There is no single solution. Risk management must reflect the nature of the work and the composition of the workforce.
Prevention is more cost-effective than absence
Statutory Sick Pay is only one part of the true cost.
Employers also face:
Temporary cover costs
Reduced productivity
Management time
Potential legal exposure
Reputational risk
The £861.6m estimate highlights how quickly absence-related costs can accumulate nationally. For individual businesses, even modest reductions in lost days can create meaningful financial savings.
Building a more resilient approach
The data points to three practical priorities for employers:
Improve visibility: Track incidents, illness patterns, and absence trends accurately.
Standardise documentation: Ensure policies, risk assessments, and training records are up to date and accessible.
Act early: Address minor safety concerns and emerging stress indicators before they escalate.
Workplace safety is not just about compliance. It is about creating systems that prevent harm before it results in absence, enforcement action, or reputational damage.
Closing thoughts
When serious accidents happen, they rightly attract attention. But the quieter, long-term impact of illness is where much of the financial burden lies.
Men remain significantly more exposed to fatal and injury risk. Women report higher levels of stress-related illness. Together, these patterns show that workplace risk is uneven and complex.
For employers, the message is clear: reducing absence and protecting people requires a joined-up approach to both physical safety and wellbeing.