As part of its various employment reforms, the Arizona government has decided to make the return to work of employees on sick leave a priority.
Since 1 January 2026, numerous changes have been made to legislation to promote or encourage a return to work. One of these changes concerns the implementation of an active absenteeism policy. This policy aims to provide employers with a framework and tools to facilitate and prepare the return to work of employees who are unfit for work. Below is an overview of the resulting obligations and some good HR practices in this regard.
The importance of maintaining contact
According to many experts, maintaining contact with employees on sick leave is one of the factors that can enable a (faster) return to work. Even limited contact helps prevent feelings of distance or disengagement on the part of the employee.
In practice, however, maintaining this contact is not always straightforward. Some employees spontaneously provide updates, while others refuse contact attempts or prefer forms of communication that do not allow direct conversation (e.g. written communication).
In addition to the challenges this creates for workforce planning, it can make it difficult to establish an open dialogue about the possibilities for returning to work or about supportive measures or job adjustments.
A mandatory procedure for maintaining contact
To support employers, the Codex on Well-being at Work now requires employers to establish a procedure for maintaining contact with employees on sick leave. This procedure must, among other things, define who contacts the employee and how often. However, it may not be used to verify whether the absence is justified.
Such a procedure also allows employers to create a genuine obligation of cooperation for their employees. Since maintaining contact becomes mandatory, a well-prepared employer now has leverage to initiate dialogue about possibilities for returning to work.
This procedure must be included in the work regulations, in accordance with the usual amendment procedure (namely consultation with employees via official notice and the provision of a register, or through agreement in the works council if one exists).
A broader absenteeism policy
The implementation of the contact maintenance procedure must also form part of a broader active absenteeism policy aimed at preparing the return to work in cases of incapacity. Unlike the contact procedure, this policy does not need to be included in the work regulations.
The Codex on Well-being at Work does not specify the content of this policy. According to the law firm AKD, the policy should transparently describe all steps that are or can be taken in cases of incapacity for work. This includes, among other things, checks by a medical inspector, evaluation of work capacity by the occupational health physician (now mandatory after 8 weeks of incapacity), or the systematic use of the reintegration pathway.
Some good HR practices
Since the legal texts formulate these obligations in very general terms, employers have a wide margin to implement them in practice.
Although the contact procedure is a useful tool, it must be carefully designed and applied. Early and regular contact is recommended (e.g. monthly), but the procedure should also allow flexibility. In many cases, building a dialogue with absent employees takes time, as certain conditions (such as burnout) require a gradual approach. It is also essential to consider who is best placed to make contact, as a tailored approach is often needed (close colleague, trusted person, direct manager, or a member of the HR department).
In the same vein, the active absenteeism policy can help employers emphasize all available support tools for absent employees, as well as preventive measures.
Good preventive practices include internal communication channels (hierarchical line or trusted person) and external channels (occupational health physician). Many employers also implement preventive employee assistance programs (psychological or medical support). This policy therefore also offers employers an opportunity to develop a solid framework for preventing absenteeism.
By Julien Hicks and Heleen Franco
AKD Law Firm
See also: Proactive absence management: what should employers do?