At HFL Education’s Primary and Nursery School Headteachers’ Conference 2026, I led a session on one of the most common and challenging issues facing school leaders: managing staff absence.
The level of engagement, thoughtful questions and shared experiences from headteachers reinforced how difficult this area can be. Most schools, settings and trusts already have an absence management policy. The challenge is knowing how to apply it fairly, confidently, and consistently when every employee’s circumstances are different.
School leaders are often trying to balance several competing considerations at the same time:
- supporting an employee who is unwell;
- maintaining continuity for pupils;
- managing the workload placed on colleagues;
- meeting the cost of cover;
- applying the school’s policy consistently;
- considering adjustments and equality obligations;
- deciding when an informal approach is no longer enough.
The key message from the session was simple:
Confidence does not come from having a perfect script. It comes from knowing the next fair, timely and evidence-based step.
Absence creates a ripple, not just a gap
Staff absence rarely affects only the person who is away. Its impact can spread across the school, settings and trust.
For pupils, absence may affect continuity, relationships and the consistency of provision. For colleagues, it can create additional cover, workload and capacity pressures. For the school budget, it may result in supply costs and difficult operational choices. Over time, inconsistent absence management can also affect culture, trust and retention.
Leaders need to acknowledge that operational impact without blaming an individual for being unwell.
Strong absence management holds both realities at the same time: the school is affected, and the employee is entitled to a fair, sensitive and individual response.
Support and accountability are not opposites
One of the most important themes discussed at the conference was the perceived tension between supporting an employee and holding clear expectations around attendance.
In practice, the two should sit together.
A supportive approach may involve:
- listening and understanding;
- exploring barriers to attendance;
- considering reasonable adjustments;
- agreeing purposeful contact;
- seeking occupational health or medical advice where appropriate.
An accountable approach may involve:
- applying the school’s policy;
- maintaining accurate records;
- setting clear expectations;
- agreeing review arrangements;
- explaining the next stage of the process.
Support without clarity can allow a case to drift. Accountability without curiosity can result in important information being missed and trust being damaged.
A balanced conversation might sound like:
“I want to understand what support may help. We also need a clear plan for managing your attendance and the impact on the school. Let’s agree the next step and when we will review it.”
This gives the employee an opportunity to be heard while ensuring that the absence is being actively and fairly managed.
Understand the situation before choosing the response
Not all absence should be managed in the same way. Before deciding what to do, leaders should establish what type of situation they are dealing with.
A one-off absence
Where an employee has a single, explained absence and no wider concerns are apparent, the appropriate response may simply be to welcome the employee back, check that the absence record is accurate and explore whether any support is required.
A possible pattern
Repeated absences, similar timing or other linked indicators may justify a closer conversation. However, a pattern is a reason to ask questions, not proof of a particular cause.
A neutral opening might be:
“I have noticed that these absences occurred around these dates. Can you help me understand whether there is any connection?”
Long term absence
Where an employee has been absent for an extended period or there is no clear return date, the focus should move towards planned contact, current medical or occupational health advice, possible adjustments and a sustainable route back to work.
Unauthorised absence or a reporting failure
Where the employee has not followed the reporting procedure, leaders should establish both why the employee is absent and why the required contact did not take place.
There may be a straightforward explanation, so the starting point should be to clarify the facts rather than immediately assume misconduct.
A practical example: when an employee does not report an absence
Consider an employee who does not attend work and does not make contact through the school’s normal absence reporting route.
The immediate operational pressure may be significant. Cover is needed, colleagues may be affected and leaders need to know whether the employee is safe. However, it is important not to decide the explanation or outcome before making appropriate enquiries.
A sensible initial approach could include:
- Check the facts
Confirm what the reporting procedure requires, whether any contact has been received elsewhere and whether there are known circumstances that may affect the employee’s ability to report. - Make appropriate contact
Use a neutral and welfare-focused opening: - Separate the two issues
Establish the reason for the absence and the reason the reporting procedure was not followed. The explanation for one may affect how the other should be understood. - Listen before deciding
There may be a health emergency, misunderstanding, communication problem or other relevant circumstance. Give the employee an opportunity to explain. - Check the policy and record the response
Once the facts are clearer, decide what further action is appropriate under the school’s policy. Record the contact made, the explanation given and the reasons for the next step.
The important principle is to clarify the facts and apply the policy, rather than allowing frustration about the immediate operational impact to determine the outcome.
Return to work conversations are more than a formality
A prompt, private and purposeful return to work conversation is one of the most valuable tools available to managers.
It provides an opportunity to:
- welcome the employee back;
- check that the employee is fit to return;
- confirm the absence record;
- understand whether there is an underlying or work-related issue;
- consider whether support is required;
- identify possible patterns;
- agree whether any follow-up action is needed.
The conversation should be based on curiosity rather than interrogation.
Useful questions might include:
- “How are you now, and are you fit to be back at work?”
- “Is there anything relevant you would like me to understand?”
- “Is there anything at work that we need to discuss?”
- “Is there any support that may help?”
- “Is the absence record accurate?”
- “Do we need to agree any follow-up?”
The purpose is not to demand a diagnosis or require the employee to justify being ill. It is to understand the position, identify appropriate support and maintain an accurate record.
Triggers should prompt a review, not determine the outcome
Absence policies commonly contain review points based on days, occasions or patterns of absence. These thresholds are useful because they help ensure that concerns are identified and managed consistently.
However, a trigger should start a conversation. It should not automatically result in a warning.
Before deciding what should happen, leaders should:
- confirm that the absence record is accurate;
- understand the reasons and surrounding circumstances;
- consider whether absences may be connected;
- identify whether disability, pregnancy, work-related factors or another relevant issue may be involved;
- review any support already offered;
- consider whether further medical or occupational health advice is needed;
- apply the school’s policy to the individual facts.
Two employees may reach the same review point but require different next steps. Consistency does not mean giving every employee the same outcome. It means following the same fair process, considering the relevant circumstances and being able to explain the reasons for the decision.
Long term absence needs an active plan
Long term absence should not become a waiting room in which the school simply waits for the next fit note.
A clear plan should normally consider:
Contact
Agree who will maintain contact, how often contact will take place, which method will be used and what the conversations will cover.
Contact should reduce uncertainty, not increase pressure.
Advice
Consider whether current occupational health or medical advice would help the school understand:
- the employee’s current health position;
- possible barriers to returning;
- the likely outlook;
- possible adjustments;
- whether a phased return may be appropriate.
Occupational health provides advice. Management remains responsible for considering that advice alongside the employee’s views, the requirements of the role and the school’s circumstances.
Options
Explore changes that might support a safe and sustainable return. Depending on the individual circumstances, possibilities might relate to:
- working hours or a phased return;
- temporary changes to duties;
- workload priorities;
- workplace or location;
- equipment or practical support;
- supervision and check-ins;
- the way a procedure is applied.
Adjustments should be individual, practical, recorded and reviewed. An arrangement that helped one employee will not necessarily be appropriate for another.
Review
Set clear review dates rather than leaving arrangements open ended. At each review, consider progress, remaining barriers, the effectiveness of support and whether further advice is required.
Formal process
Where attendance remains difficult to sustain despite appropriate support, a formal capability process may eventually become relevant.
However, leaders should not jump directly from concern to dismissal. A defensible process is built through accurate facts, meaningful consultation, current evidence, consideration of adjustments and alternatives, clear review periods and appropriate HR advice.
My reflection from the conference
What stood out most from the discussion was not a lack of commitment from school leaders. It was the weight of the decisions they are being asked to make.
Headteachers want to support employees compassionately, but they also need to protect continuity for pupils, manage increasing pressure on colleagues and make responsible use of school resources. Many of the questions were not simply, “What does the policy say?” They were:
- “How do I start the conversation?”
- “When should I move beyond informal support?”
- “How do I remain consistent without ignoring individual circumstances?”
- “What if the employee becomes upset?”
- “When is occupational health advice needed?”
- “How do I know when enough support has been offered?”
These are judgement questions. A policy provides the structure, but leadership confidence comes from understanding the facts, listening carefully, keeping an open mind and knowing when to seek advice.
Four actions schools can take now
Schools that want to strengthen their absence management practice could begin with four practical actions:
1. Improve conversations
Check whether return to work conversations happen promptly and consistently, and give managers simple prompts to use.
2. Review the data
Look for absence patterns that may require a conversation, while remembering that a pattern is something to explore rather than an explanation in itself.
3. Support managers
Ensure leaders know what they can ask, what should be recorded and when to seek HR or occupational health advice.
4. Revisit the policy
Check that managers understand review points as prompts for an informed review, not automatic warnings.
How HFL HR Advisory Services team can help
Absence cases can become complex quickly, particularly where there may be disability, mental health concerns, pregnancy related absence, work related factors, disputed medical evidence, repeated short term absence or an uncertain return to work.
The HFL HR Advisory Service can support schools, settings and trusts with:
- Absence management strategy and case planning;
- difficult management conversations;
- return to work and review meetings;
- occupational health referrals and questions;
- reasonable adjustments;
- short term and long term absence procedures;
- formal capability processes;
- equality and discrimination considerations;
- reviewing correspondence, meeting records and decision-making;
- policy review and manager development.
Early HR advice can help leaders remain supportive while establishing a clear, fair and evidence-based route through the case.
Email: hrservices@hfleducation.org
Telephone: 01438 544463
