The latest UK official estimate puts the sickness absence rate at 2.0% in 2025. People in employment lost 148.8 million working days to sickness or injury, equivalent to 4.4 days per worker. In the United States, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that 2.2% of full-time wage and salary workers were absent because of illness or injury in an average reference week in 2025, while 1.1% of their usual worktime was lost.
Those figures are useful, but they are not directly comparable. The UK rate measures hours lost across people in employment, while the US absence rate counts full-time workers who worked fewer than 35 hours in a survey week. A responsible benchmark starts by matching the definition, denominator, population, and reference period.
:::note[2026 edition: headline statistics]
- UK sickness absence rate, 2025: 2.0% of working hours lost.
- UK days lost, 2025: 148.8 million.
- UK days lost per worker, 2025: 4.4 days.
- US illness/injury absence rate, 2025: 2.2% of full-time wage and salary workers.
- US illness/injury lost-worktime rate, 2025: 1.1% of usual hours.
- US paid sick-leave access, March 2025: 82% of civilian workers.
- Great Britain work-related ill-health days lost, 2024/25: 35.7 million. :::
Sick Leave Statistics at a Glance
| Measure | Latest figure | Population and period | What it measures | Official source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UK sickness absence rate | 2.0% | People in employment aged 16+, UK, 2025 | Hours lost to sickness or injury as a share of total working hours | ONS |
| UK working days lost | 148.8 million | People in employment aged 16+, UK, 2025 | Estimated days lost to sickness or injury | ONS |
| UK days lost per worker | 4.4 days | People in employment aged 16+, UK, 2025 | Estimated annual days lost divided by workers | ONS |
| US illness/injury absence rate | 2.2% | Full-time wage and salary workers, 2025 | Share working fewer than 35 hours in the reference week because of illness or injury | BLS |
| US illness/injury lost-worktime rate | 1.1% | Full-time wage and salary workers, 2025 | Hours missed for illness or injury as a share of usual hours | BLS |
| US paid sick-leave access | 82% | Civilian workers, March 2025 | Share with access to an employer-provided paid sick-leave plan | BLS |
| Great Britain work-related ill-health days lost | 35.7 million | People who worked in the prior 12 months, 2024/25 | Full-day-equivalent days lost to illness caused or made worse by work | HSE |
Sources last verified 24 August 2026. ONS labels its Labour Force Survey sickness-absence estimates as official statistics in development. BLS notes that its 2025 annual absence estimate is an 11-month average because October data were not collected during the federal government shutdown.
What the Latest UK Data Says
The ONS 2025 release, published on 1 May 2026, estimates that sickness or injury accounted for 2.0% of working hours, unchanged from 2024 and 0.1 percentage points above 2019. The total of 148.8 million days lost was broadly unchanged from 148.9 million in 2024.
The 4.4 days per worker figure is a population average, not a recommended allowance and not a trigger for individual action. Many employees take no sick leave in a year, while a smaller number have longer medically necessary absences. Treating the mean as a “normal maximum” would penalise people with serious illness, disability, pregnancy-related conditions, or other protected circumstances.
ONS reports clear group differences in 2025: women had a 2.4% rate compared with 1.7% for men; part-time employees had a 2.8% rate compared with 1.9% for full-time employees; and the public-sector rate was 2.9% compared with 1.7% in the private sector. These are descriptive associations, not proof that sex, schedule, or sector causes absence. Occupation mix, health conditions, age, job demands, and survey composition can all matter.
ONS also warns about extra volatility in recent Labour Force Survey estimates and a discontinuity from reweighting. The flat 2024-to-2025 headline should not be presented as proof of a settled long-term trend.
What Caused UK Sickness Absence?
ONS reports reasons as shares of absence occurrences, not shares of days lost. In 2025:
| Reported reason | Share of sickness-absence occurrences |
|---|---|
| Minor illnesses | 30.4% |
| Other conditions | 15.6% |
| Musculoskeletal problems | 14.6% |
| Mental health conditions | 8.9% |
| Gastrointestinal problems | 6.6% |
Occurrences are not duration. A minor illness can create many short episodes, while a mental-health or musculoskeletal condition may create fewer but longer spells. An employer looking only at episode count will miss severity and operational impact.
The Health and Safety Executive answers a narrower question: illness caused or made worse by work in Great Britain. For 2024/25, HSE estimates 35.7 million days lost to work-related ill health. Stress, depression, or anxiety accounted for 22.1 million of those days, and musculoskeletal disorders accounted for 7.1 million.
Do not add the HSE figure to the ONS total. It overlaps with sickness absence and uses a different population, scope, and survey definition.
What the Latest US Data Says
The BLS Current Population Survey reports a 2.2% illness-or-injury absence rate among full-time wage and salary workers in 2025. The related 1.1% lost-worktime rate means 1.1% of usual hours were missed for illness or injury in an average survey week.
The two rates answer different questions:
- The absence rate asks what share of full-time workers had an absence.
- The lost-worktime rate asks what share of usual hours was lost.
The figures exclude self-employed workers and people who normally work fewer than 35 hours. They can also miss some partial-week absence. BLS warns that 2025 is an 11-month average because October data were not collected, so it is not strictly comparable with a normal 12-month annual average.
Benefit access is separate from absence usage. In March 2025, 82% of US civilian workers had access to paid sick leave: 80% in private industry and 93% in state and local government. Access was 90% for full-time civilian workers and 56% for part-time workers.
The wage gap was larger still. BLS reports access for 61% of workers in the lowest wage quartile and 95% in the highest quartile. Access does not show whether leave was used, how many days each worker received, or whether pay replaced the full wage.
Australia and New Zealand: Entitlement Is Not Usage
Australia’s official statistics provide a useful access measure, but it is often misquoted. The Australian Bureau of Statistics reports that 21.3% of employees had no access to paid leave entitlements in May 2025. That indicator combines paid sick leave and/or paid holiday leave and is commonly associated with casual employment. It does not mean “21.3% lack sick leave,” and it does not measure sick days taken.
Under Australia’s National Employment Standards, eligible full-time employees receive 10 days of paid sick and carer’s leave per year, with part-time employees accruing it pro rata. Casual employees are excluded from that paid entitlement. See our guide to personal, sick and carer’s leave in Australia for the policy detail.
In New Zealand, eligible employees currently receive 10 paid sick days a year after qualifying and can accumulate up to 20 days. The entitlement is not pro-rated merely because someone works part time. Again, this is a statutory allowance, not an estimate of average usage.
These four country signals belong in one explainer only if the labels remain explicit:
| Signal | Measures usage? | Measures access or entitlement? | Comparable as a ranking? |
|---|---|---|---|
| UK ONS 2.0% | Yes, hours lost | No | No |
| US BLS 2.2% | Yes, workers absent in a reference week | No | No |
| US BLS 82% | No | Employer-plan access | No |
| Australia ABS 21.3% | No | Lack of combined paid-leave access | No |
| New Zealand 10 days | No | Statutory entitlement | No |
Why International Sick-Leave Rankings Mislead
Countries do not publish one harmonised “average sick days” measure. Common differences include:
- employees versus all workers;
- full-time only versus full- and part-time workers;
- people absent versus hours or days lost;
- own illness only versus caring and other personal reasons;
- reference-week surveys versus annual recall;
- access to paid leave versus actual usage;
- all illness versus only work-related ill health.
A league table built from these sources would reward whichever definition produces the smallest number, not necessarily the healthiest workplace. Use international data to understand measurement choices and broad context, not to label one workforce better or worse.
Calculate Your Organisation’s Sick-Leave Rate
Use scheduled time as the denominator:
Sickness absence rate = sickness hours lost ÷ scheduled working hours × 100
A team scheduled for 16,000 hours that loses 320 hours to sickness has a 2.0% sickness absence rate.
Hours are usually safer than days because they handle part-time and compressed schedules. If you use days, convert partial days consistently and exclude planned annual leave, public holidays, parental leave, and other agreed absence categories.
Our absence rate formula guide provides a worked example. Use the rate for volume, then add separate measures for frequency and duration.
Five Metrics Worth Tracking Together
- Sickness absence rate: proportion of scheduled time lost.
- Days or hours lost per employee: state whether the denominator is headcount or full-time equivalents.
- Episode frequency: count separate spells, not certificates or payroll lines.
- Average duration: report short- and long-term absence separately.
- Cause and work-relatedness: use a small, privacy-respecting taxonomy and do not infer diagnoses.
For a broader operating process, see the absence management guide and our guide to spotting absence trends.
How Employers Should Use the Benchmarks
- Match the definition. Confirm the population, numerator, denominator, period, and exclusions before comparing rates.
- Compare trends before league tables. A sustained change in your own consistent series is usually more actionable than a small gap from a national estimate.
- Segment carefully. Review location, role, shift, manager, and work pattern only where groups are large enough to protect privacy and support a stable rate.
- Investigate systems first. Workload, scheduling, staffing, safety, job design, and manager behaviour can all affect absence.
- Keep wellbeing and conduct separate. A high rate is not proof of avoidable absenteeism. Our absenteeism definition guide explains the distinction.
- Use trigger scores as prompts. Never automate disciplinary action from a rate or Bradford Factor score without context, legal review, and reasonable-adjustment safeguards.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the UK sickness absence rate in 2026?
The latest ONS release available in 2026 covers 2025 and estimates a 2.0% sickness absence rate. That represents 148.8 million working days lost, or 4.4 days per worker.
How many sick days does the average UK worker take?
ONS estimates 4.4 days lost per worker in 2025. This is a population average, not a cap or a measure of the typical employee’s entitlement.
What is the US sick-leave absence rate?
BLS reports that 2.2% of full-time wage and salary workers were absent for illness or injury in an average reference week in 2025. Their lost-worktime rate was 1.1%.
How many US workers have paid sick leave?
In March 2025, 82% of civilian workers had access to paid sick leave through their employer. Access was lower for part-time and lower-wage workers and does not mean every worker received the same allowance.
Can countries be ranked by sick leave?
Not responsibly from these figures. The UK, US, Australian, and New Zealand sources measure different things. A valid comparison needs a harmonised population, numerator, denominator, reference period, and reason scope.
Should annual leave count as absence?
No. Planned annual leave is an entitlement, not sickness absence. Including it makes the rate unsuitable for comparison and creates a misleading view of attendance.
Turn the Statistics Into a Better Process
National statistics show scale; your own records show where support or operational change may be needed. Keep definitions stable, protect employee privacy, and pair every rate with episode duration, frequency, cause, and context.
Leave Balance gives teams one place to record approved leave and review absence patterns without maintaining parallel spreadsheets. It supports a consistent process; it does not diagnose health conditions or replace a fair, human review.