Paid Sick-Leave: Is It a Good Way to Control Epidemics?
This research considers an economic intervention i.e. a paid sick leave policy to control an Influenza epidemic. Research has shown that “presenteeism” i.e. sick workers coming to work, costs employers more than “absenteeism” because sick workers put their coworkers at risk and are less productive.
We examined the costs and benefits of a paid sick leave policy through its effect on productivity, medical costs and attack rate. We considered two kinds of workers’ behavior: honest and rational. Honest workers take sick leave for days they are sick; but rational workers take all available sick leave. We ran agent-based epidemic simulations on large scale social contact networks with individual behavior modeling to study the coevolution of policy, behavior, and epidemics, as well as their impact on social welfare.
Our experimental results indicate that if the workers behave honestly, the society’s economic benefits increase monotonically with the number of paid sick days, however if the workers behave dishonestly but rationally, the society’s welfare is maximized when the number of paid sick days is equal to the number of mean days of sickness. This research shows that paid sick leave can be used as an effective policy instrument for controlling epidemics.
Keywordsepidemics simulation influenza public health economic analysis social welfare sensitivity analysis
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.Barrett, C., Bisset, K., Eubank, S., Feng, X., Marathe, M.: Episimdemics: an efficient algorithm for simulating the spread of infectious disease over large realistic social networks. In: Supercomputing Conference, pp. 1–12. ACM/IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
- 4.Barrett, C., Bisset, K., Leidig, J., Marathe, A., Marathe, M.: An integrated modeling environment to study the co-evolution of networks, individual behavior, and epidemics. AI Magazine 31(1), 75–87 (2009)Google Scholar
- 6.Bisset, K., Chen, J., Feng, X., Kumar, V.A., Marathe, M.: EpiFast: a fast algorithm for large scale realistic epidemic simulations on distributed memory systems. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Supercomputing (ICS), pp. 430–439 (2009)Google Scholar
- 7.Bisset, K., Marathe, M.: A cyber-environment to support pandemic planning and response. In: DOE SciDAC Magazine, pp. 36–47 (2009)Google Scholar
- 9.Burns, A., Mensbrugghe, D., Timmer, H.: Evaluating the economic consequences of avian influenza (2008)Google Scholar
- 11.Gilleskie, D.: A dynamic stochastic model of medical care use and work absence. Econometrica, 1–45 (1998)Google Scholar
- 12.Grabowski, A., Rosinska, M.: The SIS model for assessment of epidemic control in a social network. Acta Physica Polonica Series B 37(5), 1521 (2006)Google Scholar
- 13.Halloran, E., Ferguson, N.M., Eubank, S., Ira, J., Longini Jr., I.M., Cummings, D.A.T., Lewis, B., Xu, S., Fraser, C., Vullikanti, A., Germann, T.C., Wagener, D., Beckman, R., Kadau, K., Barrett, C., Macken, C.A., Burke, D.S., Cooley, P.: Modeling targeted layered containment of an influenza pandemic in the United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105, 4639–4644 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Hemp, P.: Presenteeism: At work - but out of it. Harvard Business Review (October 2004)Google Scholar
- 15.Marathe, A., Lewis, B., Barrett, C., Chen, J., Marathe, M., Eubank, S., Ma, Y.: Comparing effectiveness of top-down and bottom-up strategies in containing influenza. PLoS ONE 6(9), e25149 (2011)Google Scholar
- 18.Taylor, C., Marathe, A., Beckman, R.: Same influenza vaccination strategies but different outcome across U.S. cities? International Journal of Infectious Diseases 14(9), e792–e795 (2010)Google Scholar
- 19.Whitley, R., Monto, A.: Seasonal and pandemic influenza preparedness: a global threat. Journal of Infectious Diseases 194(suppl. 2), S65–S69 (2006)Google Scholar