Research reveals that firms are more likely to take out insurance on printers and other replaceable assets than provide benefits packages and protection for employees.
Computer World UK reports on the findings of research commissioned by income protection specialist Unum, which polled 108 senior business people in the IT sector, with 45 percent of companies in the IT sector indicating that they have insurance for assets such as printers and phones, but 34 percent admitting that they could do more to protect their members of staff.
These findings come despite just 25 percent of the companies stating that they would be “very or extremely concerned” if printers or other easily replaceable assets were to break, compared to 89 percent of IT businesses recognising that employees are one of their most important assets.
Furthermore, 15 percent of IT firms admitted to not offering any kind of benefits package to their employees, with Unum claiming that this highlights “a mismatch in what companies value versus what they protect”.
Less than a third of companies in the IT sector were found to protect staff members against long-term sickness by offering income protection, despite Unum claiming that a typical business with over 500 employees will spend around £620,000 ($994,000/€725,000) per year on sickness absence costs, and 90 percent of IT business respondents indicating that long-term sickness absence “is a concern for them”.
While the research found that businesses could do more to protect their employees, it revealed that 49 percent of respondents have building insurance, 45 percent have contents insurance, and 36 percent have comprehensive insurance for their company cars.
Commenting on the findings, Matt Fahy, CIO at Unum, said: “Whilst IT companies do understand the importance of employees to their business, there is clearly a mismatch between what they value and what they spend their money on protecting.
“Around one in 10 employees will go on long-term sick leave during their working lives, so it is concerning to see so many employers without a plan in place to protect against this eventuality.”