IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Les déterminants individuels des absences au travail : une comparaison européenne

  • Sabine Chaupain-Guillot
  • Olivier Guillot
Registered author(s):

    À partir des données de l’European Community Household Panel (ECHP), on s’intéresse aux déterminants individuels des absences au travail dans les pays européens. L’étude porte sur l’ensemble des États membres de l’UE-15, à l’exception de la Suède. Les comportements d’absence des salariés, dans chacun de ces pays, sont analysés à l’aide de deux modèles sur données de panel : un modèle Probit à effets aléatoires et un modèle Logit à effets fixes. Ces modèles sont estimés séparément pour les hommes et pour les femmes. Afin de tenir compte de l’éventuelle endogénéité du degré de satisfaction à l’égard de l’emploi occupé, on procède également à l’estimation de modèles Probit bivariés, permettant d’expliquer simultanément l’insatisfaction au travail et l’absence. Comme différents travaux antérieurs, cette comparaison européenne fait apparaître des écarts sensibles de taux d’absence entre les pays. On constate que les taux observés en France, au cours de la période 1994-2001, sont parmi les plus faibles de l’UE, les durées d’absence pour les salariés français étant cependant plus longues, en moyenne, que celles enregistrées dans la plupart des autres pays (du moins si l’on en juge d’après les chiffres relatifs aux années 1998 à 2001). Les résultats des estimations montrent que les facteurs jouant sur la probabilité d’absence sont loin d’être identiques d’un pays à l’autre. L’existence d’une maladie chronique ou d’un handicap, le degré de satisfaction au travail et, chez les femmes, la présence d’un enfant de moins de 3 ans sont, en effet, les seules variables qui ont un impact significatif, et de même signe, dans la quasi-totalité des États de l’UE-15 (d’après les résultats des modèles Probit à effets aléatoires).

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.beta-umr7522.fr/productions/publications/2010/2010-17.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg in its series Working Papers of BETA with number 2010-17.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: 2010
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:ulp:sbbeta:2010-17
    Contact details of provider: Postal: PEGE. 61, Aven. de la Forêt-Noire 67000 Strasbourg
    Phone: +33 3 68 85 20 69
    Fax: +33 3 68 85 20 70
    Web page: http://www.beta-umr7522.fr/
    Email:


    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. repec:ese:iserwp:2008-29 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Barmby, Tim A. & Ercolani, Marco G. & Treble, John G., 2000. "Sickness Absence: An International Comparison," IRISS Working Paper Series 2000-03, IRISS at CEPS/INSTEAD.
    3. Wilde, Joachim, 2000. "Identification of multiple equation probit models with endogenous dummy regressors," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 309-312, December.
    4. Rigmar Osterkamp, 2002. "Work Lost Due to Illness - an International Comparison," CESifo Forum, Ifo Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 3(4), pages 36-40, 02.
    5. Robert Drago & Mark Wooden, 1992. "The Determinants of Labor Absence: Economic Factors and Workgroup Norms across Countries," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 45(4), pages 764-778, July.
    6. Jessica P. Vistnes, 1997. "Gender differences in days lost from work due to illness," Industrial and Labor Relations Review, ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 50(2), pages 304-323, January.
    7. Mohammed Chaudhury & Ignace Ng, 1992. "Absenteeism Predictors: Least Squares, Rank Regression, and Model Selection Results," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 25(3), pages 615-35, August.
    8. Allen, Steven G, 1981. "An Empirical Model of Work Attendance," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 63(1), pages 77-87, February.
    9. Philippe Tessier & François-Charles Wolff, 2005. "Offre de travail et santé en France," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 168(2), pages 17-41.
    10. Leo Bonato & Lusine Lusinyan, 2004. "Work Absence in Europe," IMF Working Papers 04/193, International Monetary Fund.
    11. Monojit Chatterji & Colin J. Tilley, 2002. "Sickness, absenteeism, presenteeism, and sick pay," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 54(4), pages 669-687, October.
    12. Brown, Sarah & Sessions, John G, 1996. " The Economics of Absence: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(1), pages 23-53, March.
    13. Chamberlain, Gary, 1980. "Analysis of Covariance with Qualitative Data," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 225-38, January.
    14. Barmby, Tim & Orme, Chris & Treble, John, 1995. "Worker absence histories: a panel data study," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 53-65, March.
    15. Barmby, Tim & Stephan, Gesine, 2000. "Worker Absenteeism: Why Firm Size May Matter," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 68(5), pages 568-77, September.
    16. Rigmar Osterkamp & Oliver Röhn, 2007. "Being on Sick Leave: Possible Explanations for Differences of Sick-leave Days Across Countries," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo, vol. 53(1), pages 97-114, March.
    17. Michel Grignon & Thomas Renaud, 2007. "Sickness and injury leave in France: moral hazard or strain?," Working Papers DT4, IRDES institut for research and information in health economics, revised Feb 2007.
    18. Chiara Monfardini & Rosalba Radice, 2008. "Testing Exogeneity in the Bivariate Probit Model: A Monte Carlo Study," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 70(2), pages 271-282, 04.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ulp:sbbeta:2010-17. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.