Employee Assitance Programs (Author: Silvia Ponce de Leon)
Introduction
Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs) are employee benefit programs offered by many employers, typically in conjunction with a health insurance plan. EAPs are intended to help employees deal with personal problems that might adversely impact their work performance, health, and well-being. EAPs generally include assessment, short-term counseling and referral services for employees and their household members. They were initially started by Dr. Warren Shepell in Canada in 1978.
Employees and their household members may use EAPs to help manage issues that could adversely impact their work and personal lives. EAP counselors typically provide assessment, support, and if needed, referrals to additional resources. These programs are becoming increasingly more common in today's worksites, and as the field grows, the responsibilities of employee assistance professionals are expanding as well. The issues for which EAPs provide support vary, but examples include:
§ major life events, including births, accidents and deaths
§ financial or legal concerns
§ family/personal relationship issues
§ work relationship issues
§ concerns about aging parents
An EAP's services are usually free to the employee or household member, having been pre-paid by the employer. In many cases, an employer contracts with a third-party company to manage its EAP.
Many of these firms rely upon resources from skilled vendors of specialized products to supplement their services. Confidentiality is maintained in accordance with privacy laws and professional ethical standards. Employers usually do not know who is using their employee assistance programs; unless there are extenuating circumstances and the proper release forms have been signed. In some circumstances, an employee may be advised by management to seek EAP assistance due to job performance or behavioral problems. This practice has been thought to raise concerns for some, who believe that the EAP may place the employer's interests above the health and well-being of the employee. However, when done properly and with a highly qualified vendor, both the employer and the employee benefit. In fact, the goal of these supervisory referrals is to help the employee retain their job and get assistance for any problems or issues that may be impacting their performance. And, most importantly, any referrals for job performance issues or concerns are always confidential.
Some studies indicate that offering EAPs may result in various benefits for employers, including lower medical costs, reduced turnover and absenteeism, and higher employee productivity and morale. There is some dispute as to whether such studies are impartial and scientifically valid, particularly those studies performed by the EAP providers themselves. EAPs may also provide other services to employers, such as supervisory consultations, support to troubled work teams, training and education programs, and critical incident services.
The broad array of services provided to employers by today's EAPs make a good business case for external programs. External EAPs can provide more than just psychological counseling through the integration of a host of "work/life" resources. These kinds of resources can help employees wrestling with the associated demands of starting a family, dealing with personal finances, legal problems or the stresses of being a working caregiver with aging parents. A full-service, integrated external EAP can provide all these services through one single, toll-free number that is accessible 24 hours a day and 7 days a week.
External EAPs also provide the added benefit to employees of delivering confidential counseling services off-site, away from the eyes and ears of fellow workers, managers, or the Human Resources department. It needs to be noted, however, that EAP services are paid for by employers who then become the "clients" of the EAP Company. A high-quality EAP will effectively communicate to employees that the organization is sponsoring the benefit but that it is confidential (within the scope of state and federal laws) and free to them. These EAPs maintain a strict adherence to the concept of serving two clients; the employer and the employee. If the employee improves as a result of the use of this benefit, then both the employer and the employee are winners--the employer has a good, highly motivated and high-performing employee and the employee gains assistance with a personal problem that was previously impacting their ability to focus on their job.
Most EAP companies are not regulated by state or local agencies, leaving both companies and clients with little recourse in the event that the EAP fails in some way. Clients who feel mistreated may file a complaint with the relevant state agency against the individual therapist. This can be a no win situation for everyone, including the EAP company, which has a great deal to lose, including its reputation amongst employees who, if they mistrust it, will not use the program. Some states, like California, do regulate EAPs that deliver counseling services through the Department of Managed Health Care which also regulates HMOs, Vision and Dental plans. This oversight provides a grievance process for consumers that wish to register a complaint against licensed health plans.
There are many "free" EAPs out there who merely act as a "1 800" number and are not workplace specialists. These are usually large insurance carriers that bundle their "so called" EAP into a disability program and have very little visibility.
In business it is customary to look at returns on investment. The provision of employee assistance services has well established business benefits. What’s not well established is how to asess the value between providers in this space. Not all EAP solutions are the same, though on the surface they appear to be.
Two potential measures to differentiate EAP providers are the quality of the solution provided and the utilization rates. Utilization rates are the percent of employees who make use of the EAP's services in a given year. A percentage that is too low may indicate that the employees do not know about the program or that they are reluctant to use it.
Workplace bullying targets should be leery of EAP's. Unfortunately, sometimes the in-house EAP's are used as a feedback mechanism to assist management with further bullying strategies. In-house EAP counselors are employees of the organization and are, therefore, under management control and may not be neutral. In a unionized workplace EA counselors are usually in management. Furthermore, management generally use Human Resources (HR) and EAP's in collusion to further bully the target. It is common for HR representatives to contact the in-house EAP counselor seeking the target's confidential information, even going so far as directing the counselor to ask specific questions to obtain key information that may be useful for further action against the target. Generally, the objective of the bully is to make the target resign and this is referred to as constructive dismissal. In-house EAP's are not designed to help the target and are sometimes manipulated by both the union and management to the detriment of the target. Sometimes a target will contact the EAP complaining about workplace bullying and an EAP counselor may come to the workplace and give a generic group presentation. However, this presentation will imply that bullying is co-worker(s) on co-worker that occurs only because management is unaware of the situation, rather than as the manager as the bully and research indicates that 89% of bullies are bosses. Typically, managers in attendance will announce they have an "open door policy" and staff can come to them at any time with any concerns. But, bully managers often encourage their staff to join in and many do either willing or unwittingly. Also, the counselor may highlight human rights laws, but workplace bullying is generally outside human rights laws particularly if manager and the target are of the same race and sex, or if the manager belongs to a minority group but the target doesn't. Typically, these presentations skirt the specific problem the target is experiencing. Many managers view EAP enrollment as demeaning to the employee or a means to “straighten out” the target. Management or even a union steward (who is hostile towards the target) may leak to the target's co-workers that the target has entered into an EAP to make the target appear unstable and weak thus further undermining and isolating the target. Typically, when the bullying turns critical, management with the help of HR will fabricate frivolous work performance allegations against the target and apply a progressive discipline policy (i.e. reprimand, suspension and dismissal). In an unionized workplace the collective agreement usually suggests that under-performing employees voluntarily enter an EAP program. EAP's are based on the premise that the unsatisfactory work performance is due to non-workplace factors such as substance abuse, financial problems, family and/or relationship conflicts, physical or emotional illness, however, these are unrelated to or the cause of workplace bullying, so the EAP is unlikely to help the target. Usually, union relations officers encourage the target to enter EAP's in anticipation of a possible suspension or dismissal as the EAP involvement may be used as a component of the legal defense strategy to make it appear to an arbitration tribunal that the target was making a serious effort to correct their alleged performance problems. If the target is unwilling to enter a EAP, then management may use this at an arbitration tribunal to make it appear that the target has a "bad attitude". Generally, the employer will use as many fabricated false allegations and witnesses as possible, but this usually results in management's own extensive and glaring evidence and testimony inconsistencies that can be bizarre. Also, prior to the tribunal some of management's potential witnesses may panic and try to avoid being called as a witness by discrediting themselves. Management's potential witnesses are often motivated by envy toward the target, trying to use or sabotage the target to further their own careers, or are unwitting bully participants.
