Mental Health Day - What is it?
It's an occasional day off, perhaps with little advance notice, justified as necessary for maintaining well-being. It is, in principle, a sick day for the mind. (The Atlantic, 2022)
On 1 July 2019, a law in Oregon went into effect giving students five mental health days in a three-month period. In 2018, Utah changed the definition of a student’s “valid excuse” to miss a day to include an illness “which may be mental or physical." (The New York Times, 2019)
I believe that organizations have also followed suit - especially as everyone is still reeling from the after-effects of the pandemic. One example:
LUXASIA Group, an omnichannel distribution platform for beauty brands, has started to provide employees with an annual one-day mental health leave benefit to promote self-care in the workplace. (JobStreet, 2022)
Yet from the perspective of the Asian culture where employers are focused on having literal face-time with their employees and are productivity-focused above all else, this can be tough to even consider. So let's view this from 2 perspectives:
Arguments for
Reasons why Mental Health Day is a good idea:
Just like how people are allowed to take medical leave when they are physically unwell, people should also be given discretion to take a day off (or so) when they are mentally unwell.
People have been facing mental health issues (such as depression and anxiety) from long before - but they have just dealt with it in a variety of ways (that may have been healthy or unhealthy). The pandemic merely exacerbated these issues and brought them to the forefront. However, I would argue that to further destigmatize mental health issues and to create further awareness, actions such as implementing a MHD in companies would be a good step forward.
This would highlight the fact that mental health is a real issue, is taken seriously by fellow employers and to encourage discussions about such issues in the workplace setting.
Implementation:
I personally think that MHD could be viewed as a different type of medical leave. It could be a yearly allowance given to each employee (just like how medical leave days are given).
Of course, this would also mean that individuals need to give some notice to their employer when they would like to take a MHD. Good practice would necessitate an employee informing their employer that they would like to take a MHD but not requiring them to state the reason(s) why they are doing so. Stating the reasons would be optional, should the employee would like to discuss the reason(s) with their employer. Such a notice is also required so that the work that needs to be done can still be completed by someone else, or the work due would still be completed by the same employee at a later date. This would ensure that accountability would still be upheld in the workplace.
A MHD would also allow employees to take the time that they need to recuperate and / or get the help that they need, in order to upkeep their mental health. This could help prevent burnout or panic / anxiety attacks or depression, that could result in a great impact on productivity or even the tenure of employees in industries that high stress is a commonality.
Uptake:
The fact that the taking of and the implementation of MHD being discussed is the first step, but the uptake of MHD by employees is another matter altogether.
Even with companies having and implementing such benefits would not automatically result in greater mental health for employees from the get-go. There could be an issue of uptake by employees, where people could refrain from taking MHD due to the following reasons (JobStreet, 2022):
- Fear of being viewed as weak by their colleagues and discriminated in the workplace;
- Fear of their career progression or promotion jeopardized;
- Fear of being let go / retrenched / fired from a job as they are seen as not being capable enough to handle their job and its responsibilities.
Practicality:
Fellow employers might think that MHD are unnecessary. Say, a conversation between an employer and an employee may go like this:
"If you feel unwell (whether physically or mentally), you should go and see a doctor. If they deem you unfit for work, then you will get a medical certificate (MC), and you can have the day off (as you are entitled to)."
However, mental health symptoms are not as obvious as physical illnesses, or rather, they do not always manifest physically. So - where does someone who is feeling mentally ill and needs some time to rest but is not deemed to be 'unfit for work' ends up with? Being forced to go through the day and handle all their responsibilities as normal. Of course, you can say that they do not deserve to complain, for that was what they signed up for / paid to do. I would agree with you that one day or moments of anxious / sad thoughts or stress built up can be handled amicably and / or swept under the carpet for the time being. Nothing would seem out of the ordinary.
What about 6 months of to 2-3 years of pent up anxiety or sad thoughts or stress that has been manifesting in habits like biting of fingernails and peeling of skin - yet - not enough to deem it as an 'illness' to warrant a 'day off' within the confines of a medical leave?
As the saying goes, "Prevention is better than cure" - wouldn't it be better for employees to take a MHD every now and then and come back refreshed than waiting for something to build up, resulting in a resignation or a permanent illness that can never be fully cured? Of course, taking a MHD once in a while does not necessarily mean that all is good and dandy - but at the very least, something can be done about the symptoms, that could lead to a better management of them, or the diagnosis of such.
Resilience - are we encouraging a 'strawberry' generation?
Another thought that employers might have would be that, are we molly-coddling the generation now? Already there has been much talk amongst employers of the lackluster quality of employees that are in the market nowadays, especially of the young workers, who are of a different quality, and are unable to withstand the same pressure and responsibilities of the previous generations?
Are we inadvertently encouraging a strawberry generation: one that cannot withstand any pressure or stress and would bruise or break down at the slightest push? Would the implementation of such a benefit of MHD be furthering the lost cause of the upcoming generation?
On the contrary, I would argue that the implementation of MHD would actually be beneficial for employees and employers alike. As mentioned above, MHD would highlight the importance of mental health, destigmatize the discussion of mental health concerns, and improve productivity and efficiency of companies in the long run. I would go further to say that, if this generation of young workers are of such a quality, there is nothing that employers can do other than to set the standard that all employees should adhere to, and to screen them through interviews and other methods accordingly. The quality (or lack thereof) of future employees should not be the reason why employers conform to a lower standard or refrain from offering a benefit that would be beneficial for themselves.
I would also go further to say that a company offering such a benefit (MHD) would be viewed as a step ahead and show that a company is a cut above other companies in their industries and even between industries.
Implementation & Uptake
I would also say that in light of the concerns regarding the uptake of MHDs, the company might need to spotlight and increase the discussion of mental health topics in the workplace in order to destigmatize such topics, so that MHD would actually be taken up by the employees, and so that the collateral benefits mentioned would be fully enjoyed by both the employees and employers alike.
Comments
Post a Comment