Belgian companies with high rates of employees on sick leave could face increased social security contributions under a new bonus-malus system approved by a parliamentary committee, L’Echo reports. The measure is part of the latest phase of Health Minister Frank Vandenbroucke’s (Vooruit) plan to tackle long-term sickness absence.
The Chamber’s Social Affairs and Employment Committee approved the fourth wave of the Return to Work plan, paving the way for a vote in the federal parliament. The package includes stricter checks on people unable to work due to illness, an increase in the return-to-work bonus and an extension of vouchers offered through the Return to Work Fund.
However, a separate bill aimed at making employers more responsible for reintegrating employees has sparked criticism, including within the governing Arizona coalition.
Employers to contribute for longer
Under the proposed legislation, employers would be required to contribute towards employees’ sickness benefits for a longer period. Currently, employees receive guaranteed pay during their first month of sick leave. After this period, they receive benefits equivalent to 60% of their salary from their health insurance fund.
Employers must already pay a solidarity contribution equivalent to 30% of these benefits during the second and third months of incapacity. The reform would extend this obligation to the fourth and fifth months.
The extension would maintain existing exemptions for companies with fewer than 50 employees, workers over 55 and certain employment categories, including temporary agency workers and apprentices.
A controversial bonus-malus system
The most contentious element of the reform concerns how these contributions would be redistributed. Under the proposed bonus-malus system, the National Social Security Office (ONSS/RSZ) would reward companies with lower rates of sickness absence by reducing their social security contributions at the end of the year. Employers with higher rates would face additional costs.
However, critics argue that the system could disproportionately affect businesses in sectors where sickness absence is naturally more common. Construction companies and hospitals, for example, could face financial penalties despite investing in workplace health and prevention measures.
According to L’Echo, CD&V MP Nahima Lanjri raised concerns about comparing all Belgian companies against one another, regardless of their sector. Several MPs suggested introducing sector-specific comparisons to ensure that employers are assessed against businesses facing similar working conditions.
Vandenbroucke rejected the proposal, arguing that a previous system based on sectoral funds had failed to produce sufficient results, with some funds remaining unused.
The reform also triggered a clash between coalition partners Anders and N-VA. Anders MP Irina De Knop criticised the additional financial burden on businesses, citing the negative opinion issued by the National Labour Council.
N-VA parliamentary group leader Axel Ronse defended the proposal, arguing that it was more effective than measures introduced under the previous Vivaldi government.
The legislation must still be approved by the Chamber’s plenary session before it can become law.
