Quick answer
The standard US absenteeism statistics come from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Current Population Survey. In 2025, 3.2% of full-time wage and salary workers had an absence in an average week, and absences took 1.7% of their usual hours. The rate is up from 2.8% in 2019.
Absenteeism statistics answer a simple question: in a normal week, how many employees miss work they were scheduled to do? The best national answer comes from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Its Current Population Survey Table 46 shows that in 2025, 3.2% of the 121.3 million full-time wage and salary workers had an absence in an average week. Most were sick: own illness or injury made up 2.2 points of that rate, and child care, family or personal obligations, civic duty and parental leave made up the other 1.0 point. Below are the rates by industry, occupation, age and sex, the trend since 2019, the latest monthly sick-absence counts for 2026, and what is and is not known about the cost of absenteeism. Each figure links to its original source.
The national employee absenteeism rate
BLS publishes two measures each year, both for full-time wage and salary workers (people who usually work 35 or more hours a week; the self-employed are excluded). The absence rate is the share of those workers who worked fewer than 35 hours in the survey week because of illness, child care, family or personal obligations, civic or military duty, or maternity or paternity leave. The lost worktime rate is hours absent as a percent of hours usually worked. Vacation, personal days and holidays do not count as absences. All 2025 figures are from BLS CPS Table 46.
- The absence rate was 3.2% in 2025: 2.2% for own illness or injury and 1.0% for other reasons.
- The lost worktime rate was 1.7%: 1.1% of usual hours lost to illness or injury and 0.6% to other reasons.
- Workzenly calculation from BLS data: 3.2% of 121,326,000 full-time workers is about 3.9 million people with an absence in an average week, about 2.7 million of them for illness or injury.
- Workzenly calculation, illustrative: at a lost worktime rate of 1.7%, a full-time employee scheduled 40 hours a week for 52 weeks (2,080 hours) would miss about 35 hours a year to absences. Actual absence is concentrated in fewer people, so most employees miss less and some miss far more.
- BLS notes the 2025 annual figures are 11-month averages that exclude October 2025, when data were not collected during the federal government shutdown, so they are not strictly comparable with other years.
What this means for employers: A 3.2% absence rate means that on a 30-person full-time crew, about one person a week (Workzenly calculation: 0.96) will miss part or all of the week. Build that into staffing. If your own rate runs well above the national figure for your industry, look at scheduling, workload and your attendance policy before assuming it is an individual problem.
Absenteeism trend since 2019
Absence rose with the pandemic and has not returned to its 2019 level. Each year below is the full-time absence rate from that year's BLS Table 46 (2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025).
- In 2019 the absence rate was 2.8% (1.9% illness, 0.9% other) and the lost worktime rate 1.4%.
- It peaked at 3.6% in 2022, with illness alone at 2.6% and lost worktime at 2.1%.
- Since 2023 it has held near the new level: 3.1% in 2023, then 3.2% in both 2024 and 2025. Lost worktime was 1.7% in each of those three years.
- The gap from 2019 to 2025 is 0.4 percentage points (Workzenly calculation), and 0.3 of it is illness (1.9% to 2.2%).
What this means for employers: The higher post-2020 rate looks like the new normal, not a spike that will fade. Staffing plans built on 2019 attendance will come up short. Plan coverage for roughly one absence in every 30 full-time workers per week, and more in winter.
Absence rate by industry
The private-sector absence rate was 3.0% in 2025, with a lost worktime rate of 1.6% (BLS CPS Table 47). Industries that run on shifts and direct contact with patients or customers sit above it.
- Health care and social assistance had the highest rate of the major private industries at 3.8%, with a lost worktime rate of 2.1%. Its "other reasons" rate, 1.4%, was also the highest, meaning more absences for family, child care and personal obligations than in any other industry shown. See scheduling for healthcare teams.
- Food services and drinking places were at 3.5%, and retail trade at 3.4%, both driven mostly by illness (2.5% and 2.4%). Both are shift-heavy industries where one missed shift leaves a gap on the floor; see restaurant and retail workforce tools.
- Construction and wholesale trade had the lowest rates at 2.3%, with lost worktime of 1.2%.
- Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction had a below-average absence rate (2.8%) but the highest private lost worktime rate in the table, 2.4%. Fewer absences, but longer ones.
- Professional and technical services (2.9%) split almost evenly between illness (1.6%) and other reasons (1.2%), the highest share of non-illness absence of any industry shown.
What this means for employers: In healthcare, food service and retail, a 3.4% to 3.8% weekly absence rate means call-outs are routine, not exceptional. Clear call-out rules, an approach to no-call no-shows, and a fast way to fill open shifts matter more there than in construction or wholesale.
Absence rate by occupation and sector
The same BLS Table 47 breaks absences down by occupation. Hands-on service roles have the highest rates; management and sales the lowest.
| Occupation group (2025) | Absence rate | Illness or injury | Other reasons | Lost worktime rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personal care and service | 4.3% | 3.1% | 1.2% | 2.1% |
| Healthcare support | 4.1% | 2.8% | 1.4% | 2.2% |
| Food preparation and serving related | 4.0% | 2.8% | 1.1% | 1.7% |
| Office and administrative support | 3.9% | 2.8% | 1.1% | 2.0% |
| Healthcare practitioners and technical | 3.7% | 2.3% | 1.4% | 2.1% |
| Production | 3.4% | 2.5% | 0.8% | 1.7% |
| Transportation and material moving | 3.4% | 2.6% | 0.9% | 1.8% |
| Building and grounds cleaning and maintenance | 3.4% | 2.5% | 0.9% | 1.7% |
| Installation, maintenance, and repair | 3.2% | 2.4% | 0.8% | 1.9% |
| Protective service | 2.9% | 2.0% | 1.0% | 1.8% |
| Sales and related | 2.8% | 1.9% | 0.9% | 1.4% |
| Construction and extraction | 2.7% | 2.1% | 0.6% | 1.5% |
| Management, business, and financial operations | 2.6% | 1.6% | 1.0% | 1.4% |
Source: BLS, Current Population Survey Table 47, 2025 annual averages. Components may not sum to the total because of rounding.
- Personal care and service workers had the highest absence rate, 4.3%, and healthcare support workers had the highest lost worktime rate, 2.2%.
- Management, business, and financial roles had the lowest absence rate at 2.6%. Workzenly calculation: personal care workers were absent about 1.65 times as often.
- By sector, the public sector rate was 4.2% versus 3.0% in the private sector. The federal government had 5.0% (lost worktime 2.6%), state government 4.3% and local government 3.8%.
What this means for employers: If most of your staff are caregivers, cooks or front-desk workers, compare yourself with those occupation rates, not the 3.2% national average. Higher public-sector rates partly reflect more generous paid leave; BLS reported in its March 2026 benefits survey that 93% of state and local government workers had paid sick leave versus 81% in private industry.
Absence rate by age and sex
From BLS Table 46 for 2025:
| Group (full-time, 2025) | Absence rate | Illness or injury | Other reasons | Lost worktime rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| All workers, 16 and over | 3.2% | 2.2% | 1.0% | 1.7% |
| 16 to 19 years | 4.2% | 3.1% | 1.1% | 1.4% |
| 20 to 24 years | 2.7% | 2.0% | 0.8% | 1.2% |
| 25 to 54 years | 3.2% | 2.0% | 1.1% | 1.7% |
| 55 years and over | 3.5% | 2.8% | 0.7% | 1.9% |
| Men | 2.6% | 1.9% | 0.7% | 1.3% |
| Women | 4.0% | 2.6% | 1.4% | 2.1% |
| Women, 25 to 54 years | 4.1% | 2.5% | 1.6% | 2.2% |
Source: BLS, Current Population Survey Table 46, 2025 annual averages.
- Women had a 4.0% absence rate versus 2.6% for men. The gap is largest for non-illness reasons: 1.4% versus 0.7%, which covers child care and family obligations.
- Women aged 25 to 54 had a 1.6% "other reasons" rate, the highest of any age and sex group shown, which matches the years when child care demands peak.
- Workers 55 and over had the highest illness-related absence among adult age groups (2.8%) and a lost worktime rate of 1.9%: illness absences get longer with age.
- Teen full-time workers (16 to 19) had a 4.2% absence rate but a lower lost worktime rate (1.4%), suggesting more frequent but shorter absences.
- By race and ethnicity, rates were close: 3.2% for White, 3.3% for Black, 2.8% for Asian and 2.9% for Hispanic or Latino workers.
What this means for employers: A meaningful share of absence is family care, not sickness. Predictable schedules, shift swaps and clear paid time off rules reduce the unplanned version of those absences. Women and older workers are not "less reliable"; they carry more care and health load, and attendance rules should not penalize protected leave.
Sick days in 2026: the monthly data
The annual tables end in 2025. For 2026, BLS publishes monthly counts from the same survey (not seasonally adjusted). Two series matter: people with a job who were not at work all week because of their own illness, injury or medical problem (LNU02006735), and usual full-time workers who worked part time because of illness (LNU02028296).
- In October 2026, 1,004,000 employed people were out all week for their own illness, compared with 1,022,000 in October 2024 and 973,000 in October 2019. (October 2025 was not collected.)
- Another 1,838,000 usual full-time workers worked only part of the week because of illness in October 2026, versus 2,110,000 in October 2024 and 1,764,000 in October 2019.
- Illness absence is seasonal. In 2026, full-week illness absences ran from 1,213,000 in January to 932,000 in August.
- The highest month since 2019 was January 2022, during the Omicron COVID-19 wave, at 3,616,000. Workzenly calculation: about 3.6 times the October 2026 level.
What this means for employers: Expect call-outs to rise from December through February. Build winter schedules with extra cover and line up people willing to pick up shifts before flu season, not during it. Check your state's paid sick leave law so sick-day handling is compliant.
The cost of absenteeism
There is no current, official national estimate of what absenteeism costs US employers. The figures most often quoted are older estimates with different methods, and they should be cited with their dates.
- CDC estimate. A CDC Foundation release of January 28, 2015 said productivity losses linked to absenteeism cost employers $225.8 billion a year, or $1,685 per employee, attributing the figure to CDC (CDC Foundation). CDC's own Work@Health fact sheet describes the same order of magnitude more broadly: productivity losses from personal and family health problems cost US employers "more than $225 billion a year." That measure covers lost productivity from health problems, not only days missed.
- Chronic conditions. A peer-reviewed study in CDC's journal Preventing Chronic Disease (Asay and colleagues, October 2016, 2015 dollars, data from 2008 to 2011) estimated annual absenteeism costs of $11.2 billion for obesity, $10.3 billion for hypertension, $9.1 billion for physical inactivity, $3.6 billion for smoking and $2.2 billion for diabetes.
- The same study put the cost at $16 to $81 per employee a year for a 100-employee employer and $17 to $286 per employee for a 1,000-employee employer, depending on the condition.
- Gallup estimate. A Gallup analysis published October 17, 2011, based on 109,875 full-time workers surveyed January to October 2011, estimated that full-time workers with chronic conditions or overweight missed about 450 million extra days a year, costing more than $153 billion in lost productivity (valued at $341 a day).
- Workplace injuries. BLS reported on January 22, 2026 that private employers recorded 2.5 million nonfatal injuries and illnesses in 2024, and that cases involving days away from work in 2023 to 2024 had a median of 8 days away (BLS SOII).
These estimates differ because they measure different things: CDC's figure covers health-related productivity loss, the 2016 study prices only absences tied to five conditions, and Gallup's counts excess missed days among workers with chronic conditions. None is a measure of total absenteeism cost today.
What this means for employers: The most reliable cost figure is your own. Multiply hours missed by the wage, then add any overtime paid to cover the shift and the cost of shifts left short. Accurate time and attendance tracking is what makes that number possible.
What workplace absenteeism data means for employers
- Benchmark against the right group. Compare your rate with your industry (2.3% to 3.8% in 2025) and occupation (2.6% to 4.3%), not only the 3.2% national figure.
- Plan for the new baseline. The absence rate has been 3.1% to 3.2% each year since 2023, compared with 2.8% in 2019.
- Separate illness from other absence. About two-thirds of absences are illness or injury, and one-third are family, child care and other obligations. Each needs a different response.
- Track it. A simple attendance tracker works for a small team; at scale, time clock data shows patterns, including late arrivals that never show up as full absences.
About this data
These absenteeism statistics come mainly from the BLS Current Population Survey, a monthly household survey. BLS publishes the annual absence tables (Tables 46 and 47) once a year with its annual averages, and the monthly illness series every month with the Employment Situation release. The 2025 annual figures exclude October 2025. Industry categories in the 2025 tables follow the 2022 NAICS, so BLS cautions that they are not strictly comparable with earlier years. Paid sick leave access comes from the BLS National Compensation Survey (annual), injury data from the BLS Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses (annual), and cost estimates from CDC, the CDC Foundation and Gallup, which are not updated on a schedule. Where we multiply or compare figures, the text says "Workzenly calculation."
We review this page when new releases come out. Journalists, students and bloggers are welcome to cite it with a link to this page. For related benefit data, see our employee benefits statistics.
More workforce statistics: Paid sick leave statistics · Burnout statistics · Workplace injuries statistics · Employee engagement statistics.
Sources
- U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey, Table 46: Absences from work of employed full-time wage and salary workers by age, sex, race, and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, 2025 annual averages. bls.gov/cps/cpsaat46.htm
- U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey, Table 47: Absences from work of employed full-time wage and salary workers by occupation and industry, 2025 annual averages. bls.gov/cps/cpsaat47.htm
- U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey, Table 46, annual averages for 2019 to 2024. 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024
- U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, series LNU02006735, Employed, with a job, not at work, own illness (not seasonally adjusted), through October 2026. data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02006735
- U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, series LNU02028296, At work part time, usually work full time, illness (not seasonally adjusted), through October 2026. data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02028296
- U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employee Benefits in the United States, March 2026, released September 25, 2026. bls.gov/news.release/ebs2.nr0.htm
- U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employer-Reported Workplace Injuries and Illnesses, 2024, released January 22, 2026. bls.gov/news.release/osh.nr0.htm
- Asay GRB, Roy K, Lang JE, Payne RL, Howard DH. Absenteeism and Employer Costs Associated With Chronic Diseases and Health Risk Factors in the US Workforce. Preventing Chronic Disease, vol. 13, October 6, 2016. cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2016/15_0503.htm
- CDC Foundation, Worker Illness and Injury Costs U.S. Employers $225.8 Billion Annually, January 28, 2015. cdcfoundation.org/node/1506
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Work@Health Program fact sheet. cdc.gov Work@Health fact sheet (PDF)
- Gallup, Unhealthy U.S. Workers' Absenteeism Costs $153 Billion, October 17, 2011. news.gallup.com/poll/150026
Frequently asked questions
What is the average employee absenteeism rate in the US?
In 2025, 3.2% of full-time wage and salary workers had an absence in an average week, according to the BLS Current Population Survey. Absences cost 1.7% of the hours those workers usually work. Own illness or injury accounted for 2.2 points of the 3.2% absence rate.
Which industry has the highest absence rate?
Among private industries, health care and social assistance had one of the highest absence rates in 2025 at 3.8%, followed by food services and drinking places at 3.5% and retail trade at 3.4%, according to BLS. The federal government was higher still at 5.0%.
Is absenteeism higher than before the pandemic?
Yes. BLS data show the full-time absence rate was 2.8% in 2019, peaked at 3.6% in 2022 and was 3.2% in 2025. The 2025 figure is an 11-month average because October 2025 data were not collected during the federal government shutdown.
Do women miss more work than men?
BLS reports that in 2025 the absence rate was 4.0% for women and 2.6% for men working full time. Women had higher rates for both illness (2.6% vs 1.9%) and other reasons such as child care and family obligations (1.4% vs 0.7%).
How much does absenteeism cost employers?
There is no current official estimate. A CDC Foundation release from January 2015 put productivity losses linked to absenteeism at $225.8 billion a year, or $1,685 per employee, citing CDC. A 2016 CDC journal study found five chronic conditions and risk factors each cost over $2 billion a year in absences.
How many workers miss work because they are sick?
In October 2026, 1,004,000 employed people had a job but were not at work all week because of their own illness, injury or medical problem, and 1,838,000 usual full-time workers worked part time because of illness, according to BLS monthly data (not seasonally adjusted).