At a time when work-life balance has become an organizational mantra, many companies are adopting increasingly flexible policies to ensure the well-being of their employees. However, this scenario also opens the door to misconduct and outright abuse of statutory rights, such as family leave, sick leave, and injury.
When these safeguards become tools for internal fraud, the consequences can be far more serious than imagined: economic damage, internal tensions, operational inefficiencies and reputational risk.
The problem: planned absences, fake sickness and unfair competition
Cases like these often emerge in daily investigative practice:
- Employees who take leave under Law 104 for family reasons, but are repeatedly observed on vacation or performing activities unrelated to their stated care.
- Sick leave that regularly coincides with secondary activities: paid work, competitive sports, or travel.
- Technicians and salespeople who use working hours to operate in unfair competition or develop their own projects.
- Prolonged false injuries to avoid transfers, job changes or disciplinary reprimands.
All of this often happens under the radar, with a network of small internal complicities and a high level of attention from colleagues, but these rarely turn into formal reports.
The real costs to the company
Abuse of safeguards is not just an ethical or behavioral issue. It concretely impacts the organization in several ways:
Direct economic costs
- Temporary recruitment of substitutes
- Slowdowns in productivity and operational flows
- Costs of insurance, reimbursement and bureaucratic management
Organizational and reputational damage
- Decline in trust among colleagues
- Growth of internal discontent (“if he’s doing it, why can’t I?”)
- Exposure to union or public complaints of discrimination if the company responds unfairly or ineffectively
Corporate investigations: when and how to intervene
Corporate investigations in these cases are not to “punish,” but to defend the integrity of the organization.
When it is appropriate to act:
- Presence of recurrent informal reports
- Repetition of absences always in conjunction with specific events
- Behavior that raises doubts even as a preventive measure
How to act legally:
- Use of acertified detective agency
- Collection of evidence that can be used in disciplinary or judicial proceedings
- Respect for privacy and the Code of Business Ethics
Tools may include observation services, shopping simulation, digital analytics (with a focus on GDPR), video surveys, and open source cross-referencing.
Who should handle the response: HR, Security and Legal
One of the critical points is that no one wants to expose themselves: the colleague doesn’t report, the manager is afraid of making a mistake, HR is waiting for hard evidence. But this is precisely why a single control room is needed, where:
- HR detects and monitors abnormal patterns of absence
- The Security Officer activates (eventually) the investigation phase
- Legal counsel verifies correctness of action and usability of evidence
Prevention: clear communication and a culture of internal ethics
Many frauds are based on the perception of impunity. Companies that inform their employees about possible controls, collaboration with outside agencies, and serious handling of suspicious cases significantly reduce the phenomenon.
Some examples of preventive actions:
- Updated Code of Business Ethics
- Training meetings on protections, duties and rights
- Clear policy on misuse of permits
Conclusion
Strategic absenteeism, illicit use of leave and internal fraud related to employment protections are not just “individual deviations.” They are signs of vulnerabilities in control systems, corporate culture and personnel management models.
Taking timely action, with professional investigative tools and a transparent and integrated approach, means defending honest work, protecting the company from reputational risks, and recognizing the value of internal trust.
