An excessive absenteeism warning letter is a letter, not a meeting note: it goes to an employee who is away, it may be the only document they read before the next step, and it has to carry the whole case on its own. The case is a number. Under a points policy absenteeism becomes excessive at a stated total, on this site's worked example 8 points in a 12-month rolling window, and a warning letter is sent at a stated earlier total. This page sets out the six things the letter states, in order, with the worked example filled in, and the three things the letter must not say. The attendance points calculator supplies the total; the policy template supplies the paragraph the letter quotes.
The number first: where the employee is, and where excessive begins
The letter opens with the total and the threshold in one sentence: as of the date of the letter the employee has 6 points of the 8 at which the policy ends employment. It then lists the events that make up the 6, by date and weight, so the employee can check every one: on the example two tardies at 0.5, a tardy at 0.5, an unexcused absence at 1, a no-call at 2 and a second absence at 1, with an excused absence shown at zero. A letter that says attendance has become a concern has described a mood; a letter that says 6 of 8 has described a position, and the employee can see how far it is from the line and what would cross it.
The paragraph applied and the warnings that came before
Next the letter quotes the paragraph of the attendance policy that sets the weights, the threshold and the steps, by number, and lists the earlier steps: the verbal warning at 2.5 in April and the written warning at 4.5 in May, each with its date. This is the final warning under the worked policy, and the letter says so in those words. The sequence is what makes the letter defensible if the next step is separation: it shows that the policy was applied as written and that the employee was told at each step. It also shows, by the excused absence at zero, that leave the law protects was not scored, which 29 CFR 825.220 requires and the EEOC's retaliation guidance expects to see.
The next step, the age-out date, and the offer of a conversation
The letter states what happens at 8, in the policy's own words, and it states when the total will fall on its own: on the example the two January tardies age out the following January and the total drops by 1. That date is not a kindness; it is the arithmetic of the rolling window, and telling the employee is part of applying the policy honestly. The letter then offers a meeting, names who to contact, and says that if any of the listed absences was for a reason the policy or the law excuses, the employee should say so now with whatever supports it, so the table can be corrected before the next step rather than argued after it.
The three things the letter must not do
It must not score an absence the employee has reported as protected leave, an accommodation or military service without first deciding that question under the rules that govern it; the letter can note that the question is open and the points provisional. It must not threaten beyond what the policy says, because the policy's next step is already the strongest thing the employer can truthfully write. And it must not be the first the employee hears of the problem: a warning letter that follows no earlier warning is a policy step skipped, and the letter should then be the earlier step instead. The corrective action guide on this site sets out the steps in order.
Questions people ask about excessive absenteeism warning letter
What makes absenteeism excessive?
Under a points policy, a stated total inside a stated window: on this site's worked example 8 points in 12 months, where an unexcused absence is 1, a tardy 0.5 and a no-call 2. Without a stated number, excessive is whatever the manager felt that week, and no letter can defend it.
What should an excessive absenteeism warning letter include?
The total against the threshold, the events by date and weight with excused events at zero, the policy paragraph by number, the earlier warnings with dates, the next step in the policy's words, the date the total will fall as events age out, and an invitation to raise any protected reason before the next step.
Can a warning letter be the first warning?
Only if the policy's first step is a written one. If the policy names a verbal warning first, a letter with no earlier step is a step skipped, and the honest fix is to make this letter the earlier step rather than the final one.