In order to fund the new Health and Work Service, the government will no longer offer compensation to employers that experience high levels of sickness absence.
Unum has warned that this could represent a major additional cost, while consultants have warned the service may not be value for money.
Unum said that, without the compensation safety net, employers should look at other options for mitigating the unpredictable costs of high sickness absence.
Peter O'Donnell, CEO, Unum said: "News that the government's Health and Work Service will be paid for by scrapping the Statutory Sick Pay Percentage Threshold Scheme makes it more important than ever for employers to protect themselves against the unpredictable costs of sickness absence.
"This is the perfect time for brokers to speak with clients about the options available for mitigating these additional costs."
However Buck Consulting has warned that, to understand how effective the Health and Work Service scheme will be, further details are needed in terms of the expected level of support, response rates, capacity planning and service levels to see the complete picture.
Martyn Anwyl, managing director of Health & Productivity at Buck Consultants UK, said:"A tender driven by price at the cost of service and ability to deliver the service may lead to a two tier occupational health provision, similar to the NHS and private medical care.
"This could mean that employers looking for higher service levels continue to pay for their existing service and lose the benefit of receiving statutory sick pay."
Buck Consultants also questioned the scheme's definition of success. Anwyl said: "The key value for employees and employers is not just aiding a return to work, but ensuring this is sustainable.
"Many small businesses are also reliant on receiving this benefit for employees on long term sick. For them the key will be how much quicker the employee can return to work versus the loss of government funding."
The consultants also noted that the proposal is aimed at the reactive end of the sickness process.
"There appears to be no provision for promoting and supporting preventative measures in the workplace, nor to work with employers and their line managers to mitigate the risks of certain workplace health risk factors (e.g. stress) that can lead to long term absence," said Anwyl.
