'Colleague' on long term sick

[MagicalTrevor]

Mainly out of intrigue because I'm not in a position to manage this person.

A 'colleague' of mine has had regular sickness over the last 4 years, we TUPE'd to a different company a year ago. Mainly it's been self certified but this latest has been 6 weeks with no sign of return. He supposedly suffers from stress, however the things he cites as causing this are things like:

• lack of communication from senior management
• its dark when he starts and leaves work (when it was winter) despite negotiating compressed hours with a day off mid week
• fuel prices going up meaning his 'personal inflation' has risen above pay rises
• commuting distance - his commute has halved since joining the new company and he actually now receives £2.5k car allowance that easily covers fuel costs

My question (without going into too much detail). How long does it normally take and what generally happens when getting rid of somebody like this?

I should also point out that he's unable to do the job and he was recently given 3 times the time to complete some tasks vs what my other colleague and I would be given.

Oh and he smells

[edc]

There is no definitive answer but I have unfortunately had to dismiss a handful of people for capability / absence in the past couple of years. Others who have had problems we have instigated the procedures, set the targets, got relevant reports where necessary and managed their absence to aan improved situation.

Long term absence by it's nature means dismissal is normally months rather than days or weeks.

As a rough plan after 4 weeks schedule a home visit. Then get a medical report. The business can then suggest alternative work where appropriate or phased returns. If no improvement or first or subsequent medical report show poor prognosis move to dismissal.

What you will normally find though is that some people will play the game and return and have a good couple of months then relapse. You need to maintain regular reviews.

You also need to guide the dr and ask leading questions when getting medical reports as you will otherwise just get a load of wooly rubbish. Don't bother with a GP report as their obligations are to the patient not a business. Use a third party health management type of company.

[davepoth]

The problem is that going off sick on stress puts a marker in the sand. Said person will be very likely to go for unfair dismissal regardless of whether they were sacked for being st, or being ill; the two get joined together really. The company has to make allowances for the "illness" otherwise it's constructive dismissal, but will be attempting to give the person "enough rope to hang themselves with" so they can manage them out of the business through the proper process.

[MagicalTrevor]

edc said:

...As a rough plan after 4 weeks schedule a home visit. Then get a medical report. The business can then suggest alternative work where appropriate or phased returns. If no improvement or first or subsequent medical report show poor prognosis move to dismissal.

That's interesting, I wonder if our HR will do that

edc said:

What you will normally find though is that some people will play the game and return and have a good couple of months then relapse. You need to maintain regular reviews.

He's done this before, this isn't the first time he's had >6 weeks off

edc said:

You also need to guide the dr and ask leading questions when getting medical reports as you will otherwise just get a load of wooly rubbish. Don't bother with a GP report as their obligations are to the patient not a business. Use a third party health management type of company.

The company I work for have a 3rd party health management company, I think he's refused to allow them access to his medical details or from contacting his doctor.

davepoth said:

The problem is that going off sick on stress puts a marker in the sand. Said person will be very likely to go for unfair dismissal regardless of whether they were sacked for being st, or being ill; the two get joined together really. The company has to make allowances for the "illness" otherwise it's constructive dismissal, but will be attempting to give the person "enough rope to hang themselves with" so they can manage them out of the business through the proper process.

There are consultations going on right now for some redundancies, they've outlined the criteria for this and he's managed to position himself firmly in the firing line. My concern is that because he's got sickness/stress issues then he'll be somehow protected? I hope that his conduct elsewhere will give him enough points that they can ignore the sickness for the purposes of redundancy.
In a way, I don't begrudge him the payout for 5 years employment as he'll undoubtably be out of a job for many, many months so will need the cash.

[mph1977]

edc said:

There is no definitive answer but I have unfortunately had to dismiss a handful of people for capability / absence in the past couple of years. Others who have had problems we have instigated the procedures, set the targets, got relevant reports where necessary and managed their absence to aan improved situation.

Long term absence by it's nature means dismissal is normally months rather than days or weeks.

As a rough plan after 4 weeks schedule a home visit.

not a good idea at all , can be interpreted as harassment

edc said:

Then get a medical report.

I see you have a transactional view of the value of occupational health

edc said:

The business can then suggest alternative work where appropriate or phased returns. If no improvement or first or subsequent medical report show poor prognosis move to dismissal.

on what basis? having a health problem is not in itself grounds for legal dismissal and you seem to have ignored the Equality Act and it's provisions, especially if the health problem can be considered a disability under them ( and that definition can be quite wide...)

edc said:

What you will normally find though is that some people will play the game and return and have a good couple of months then relapse. You need to maintain regular reviews.

ah yes when the 'concern' and oversight turns into a concerted effort to get the nutter out cheaply ...

edc said:

You also need to guide the dr and ask leading questions when getting medical reports as you will otherwise just get a load of wooly rubbish. Don't bother with a GP report as their obligations are to the patient not a business. Use a third party health management type of company.

Do not ask leading questions - ask clear questions

A GP is unlikely to give a report to an employer anyway

by 'third party health management' i presume you mean a proper occupational health service with properly qualified Doctors and Nurses

Edited by mph1977 on Saturday 3rd March 03:22

[mph1977]

MagicalTrevor said:

<snip>
The company I work for have a 3rd party health management company, I think he's refused to allow them access to his medical details or from contacting his doctor.

that's generally not very clever in such circumstances as the usual rule of thumb with such things is to keep everyone on the same page from a health point of view. the absence of communication between the occupational health team and the GP will be noted it also closes the door to the involvement of specialist resources within mental health such asthe vocational team

[MagicalTrevor]

You seem well informed may I ask if you work in the healthcare/occupational health profession?

That's a genuine question btw.

[Pints]

Without wishing to sound obtuse or provocational, there quite clearly exist persons who do seem to do their best to take the piss and play the system. While I acknowledge that genuine mental health issues exist and can contribute to LTS, this colleague of yours sounds like someone who is playing the long game and plans to take the company for as much as he can.

It's a pity because when someone comes along who is genuinely suffering from the affliction, they'll be tarred with the same brush as this work-shy tool.

[dundarach]

Read the policy - you should have one

Ours is very simple

35 days in 12 months -formal warning
12 more in 12 months dismissal

Sounds to me like the people at the top do not know what there're doing....

[Pints]

dundarach said:

Read the policy - you should have one

Ours is very simple

35 days in 12 months -formal warning
12 more in 12 months dismissal

Sounds to me like the people at the top do not know what there're doing....

A very narrow mindset to have IMO.

Imagine someone suffering with cancer. Sounds like your company's policy would dismiss someone in such a siuation, because you can easily rack up this many days in treatment, etc. and eventually be in a position to return to work.

[Engineer1]

That cast in stone rules seem stupid, a reccuring or long term illness or even planed medical treatment can result in you using more than 35 days, ok you could argue that holiday should be used but then you can fall foul of the no more than 2 weeks off in any quarter rule or similar.

[mph1977]

MagicalTrevor said:

You seem well informed may I ask if you work in the healthcare/occupational health profession?

That's a genuine question btw.

Trevor, was that directed towards me ?

I'm a Health Professional with a long term health condition and have worked in specialised rehab so have quite a lot of exposure to the system from all sides.

[mph1977]

Pints said:

dundarach said:

Read the policy - you should have one

Ours is very simple

35 days in 12 months -formal warning
12 more in 12 months dismissal

Sounds to me like the people at the top do not know what there're doing....

A very narrow mindset to have IMO.

Imagine someone suffering with cancer. Sounds like your company's policy would dismiss someone in such a siuation, because you can easily rack up this many days in treatment, etc. and eventually be in a position to return to work.

never mind cancer , it'll be ropey time wise if you were to have any kind of major operation or even to break a bone ...

while total days can be better than episode based systems , such a simplistic system is wide open to claims being made against the employer, especially when other employers might be looking at months to years of continuous absence along expert reports before dismissing someone.

[Pints]

mph1977 said:

never mind cancer , it'll be ropey time wise if you were to have any kind of major operation or even to break a bone ...

while total days can be better than episode based systems , such a simplistic system is wide open to claims being made against the employer, especially when other employers might be looking at months to years of continuous absence along expert reports before dismissing someone.

Absolutely. I used cancer as an example because I know of someone who recently went through this.

We have some staff on our books who have been listed as LTS for several years.

[Deva Link]

mph1977 said:

edc said:

There is no definitive answer but I have unfortunately had to dismiss a handful of people for capability / absence in the past couple of years. Others who have had problems we have instigated the procedures, set the targets, got relevant reports where necessary and managed their absence to aan improved situation.

Long term absence by it's nature means dismissal is normally months rather than days or weeks.

As a rough plan after 4 weeks schedule a home visit.

not a good idea at all , can be interpreted as harassment

Not sure which bit you're saying is harrassment, but quite a lot of public bodies (councils etc) send a nurse to do a home visit the same (first) day someone calls in sick.

And in my wife's civil service department, where some people would have you believe no-one ever gets sacked, they managed a woman out who was forever off with stress, blaming the pressure of work. It took several months but they they firmly pursued it.

[ClaphamGT3]

Deva Link said:

mph1977 said:

edc said:

There is no definitive answer but I have unfortunately had to dismiss a handful of people for capability / absence in the past couple of years. Others who have had problems we have instigated the procedures, set the targets, got relevant reports where necessary and managed their absence to aan improved situation.

Long term absence by it's nature means dismissal is normally months rather than days or weeks.

As a rough plan after 4 weeks schedule a home visit.

The harrassment comment is unmitigated tosh. It is increasingly seen as part of an employers duty of care to assess the health and well-being of an employee on LTS and certainly to undertake an assessment of readiness to return to work. MPH 1977 may have read a lot of material on the subject but hasn't understood it.

not a good idea at all , can be interpreted as harassment

Not sure which bit you're saying is harrassment, but quite a lot of public bodies (councils etc) send a nurse to do a home visit the same (first) day someone calls in sick.

And in my wife's civil service department, where some people would have you believe no-one ever gets sacked, they managed a woman out who was forever off with stress, blaming the pressure of work. It took several months but they they firmly pursued it.

[edc]

My post is top line. It clearly doesn't go into intricate detail of how to handle a case. Each case is individual but the basic process is the same. It does work. I have been there from an employer perspective.

There is no harassment in contacting your employee and requesting a home visit. They are perfectly entitled to refuse. In that instance I would try again and let them refuse again. All of this should be documented. Why would the relationship breakdown so much that the employee would to communicate? Regular contact in long-term illness can be a good thing in much the same way that employers can use keep in touch days for maternity.

The medical report serves a number of purposes. Most employers are not health professionals so extra help is sometimes useful. If an employer does want to dismiss s/he has every right to do so but should follow the right process. If the health report supports the case for dismissal then great. If it doesn't then also great. If the employee refuses any other intervention then the employer is entitled to make a decision on all the information which is available to them. If that means no health report then so be it.

A GP will provide a report if you write to them and have the employee consent. I have done so in the past but increasingly in later years have found them to be of little value. A couple of reasons: they seem to be written in haste with little content and more pertinently in the case of long term illness the employee has normally been referred elsewhere and it is this other person that is handling the case.

mph1977 you seem to have read a lot in between the lines of what I have written and come to some conclusions which I simply didn't write eg medical report as a pure transaction, that health problems in themselves are legal grounds for dismissal, that I would ignore the equality Act etc - at no point did i actually state any of this.

I am not a healthcare expert and don't profess to be but I work for the employer in just these sorts of situations. What you can't read off the screen is actually how much empathy and support I can actually provide whether directly myself, by coaching others or referring individuals for other support

No doubt, if a person cannot do the job due to absence related capability then the company must consider the feasibility of continuing employment.

[HappySilver]

Pints said:

dundarach said:

Read the policy - you should have one

Ours is very simple

35 days in 12 months -formal warning
12 more in 12 months dismissal

Sounds to me like the people at the top do not know what there're doing....

A very narrow mindset to have IMO.

Imagine someone suffering with cancer. Sounds like your company's policy would dismiss someone in such a siuation, because you can easily rack up this many days in treatment, etc. and eventually be in a position to return to work.

These types of policies are very old fashioned and have mainly been removed for the reasons stated and because some employees see them as, in this case, up to 34 days additional holiday with no consequence. Case-by-case is the more modern thinking.

As for "A GP is unlikely to give a report to an employer anyway", in 25 years of requesting 100s of these I think I have only been turned down once. Why would they refuse? They are interested in the same as the employer and the employee i.e. to ensure that the employees medical condition and the consequences of this are considered by the employer when deciding how to manage the employee. They do not have to give-up any super confidential information, they simply state what the reasons for the absence are and how long they expect the employee to be absent etc. - there is legislation to covers the requesting of these reports and confidentiality etc. of them.

An independent medical assessment is the way forward, this can either be an actual assessment or paper based on the reports of the GP/specialists treating the employee. This will determine if the condition is covered by disability legislation etc. and guide the employer on how to manage the case.

The biggest mistake I see managers make is believing they can make judgements on medical conditions without any medical training.

[Robsti]

I would imagine that employees that are on full pay are more likely to be on long tem sick leave than ones that get SSP!

[Dr Jekyll]

A friend of mine answered application form questions as follows.


Q: How many days were you off sick in the last 12 months?

A: Zero

Q: what was the reason/s?

A: Self employed.