In a 6 month period how many sick days are "acceptable"
Discussion
As an aside - if you have not been employed for more than 12 months then you can get the boot regardless of sickies: nicked from Google - Statutory protection from Unfair Dismissal only applies after a person has been continuously employed for 12 months. An employee with less than 12 months may be dismissed by giving reasonable notice.
We have a policy of the 10 days paid sick leave in any 18 month rolling period. You must server three months continuous employment without sickies to get your entitlement back.
We have a policy of the 10 days paid sick leave in any 18 month rolling period. You must server three months continuous employment without sickies to get your entitlement back.
TurricanII said:
As an aside - if you have not been employed for more than 12 months then you can get the boot regardless of sickies: nicked from Google - Statutory protection from Unfair Dismissal only applies after a person has been continuously employed for 12 months. An employee with less than 12 months may be dismissed by giving reasonable notice.
We have a policy of the 10 days paid sick leave in any 18 month rolling period. You must server three months continuous employment without sickies to get your entitlement back.
What do you mean get the entitlement back ? We have a policy of the 10 days paid sick leave in any 18 month rolling period. You must server three months continuous employment without sickies to get your entitlement back.
LC23 said:
Surely they are on dodgy ground with that? They can't just start handing out disciplinaries when people are off sick as it would be so difficult to prove if they were genuine or not?
Doesn't matter if they are genuine or not, time off is time off and should be dealt with appropriately.If it's not genuine, then that's potentially gross misconduct.
sinizter said:
It's 10 days in an 18 month rolling period. Are you suggesting that 3 months without any sick leaves will return the full allowance back ? Then the rolling period does not make sense.
Maybe I'm talking rubbish, but I think he was trying to say that if the 'allowance' was exceeded, you then had to have 3 months without sick. Like I said, may be completely wrong.TBH, I think the whole concept of a sick allowance / limit is ridiculous. Unbelievably, people still see it as some sort of entitlement or something to aim for (well, just below the allowance obviously).
I probably average a day or two (genuine sick days) a year and have been many years without any sick (as have a lot of other people of course) and still find it very awkward / embarrassing if I ever have to call my Manager to explain that I won't be in. However, my company still have a limit, up to which no real action is taken, of around 100 on the bradford factor (which is a lot in my view). I'm sure many people happily end the year with a Bradford score of 80 / 90 with no repercussions whatsoever.
You get 10 paid sick days off in 18 months starting from the date of your first sickie. You do not get another paid sick day until (1) you have worked three months with no sick AND (2) 18 months has passed from the date of your first sickie. Edited to add: after 18 months has passed AND you have served 3 months with no sick, you get 10 days paid sick again.
Edited by TurricanII on Wednesday 30th March 23:04
Carrot said:
Roberty said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Why the hell should there be a difference?It's amazing how that hangover
in the morning doesn't turn into a sickie when you don't get paid.Lobster43 said:
If you're a Contractor, the average sick time per year is 0.
It's amazing how that hangover in the morning doesn't turn into a sickie when you don't get paid.
It's the same for most small business owners. They can often still pay themselves to be off sick but mysteriously they rarely need to!It's amazing how that hangover
in the morning doesn't turn into a sickie when you don't get paid.Haighermeister said:
My company's policy is 3 in 12 months gets you on a disciplinary....
discip or attendance warning ? all too often people start bleating about discips for attendance but in fact it's the Capability (attendance) process and not a discip - that said the eventual outcome can be a P45 either way
Roberty said:
Why the hell should there be a difference?
something to do with the number of health, 999 services and the like staff employed in the public sector ... I'd be interested to compare the rate of assault / person handling injuries between private and public sector ... then there's the stuff like infection control which only applies to some sectors ( e.g. healthcare , food, pharma + cosmetics manufacture)I work in healthcare if I get D+V it's a minimum 3 days off - and that assumes i'm only symptomatic on one day , because I have to have 48 hours clear of symptoms per the infection control bods, if I attempt to return to work before that 48 hours is up I will be disciplined ...
LC23 said:
Surely they are on dodgy ground with that? They can't just start handing out disciplinaries when people are off sick as it would be so difficult to prove if they were genuine or not?
A disciplinary invite on the grounds of capability would be valid for this. If someone is incapable of turning up to work (for whatever reason), then they are incapable of doing their job.Each case should be taken on it's own merit though, a invite to disciplinary meeting is not disciplinary action in itself.
Further, an employer should/would be making "reasonable adjustments" for someone with a disability.
I've worked for a third world oil company on one year contracts, for some years, last year 4 days after taking a new contract with a group company I had never worked for before I found out I need heart surgury, So I maxed my annual sick leave in the first 3 months, and then had 2 months on half days and was paid a full day. They renewed my contract again this year and they doubled my annual sick leave in case I need it.
So it depends on if you have a good employer, these people could have told me to go after 4 days.
I get very concerned by somne of the sick policies reference don these threads, and by what people think is acceptable behaveour from their employer, some of the things on here seen as standard UK practice wouldn't work in places I've been in Africa.
So it depends on if you have a good employer, these people could have told me to go after 4 days.
I get very concerned by somne of the sick policies reference don these threads, and by what people think is acceptable behaveour from their employer, some of the things on here seen as standard UK practice wouldn't work in places I've been in Africa.
Berw - out of interest how did they double your sick leave? Do you mean they doubled the amount of paid sick leave you could have, if you had had to take it? is this just for you or does it apply to all employees? I'm just curious/interested to know how it would work in practise
Seems like a nice understanding firm to work for
Seems like a nice understanding firm to work for
Custard Test said:
liner33 said:
In the last 6 months my niece has had 5 days off with swine flu ewith doctors note and 5 days off with Norovirus again doctors note
She got a written warning from her employer due to excessive sickness .
That is harsh and I would appeal that decision.She got a written warning from her employer due to excessive sickness .
When you enter into a contract of employment you are implicitly agreeing that you are ready, willing and able to work. If you are not, then you are not fulfilling the terms of your contract.
Whilst some employers can absorb some absence, not all can, and if your absence ends up costing the company, then they are well within their rights to discipline as they feel appropriate.
It'd be interesting to know more though, as there is probably a history of absence and these were just the last two examples. The normal excuse is "But I was genuinely sick this time", which is imediately followed wiht the question from me "Are you suggesting that the otherinstances were just sickies?".
Disciplinary action is only ever taken with a trend or multiple examples, yet people confuse it with occurring because of the last instance, when in fact it relates to all absences over a period of time.
Roll up, roll up! meet R1loon! the human cyborg! 
although I've only had half a sick day in 10 years, I wonder how much more money it costs employers when say 1 person has a virus goes to work and gives it to 5 others who are now off sick rather than 1. Swings and roundabouts?
People will get ill being in contact and made up of so much bacteria, you can't avoid it and sometimes it can get unlucky and happen more than once in a short space of time. But at the same time people will always abuse it, just like the benefits system, you can't win!
although I've only had half a sick day in 10 years, I wonder how much more money it costs employers when say 1 person has a virus goes to work and gives it to 5 others who are now off sick rather than 1. Swings and roundabouts?
People will get ill being in contact and made up of so much bacteria, you can't avoid it and sometimes it can get unlucky and happen more than once in a short space of time. But at the same time people will always abuse it, just like the benefits system, you can't win!
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff