Does Anyone Know What Regiment These...
History0 min ago
Where do they stand?
4 Answers
My partners employer has announced the other day that they are taking a completely different approach to recording sickness and dealing with sickness absence.
What they plan to do is from the start of this year record all sickness and name and shame employee's who have poor sickness records (which they have already done now) and also from the very first period of sickness (not taking into account last years as it starts on a clean slate) they will be giving warnings?
Now, to me this seems completely ludicrous! How can they give a warning for a "first time offence" of being sick? Surely by their rationale, they expect all employees to then be super-human and never contract an illness, virus, infection or bug???
How does this stand with the changes in employee/employer contract of employment also? do employers have to write a new contract with the new terms and what if the employee refuses to sign or agree to this?
Is there any legal stance for employer to do this or employee to fight it? Also have they broken the Data Protection Act by naming and shaming employees for previous sickness records that to all intents and purposes are for managerial purposes and kept in confidential files?
What they plan to do is from the start of this year record all sickness and name and shame employee's who have poor sickness records (which they have already done now) and also from the very first period of sickness (not taking into account last years as it starts on a clean slate) they will be giving warnings?
Now, to me this seems completely ludicrous! How can they give a warning for a "first time offence" of being sick? Surely by their rationale, they expect all employees to then be super-human and never contract an illness, virus, infection or bug???
How does this stand with the changes in employee/employer contract of employment also? do employers have to write a new contract with the new terms and what if the employee refuses to sign or agree to this?
Is there any legal stance for employer to do this or employee to fight it? Also have they broken the Data Protection Act by naming and shaming employees for previous sickness records that to all intents and purposes are for managerial purposes and kept in confidential files?
Answers
1 to 4 of 4
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by stevie2f2f. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I would have thought that the only thing they couldn't do is name and shame publicly.
A warning for a first offence seems a little excessive though. I know of companies that will have a meeting with anyone who has more than 3 sickness leaves in one year. As long as they are fare and treat everyone equaly then they aren't doind anything wrong. In fact I think the local authorities should adopt this as their sickness benifs are considered as extra holiday and (lots of) people take their 'sick allowance' accordingly which in turn keepts local taxes high.
A lot of companies are adopting this type of thing to combat the excessive sick record of some employees who abuse the beifit. It also puts pressure on work mates to cover and the extra expence this all entails.
As long as they give adequate notice they can (I think) add it and it just becomes part of your working conditions so a new contract isn't necessary.
A warning for a first offence seems a little excessive though. I know of companies that will have a meeting with anyone who has more than 3 sickness leaves in one year. As long as they are fare and treat everyone equaly then they aren't doind anything wrong. In fact I think the local authorities should adopt this as their sickness benifs are considered as extra holiday and (lots of) people take their 'sick allowance' accordingly which in turn keepts local taxes high.
A lot of companies are adopting this type of thing to combat the excessive sick record of some employees who abuse the beifit. It also puts pressure on work mates to cover and the extra expence this all entails.
As long as they give adequate notice they can (I think) add it and it just becomes part of your working conditions so a new contract isn't necessary.
I used to work for a company where employees were penalised for being off sick.
We were "allowed" to be off sick for a cumulative total of 10 days per year. Beyond that, you did not get paid.
For every day you were off sick, you forfeited 10 % of that month's profit-based bonus.
Also, you forfeited 10% of the quarterly bonus for every day off sick during the relevant quarter.
Coupled with absolutely zero chance of development or promotion and truly abysmal pay, it was a wonderful place to work !
We were "allowed" to be off sick for a cumulative total of 10 days per year. Beyond that, you did not get paid.
For every day you were off sick, you forfeited 10 % of that month's profit-based bonus.
Also, you forfeited 10% of the quarterly bonus for every day off sick during the relevant quarter.
Coupled with absolutely zero chance of development or promotion and truly abysmal pay, it was a wonderful place to work !
I presume theyre not 'publishing' what the illness or excuse for being off sick is? If theyre just saying that Joe Bloggs was off sick 5 days this month I can't see anything wrong with that as it is stating a fact - and the people working with Mr Bloggs will certainly know that he has been off 5 days anyway as they will have been covering for him.
Most employment contracts will have a clause concerning sick leave which will allow the employer to, as a last resort, terminate a contract due to poor attendance, which can include sick leave. They would need to keep this in proportion though as it would be seen as grossly unfair if a person was disciplined for having one day off sick.
Employers are advised to do return to work interviews after any sick leave (even one day) as this action alone tends to cut down on the number of sick days taken. This would be most employers first step with perhaps disciplinary action for those that appear to be serial sick leave takers.
I cant see a problem having sick leave charts, the same as most offices have annual leave charts. There would probably be a problem if they gave the reason why people were off i.e. their illness, as this could be a breach of confidence.
Most employment contracts will have a clause concerning sick leave which will allow the employer to, as a last resort, terminate a contract due to poor attendance, which can include sick leave. They would need to keep this in proportion though as it would be seen as grossly unfair if a person was disciplined for having one day off sick.
Employers are advised to do return to work interviews after any sick leave (even one day) as this action alone tends to cut down on the number of sick days taken. This would be most employers first step with perhaps disciplinary action for those that appear to be serial sick leave takers.
I cant see a problem having sick leave charts, the same as most offices have annual leave charts. There would probably be a problem if they gave the reason why people were off i.e. their illness, as this could be a breach of confidence.
Employers are allowed - indeed advised - to keep employee sickness records and take action if a particular employee takes an excessive amount of leave. It's a way of pointing out shirkers and also of addressing areas where the employee may need help.
Publicising the names and records of such employees, however, would surely be a breach of confidentiality.
Publicising the names and records of such employees, however, would surely be a breach of confidentiality.
1 to 4 of 4
