Employment: losing bonus due to absence

esuhl

My employer has always had a clear policy for paying bonuses. One criterion is that you have had at most 1.5 days off due to sickness in the last month.

I was curious (as a point of interest) as to whether this was legal. After all, a company has to pay you if you are sick, and if there was any suggestion of "foul play" you would expect disciplinary proceedings.

If I was genuinely ill, I would expect to be off for more than 1.5 days, whereas "pulling a sickie" could happily be done once a month without risking your bonus!

Anyway, I know nothing about this area of law and just wondered what it actually says. Does anyone know...?

ispartacus75

A company DOESNT have to pay you sick pay, so I dont know why you have put this.

zzzLazyDaisy

A company doesn't have to pay you a bonus either, and any bonus they do pay is subject to the terms and conditions the employer lays down.

The only exception to the sickness rule would be that if the employee had a disability and the reason for the absence in excess of 1.5 days was due to the disability. The employer has a duty to ensure that the disabled employee is not disadvantaged for a reason relating to their disability, compared to their able-bodied colleagues, so any absence for a reason related to the disability should be discounted.

But if someone had two days, or a week, off with a cold, say, they would lose their bonus. That is perfectly legal.

esuhl

ispartacus75 wrote: »

A company DOESNT have to pay you sick pay, so I dont know why you have put this.

Oh, really? I thought they did. I thought even temporary workers had to be paid sick pay under certain conditions, but maybe I'm wrong. Like I said - I know nothing about employment law.

I just thought it was a bit unfair that you met every target, every day of the month, and then due to 2 days of genuine sickness lost the whole bonus. But maybe that's perfectly legal - I don't know!?

zzzLazyDaisy

The only legal entitlement to sick pay, is statutory sick pay - currently £75.40 a week - even then you don't get paid for the first 3 days.

Any other payment you may receive during periods of sick leave are a matter of contract between you and your employer, but there is no legal right to this.

esuhl

Ahhh, well. Fair enough. I realise that the bonus doesn't have to be paid at all, but I thought the terms for paying it might have to be "fair" and that "fair" might mean that you shouldn't lose your bonus if you were ill through no fault of your own... if you had been signed off by your doctor, for example. Obviously I'm very wrong!

I had forgotten about the fact that you aren't legally entitled to sick pay for the first three days. My employer is kind enough to pay sick pay from day one, so maybe I've got a better deal than I thought!

Like I said, I was just curious. One of my colleagues was grumbling about it a few days ago. Looks like I lost our bet :rolleyes:

Anyway, thanks a lot for your comments :T

SandC

I think the point is not the being ill per se but the absence from work. Most bouts of illness are typically through 'no fault of your own' like tummy upset or a bad cold, flu, some bug that's going around. The fact of the matter is that you are not at work and full productivity can only be achieved when everyone is present.

How fair would it seem to give a bonus to someone who had a week off the month before so effectively did around 75% of the work of everyone else - just because they couldn't help getting flu?

You have to look at bonuses for what they are. You are paid a full wage for turning up - and your company obviously has a policy for paying full pay for however long they have decided in their contracts. Therefore you are not being penalised for being off sick. A bonus is not part of your payment package so you are not being treated detrimentally by not receiving it because you have been absent more than 1.5 days.

It sounds rather generous to me actually.