Off sick since august , been called in for a 'catchup ' with HR ??

jdturk

dpassmore wrote: »

janiebaby29

I can understand them trying to keep you in work, but by compounding your injury by giving you a position that has undoubtedly exacerbated your problem (as you stated it got worse doing the new role), that is downright negligent and is unacceptable.

I think its very harsh on the company who could have got rid of the OP earlier on. Damned if you do and Damned if you don't!

jdturk

jdturk wrote: »

I think its very harsh on the company who could have got rid of the OP earlier on. Damned if you do and Damned if you don't!

It all depends on the circumstances as well, if the company said we will be making you redundant or you can have this other job then the responsibility should lie with the OP.

If however they said you have to move to this other role then its a bit differant.

tanith

I have been in the position the OP is in and its not easy to admit you can't do a job you love anymore..I was given lots of other options but for various reasons they weren't suitable (one was on a different site altogether and I couldn't manage the distance involved), so eventually the union and OH with discussions with myself came to the conclusion Ill-Health retirement was the way to go but that decision was a hard one for me as I loved the job I was doing and giving up was difficult as I was near to retirement age and knew I wouldn't work again..hopefully the OP is much younger and will recover enough to find other employment... but I know how it feels to see no way out other than to give up...
I would definately get advice from your Union they were an endless source of info for myself , I had no idea I could claim IB for instance ...

Uncertain

jdturk wrote: »

I think its very harsh on the company who could have got rid of the OP earlier on. Damned if you do and Damned if you don't!

Maybe, maybe not.....

These large organisations have large HR departments designed to "minimise", as they would see it, problems that staff create.

If they OP's condition has indeed be caused or made worse by work then there is no reason why they should escape their responsibilities.

Also, the fact that some of these "HR professionals" would be out of their depth in a paddling pool is not the OP's problem. If they have not done their job properly and the OP can benefit from it then why not?

jdturk

Uncertain wrote: »

Maybe, maybe not.....

These large organisations have large HR departments designed to "minimise", as they would see it, problems that staff create.

If they OP's condition has indeed be caused or made worse by work then there is no reason why they should escape their responsibilities.

Also, the fact that some of these "HR professionals" would be out of their depth in a paddling pool is not the OP's problem. If they have not done their job properly and the OP can benefit from it then why not?

All it will mean is that if these things become more prevalent that people won't be given the opportunity to move to another job if theirs is being made redundant

paulwf

Torby wrote: »

@PAULWF: if the condition could be attributed to age/underlying conditions etc, it can be argued that the injury at work exacerbated the onset, i.e. yes it would/could have happened in 10 years time but this has brought this forward by 3 or 4 years, so in court it may be argued that the injured party would only be compensated for a short period as opposed to supporting them financially for the rest of their "working lives".

I hear what you are saying, I was thinking that the till work may only have accelerated the illness by months rather than several years though, and not cause any lasting harm that couldn't have been cured by a month off (not 6 months and counting). It's up to a medical expert to look into it though as I suggested...good idea about talking to the union too though.

Also if you do get a settlement for an injury at work and you have been off for a lengthy period and moved on to incapacity benefit, the award would have to be high enough to take this into account, the government will also wat its pound of flesh back if you win your case.

I was wondering what the likely settlement would be? My concern would be burning your bridges and only ending up with a few thousand (a few months pay) back. A more amicable solution might be just as profitable?

dickydonkin

Some good views and opinions here - some valid - some not so.

Whatever the OP decides to do going forward will certainly depend on a medical diagnosis and subsequent legal advice should that become necessary.

The ability or otherwise to be able to continue working will also be an obvious deciding factor as to what to do next.

It would be helpful to the OP as to what type and the likely causation of her injuries were.

BTW, checkout assisstants are at quite a high risk of MSD's (musculoskeletal diseases) and WRULD's (Work related upper limb disorders) and on the face of it, the decision to place someone who is seemingly suffering from a back condition into a realtively high risk activity, seems a bit crass to me.

See the following links:

http://osha.europa.eu/en/publications/e-facts/efact12

http://www.hse.gov.uk/fit3street/msdretail.htm

There may/may not have been an underlying/pre existing medical condition.

The injury may/may not have been caused by the nature of the work.

Age may/may not be a contributory factor.

Without a professional diagnosis and knowing the full facts, we on this forum are really not in a position to ascertain the type/cause of the OP's illness, but I think there has been some good advice that may assist her.

Only the OP can decide what course to take, but in her situation, I would attempt to ascertain what type of injury is causing the problem and determine the cause(s) of that injury before deciding on the next step.

If the injury can be remedied, then fine - if not and there is no other suitable employment within the company, then the company may expedite an exit strategy - moreso if there is a likelihood of them having to defend an industrial injury claim in the future.

Sponge

I agree with the posts suggesting you need to seek proper advice from your Union, ACAS, CAB, etc. You need to be prepared. You need to know your rights. You may need to have somebody in this interview with you if you’re unsure.

I've been off a few times with a bad back and only last week had a visit from an Occupation Health Advisor. She went through my condition and did a thorough assessment of my working environment to make sure I had all I need (equipment wise) and that nothing was making matters worse (I’m sitting badly). It sounds like you’ve had none of this.

I don't know if it's my company's policy, or a legal requirement, but HR should have been directly involved with your case and how you were being 'processed' with respect to your medical condition. They most certainly should have directed an OHA to assess your working environment, to make sure everything was as it should be and not aggravating your condition. It sounds like they haven't. It sounds like they've made things worse by changing your job/role.

As far as some of the other posts: try not to take them to heart. There are lots of people here that positively like to give bad news, badly. They use excuses such as, 'Should I lie to you?' to hide the fact they can't offer straight, factual, helpful advice without being rude, patronising and inconsiderate of peoples emotional state/feelings.

Of course you can't be off sick indefinitely, being paid forever by your employer. A fact I'm sure you'll agree with. But if your employer has been at all negligent in handling your case, then they need to be held accountable. This is where the professional advice comes in.

janiebaby29

Sponge wrote: »

I agree with the posts suggesting you need to seek proper advice from your Union, ACAS, CAB, etc. You need to be prepared. You need to know your rights. You may need to have somebody in this interview with you if you’re unsure.

I've been off a few times with a bad back and only last week had a visit from an Occupation Health Advisor. She went through my condition and did a thorough assessment of my working environment to make sure I had all I need (equipment wise) and that nothing was making matters worse (I’m sitting badly). It sounds like you’ve had none of this.

I don't know if it's my company's policy, or a legal requirement, but HR should have been directly involved with your case and how you were being 'processed' with respect to your medical condition. They most certainly should have directed an OHA to assess your working environment, to make sure everything was as it should be and not aggravating your condition. It sounds like they haven't. It sounds like they've made things worse by changing your job.

As far as some of the other posts, then try not to take them to heart. There are lots of people here that positively like to give bad news, badly. They use excuses such as, 'Should I lie to you?' to hide the fact they can't offer straight, factual, helpful advice without being rude, patronising and inconsiderate to peoples feelings.

Thankyou , Im trying not to take it to heart ,
I do want to work , in a desk situation thats right for me ,
I'm just so fed up of being off work and my genral back condtion ,
Its hard to see the wood for the trees ATM

janiebaby29

Just to say thankyou all for taking the time to reply to me ,
I will let you know whats going on