Should this be reported?

MrsAnnie

I have no idea if DD is on the payroll.

She physically and mentally can not do any work what so ever - so I highly doubt she is on the payroll.

Having said that, can a person legally be on a payroll if they 'do' nothing for the company in any capacity? If so then there is a possibility that infact she may be on the books. It would certainly explain alot.

Zazen999

MrsAnnie wrote: »

I have no idea if DD is on the payroll.

She physically and mentally can not do any work what so ever - so I highly doubt she is on the payroll.

Having said that, can a person legally be on a payroll if they 'do' nothing for the company in any capacity? If so then there is a possibility that infact she may be on the books. It would certainly explain alot.

This is why I asked earlier; it would be one way of getting round the insurance issue.

However, what business in their right minds would allow this [esp without the father being there]? At the very least, it is stopping members of staff from doing their job!

Very very strange.

kingfisherblue

I have a disabled child and I would be very concerned if he had to sit around in an office all day. He has both physical disabilities and mental impairment, as well as medical problems, so he needs quite a high level of care and is unlikely to ever do paid work.

Looking from a parental point of view, there is rarely enough day care available, but an office environment is not a suitable alternative. SS can help to find day care, they can arrange Direct Payments to pay for a carer to look after the young lady while her dad is at work, they may be able to offer other alternatives such as respite.

Looking at it from an employment point of view (and I do have a little experience as I am a director of a community centre):
* Risk assessments - for the young lady (hurting herself on equipment, unsuitable access, spilling a hot drink, etc) and for other staff (risk of hurting themselves if they help her, risk of unjust accusations, etc)
* Fire safety
* Insurance - very important! It is possible that having her there invalidates some insurances if she is not on the payroll
* Anybody working with or caring for vulnerable adults needs an enhanced CRB, currently about £36 per person
* Work not being completed on time by the office staff if they are busy with the young lady in question
* Unfair expectations on office staff
* Change of job description without consultation
* Possible need for personal care - who would help her?
* Several employment laws possibly being broken due to above points

I feel quite sorry for this young lady - she doesn't have much of a life, does she?

The way forward may well be to speak to managers about the office staff not accepting any responsibility for this girl, but this would have to be all the staff in aggreement, otherwise one staff member could be perceived to be a trouble maker. However, I can understand staff being reluctant to take this route, even as a group. Instead, Social Services have been suggested by some posters and I would agree that this is the most likely way to get something done. They have a duty of care for disabled people and this girl is not receiving the standard of care that is her right (I'm not having a go at any of the staff - they should not be offering her any care. Nor am I having a go at her father - he may be at the end of his tether and be equally unhappy with the situation but not be able to see a way out of it).

This girl needs proper support and she is not in the correct environment to receive it. What would happen if the father did not turn up to collect her one evening? Who would stay until he did arrive? How long would it be reasonable to wait? Would two people have to stay to avoid any risk of accusations of improper behaviour?

This is a situation that is potentially dangerous. Even when the father is there, it is unacceptable. He is not getting any sort of break from caring (except this week ).

The father has a legal right for a Carer's Assessment from SS and this will take into account his caring needs, employment and his need for respite.

Equally, the young lady has a right to an assessment to determine her rights - and I think that being sat in an office all day while her father works as well as cares for her is far below the level of rights that she has.

The staff also have rights - the right to do their jobs as per their job descriptions, the right not to be unpaid carers in their workplace, the right to raise a grievance.

This situation needs addressing quickly - the managers are being negligent in their duties towards their staff. More importantly, the young lady needs her rights recognising and acting upon.

ceridwen

MrsAnnie wrote: »

Management is not the one looking after her for 8 hours a day.

Well - I am wondering about specifics actually.

This is certainly an unusual situation...I've not heard of anything like this before.

Just what EXACTLY do the work colleagues do each day in this sorta "carer" role they are in willy-nilly?

Does it just consist of making her a drink whenever they make themselves one? - in which case "shame on them for being awkward about it"? on the one hand....

...or does it involve elements of personal care (eg toiletting-type duties, etc) on the other hand? - in which case then we are talking about a very different thing...

terra_ferma

ceridwen wrote: »

...or does it involve elements of personal care (eg toiletting-type duties, etc) on the other hand? - in which case then we are talking about a very different thing...

That would make a huge difference. Providing personal/intimate care (e.g. wiping someone's bottom) would put the workers in a very vulnerable position. What if she makes allegations? Or even worse if someone was to take advantage of her and abuse her (it happens in the real world, unfortunately)?
Only people who have been CRB checked should look after vulnerable people, as it's been said before. Even volunteers.
Family friends don't need to, but in this case it's a work environment.

Hope it gets sorted quickly!

dickydonkin

Knowing what i know about the company, they are unlikely to agree to a fire drill especially since they are aware that she is in the office.

kingfisherblue has highlighted some very good points and there is not a lot more to add.

Although it is wise to have fire drills at least twice a year, what is worrying is that should a real fire break out or a swift evacuation is necessary, who would take responsibility for her safe evacuation?

There should also be a workplace risk assessment undertaken or reviewed should one exist to take into consideration the disabled person.

Have escape routes been modified for example?
Is there a designated person to aid evacuation?
Have amenities been improved?

All of these things and many more which kingfisherblue highlighted need to be considered and as it is a place of work, the company have a duty of care to her - even though she is not an employee.

This situation is very unusual and it seems the disabled persons father is taking advantage of the good nature of the workforce.

Maybe the company should be made aware of their responsibilities and let them deal with this delicate situation.

SandC

MrsAnnie wrote: »

I have no idea if DD is on the payroll.

She physically and mentally can not do any work what so ever - so I highly doubt she is on the payroll.

Having said that, can a person legally be on a payroll if they 'do' nothing for the company in any capacity? If so then there is a possibility that infact she may be on the books. It would certainly explain alot.

It happens regularly in privately owned companies. At my last place two of the children of the chairman were paid every month but didn't actually come into work. I know because I had to issue their payslips to them.

shellsuit

I know a company who has someone on the payroll who doesn't work there ~ well, they did do but haven't now for a good number of years.

kingfisherblue

I don't think the question about whether this girl is on the payroll is relevant - I think the problem is that other staff apart from her father are having to take responsibility for her.

floss2

kingfisherblue wrote: »

... I think the problem is that other staff apart from her father are having to take responsibility for her.

without anyone actually knowing that they are trained, that appropriate checks have been made and that the staff are adequately covered in the event of any unforseen incident.