Pre-employment health questionnaire

sunday_girl

Hi

I'm applying for a job and along with the application form I have been sent a health questionnaire to fill in. Just wondered if this was common? - when I used to work in HR we would only ask for these kind of details after offer and it seems to be quite personal information to disclose when you may not even get through shortlisting.

Is this now the norm?

Person_one

I've never had one until after offer. Doesn't seem right to me. What sort of info is it asking for?

jimbms

For a lot of companies yes and why not, it means you can weed out those who may have problems and go off sick, employers at the moment have the upper hand as there are plenty to pick from so they can ask a candidate whatever they want, if what they ask can only be legally be asked to be given as an option then you will find those that opt not to give it will find the don't get an interview bar the token couple who are already pencilled to fail.

seabreeze96

This has also happened to me, I received some info recently before attending an interview whereby one of the forms was a health screening questionnaire - asking how long I had been off work in the last 2 years, what vacinnations I've received, etc. Then again, it was for the NHS!

Googlewhacker

It is legal at the moment (presuming they ask everyone) but it was going to be changed by he Equality Bill coming in in October this year but the date has been removed from the internet and as such it could be pushed back depending on the government thinking.

sunday_girl

That's interesting thanks, I have filled it out....don't really have a problem as I have nothing much to declare so to speak...but just thought it was a little unusual at this stage.

jimbms

Googlewhacker wrote: »

It is legal at the moment (presuming they ask everyone) but it was going to be changed by he Equality Bill coming in in October this year but the date has been removed from the internet and as such it could be pushed back depending on the government thinking.

As I said they can make it illegal to demand but they can't make it illegal to ask you to supply this info of your own free will and make it clear you can decline and it won't count on your application. the fact that only 10% who decline get an interview and none of these get the job is just a coincidence. Get real if a potential employer asks then the choice is comply or look elsewhere, btw I fail to see how this would come under any equality ruling as all candidates would be asked equally.

Googlewhacker

jimbms wrote: »

As I said they can make it illegal to demand but they can't make it illegal to ask you to supply this info of your own free will and make it clear you can decline and it won't count on your application. the fact that only 10% who decline get an interview and none of these get the job is just a coincidence. Get real if a potential employer asks then the choice is comply or look elsewhere, btw I fail to see how this would come under any equality ruling as all candidates would be asked equally.

Go read up on the equality bill that is coming through. It will be illegal to ask questions on illness that will not have an effect on the job. So it will be fine to ask about back problems for a warehouse person but not someone that works sitting down.

LittleVoice

jimbms wrote: »

As I said they can make it illegal to demand but they can't make it illegal to ask you to supply this info of your own free will and make it clear you can decline and it won't count on your application. the fact that only 10% who decline get an interview and none of these get the job is just a coincidence. Get real if a potential employer asks then the choice is comply or look elsewhere, btw I fail to see how this would come under any equality ruling as all candidates would be asked equally.

If you haven't just made up your stats out of thin air, then please tell us where they are recorded - or is that how your organisation operates?

Of course there is an equality aspect to this. If it is used in the selection for interview process and nobody who applies and has a disability or long-term health problem is interviewed, does it not suggest to you that there is unlawful discrimination on the grounds of disability? But I don't suppose you see anything out of the ordinary with that and that is only to be expected and accepted as the way things are done in the real world.

Googlewhacker

LittleVoice wrote: »

If you haven't just made up your stats out of thin air, then please tell us where they are recorded - or is that how your organisation operates?

Of course there is an equality aspect to this. If it is used in the selection for interview process and nobody who applies and has a disability or long-term health problem is interviewed, does it not suggest to you that there is unlawful discrimination on the grounds of disability? But I don't suppose you see anything out of the ordinary with that and that is only to be expected and accepted as the way things are done in the real world.

I see the point but at the end of the day if I was the employer why would I employ someone who has a proven track record of long term sickness in the last year or two and is likely to be of more than someone that is showing no long term sick period?

There is nothing to help the employer in something like this. If I was in charge of the government I would allow a stipulation that if an employer takes someone on with long term sickness that if that person has over 3 times the national average (National Average is 6.5 days so 19.5days) of within a year for the first two years then the employer is able to give notice regardless of the reasons for sickness. After the first two years the employer is treated like any other employer and normal procedures would apply.

This way people who have been on long term sick are more likely to be employed, they have a very good buffer of illness allowance but if they become a problem to the employer then they can be dismissed easily without causing the employer problems and loss of money.

jimbms

LittleVoice wrote: »

If you haven't just made up your stats out of thin air, then please tell us where they are recorded - or is that how your organisation operates?

Of course there is an equality aspect to this. If it is used in the selection for interview process and nobody who applies and has a disability or long-term health problem is interviewed, does it not suggest to you that there is unlawful discrimination on the grounds of disability? But I don't suppose you see anything out of the ordinary with that and that is only to be expected and accepted as the way things are done in the real world.

Some people are so obsessed with stats and political correctness. I never even mentioned any stats the 10% was a theoretical guess for the means of giving a vague example, so you know where to shove your stats. As for where they are recorded, well the fact is it is my company and I interview, if a person does not give information I require I wont employ them simple 100% proven stats for me. If someone has a record of having a lot of time off due minor illnesses like colds etc without any real medical cause it is nothing to do with disability, as for discriminating against disablity, I am disabled and at least half my employees are, so long as a person can do their job and is not bone idle shirker who thinks it is ok to take constant odd days off for petty stuff usually monday or fridays, then I will employ them. But if a person does not want to show my their sickness record so I can check this then to me they have something to hide and I don't want them. BTW it is not illegal to ask a candidate how many days sick they have had off. As for long term illness, then I am afraid not many people will employ such due to the cost, in my company for example everone has private health and I cannot get cover for these persons, as my insurance is linked to the health plan then legally I cannot employ them without insurance., or I can if they are willing to forego the health cover and full sickness pay and accept SSP if off sick because I wont pay for it out of my pocket to the detriment of other employees.