Disciplinary over sickness absence!

teabelly

There is also the visibility issue too. There are people that work hard and keep their head down. They get passed over for promotion. There are others that work less hard but on the visible things and crow about it to the right people. They get promoted.

If there is someone at work who puts others at risk due to their negligence then I wouldn't waste time with reporting to a management that won't do anything. I'd report it straight to the HSE. I'd also mention the words corporate manslaughter which is a potential charge the directors could face if they knew about the situation and didn't take adequate steps to fix it.

Spirit_2

sandraroffey wrote: »

my sister has had major surgery onher shoulder and cant work yet. her consultant has signed her off. and she cant work for another at least 6 weeks. this week her manager at tesco called her and told her she had to call her consultant and tell him to sign her off so she can go and stand in the store foyer to talk to people about their club cards. then he asked her about her med certs. 'is your doctors name on there. i will be phoning her', i really dont think he can do this!!!!

another example of harrassment when you are off sick. although technically she isnt sick - she is recovering from major surgery.

From April 2010 there has been a shift from sick notes to 'fit note' which help to get people back to work more quickly. Perhaps not in the first few weeks post op but later your sister may be able to do more limited duties ,agreed with her employer, even if she is unable to do her whole job. Google fit notes if you want more information.

Your sisters rehabilitation will be a progression and unlikely to go from being no activity from 6 weeks to as much activity as you like on 6 weeks and 1 day

Googlewhacker

TwistedPsycho wrote: »

It's not as easy as that. The person concerned is still "under investigation" for their latest "risk" error that could theoretcially have led to electrocuting a lot of staff.

They have been allowed back to work after having their preliminary interview because we are short of staff and the nature of our work means that if our post is not covered, the job stops.

I have spoken to our union who has pointed out that has a huge probability of blowing up in my face, based on the management style of the company.

I understand, it is a shame that the management don't understand that what they are doing by allowing that member of staff to carry on working is undermining the other members of staff.

The problem is for management I guess is that to get rid of someone easily without reprocussion is near impossible under the current regulations but at some point they will have to take that risk and hopefully before it becomes fatal.

Googlewhacker

teabelly wrote: »

There is also the visibility issue too. There are people that work hard and keep their head down. They get passed over for promotion. There are others that work less hard but on the visible things and crow about it to the right people. They get promoted.

Maybe but in general if you are doing the minimum work then you will be less likely to be promotoed. If you don't play the game then you are less likely to be promoted.

If there is someone at work who puts others at risk due to their negligence then I wouldn't waste time with reporting to a management that won't do anything. I'd report it straight to the HSE. I'd also mention the words corporate manslaughter which is a potential charge the directors could face if they knew about the situation and didn't take adequate steps to fix it.

I would report to managment at first because that is the direct line and if they don't know they can't do anything about it. If it is not solved after that then go higher.

woody01

I do agree that there seems to be greater incidence of this complaint in the public sector

Because they get full pay and the excuse is convenient!

Stress is not having enough money to feed your family.....
Stress is having a loved one dying in front of you with cancer......
Stress is losing everything and having your home repossessed........

Stress IS NOT is tough day in work!

MissMuppet

paulwf wrote: »

What actions did the stress risk assessment suggest?

Stress is very subjective. You can quantify things like excessive workload as you would be staying late and working through breaks, but stress is harder to measure. Presuming you work set hours and have set breaks then some people might not find it stressful at all whereas others would.

Are the actions required for reducing stress actually reducing workload or is it a better way of working?

The actions that were suggested were mainly around communicating with other staff and making the office more workable. I have two very loud colleagues in a very small office and one who is very expressive with her own stress/anxiety. Also due to all the changes within the department, it being under review, the threat of losing my job has been hanging over me for 3 years. Management don't communicate with us and we are given dates when decisions will be made and then they move the goalposts. The workload is not so much an issue now, but the domino effect of people going off sick will cause problems as myself and others are expected to cover peoples work when they are off.

MissMuppet

teabelly wrote: »

I used to work in Education. Stress is caused by their incompetent management and poor handling of staff shortages ie they still expect everything to be done with fewer and fewer people..

This is exactly what's happening, I doubt it will change but my options are limited, I'm in a catch 22 situation, stick with it or find a new job when there are very few around and with a high sickness record...

Thanks for the advice about the grievance, I really don't know what to do, I felt pushed into a corner about coming in on my leave. It was either keep the original date or come in when I'm on leave... Even the union said she didn't think they would change it!

MissMuppet

mariefab wrote: »

This 'condition' that you mention in your opening post; do you know whether it would qualify as a disability under the Disability Discrimination Act?

It would usually qualify if your condition has a substantial and long term adverse effect on your ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.

If this applies to you, then your employer should allow you to have a higher percentage of sick leave than employees without a disability (as a reasonable adjustment) before considering disciplinary action.

This is something I have looked into, but no it doesn't at the present time. Although it appears that people with similar have won employment tribunals.

patman99

MissMuppet, tell your employers that you are away abroad that week so are actually unavailable.

They really can't expect you to fly back for such a meeting. Get that greivance in as well.

MissMuppet

Just a quick update, I received a first written warning at the disciplinary. I now have targets to meet for the next 12 months, so will see how that goes. Thanks for all the advice.