Boss's 'discretion' not to pay me..but pays others!

lemonjelly

Custom & practise.

If the employer pays it to one, they have to pay it to others.

Discretion is rubbish. There have to be measureable criteria.

problem your mate has, is with less than 12 months employment, then there may be limited reasons for any tribunal claim...

SarEl

bob_dob wrote: »

My union rep says that in those circumstances 'discretionary' is 'discrimination'!

Yeah? And did you ask him what kind of discrimination it is - because it certainly isn't an unlawful kind. Just because something is "discriomination" doesn't make it illegal!

Gordon_Hose

Googlewhacker wrote: »

I think your girlfriend wants to check that situation out as it sounds rather dodgy

It's not dodgy at all. Company sick pay is discretionary, if they want to take it away, they can.

She now gets SSP only.

Googlewhacker

Gordon_Hose wrote: »

It's not dodgy at all. Company sick pay is discretionary, if they want to take it away, they can.

She now gets SSP only.

It's dodgy if for example they only allowed males to have company sick pay and females were not.

However I guess it could be argued that anyone on new contracts have differant terms to the older member of staff but they would have to be very very clear this is because there is a change in contract terms being issued.

Uncertain

Gordon_Hose wrote: »

It's not dodgy at all. Company sick pay is discretionary, if they want to take it away, they can.

She now gets SSP only.

No. Not always.

This is a popular myth put about by many so called HR "professionals".

Check the contract wording carefully. Unless it specifically says it is discretionary AND, if so, that discretion is then exercised in a fair and equitable way then she may have a valid claim.

Otherwise the sick pay may be a contractual right subject to certain laid down conditions being met. For example these may be length of service, notification by certain times, doctor's certificates and of course a maximum period of time. In this case, even if the employment was lawfully terminated, the firm would still have to pay the sick pay providing the conditions had been complied with. There is case law to support this.