disciplinery but had sick line

LMCD

Jinx wrote: »

The company I work for is getting really strict on absence.... one absence of more than 7 days or 3 absences of any length in a rolling year 'triggers' the absence policy which means you can start being taken down a disciplinary route. Obviously this doesnt happen a lot with genuine illnesses but it is the official line. Every absence means an return to work interview.

If anything I would of thought that a return to work would be the only thing necessary esp as the doc supplied sick note .. its madness imo..I think alot more in her line of work she would be prone to illnes so it could possibly be more understandable but will see what happens ...

LMCD

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

Or she could ask herself???

It would be helpful to know the actual wording of the disciplinary letter otherwise we are all p1ssing in the wind.

ask who and what exactly?!

there was no letter she was told there would be a meeting - what difference does it make on the context of the letter if there was one?!

my original query was - if you have a sick note whilst absent off work for a week is it legal that they should then get a disciplinary!?

Sambucus_Nigra

LMCD wrote: »

ask who and what exactly?!

there was no letter she was told there would be a meeting - what difference does it make on the context of the letter if there was one?!

my original query was - if you have a sick note whilst absent off work for a week is it legal that they should then get a disciplinary!?

Ask on here? Ask on other employment forums?

Anyhow....

The difference is that
a - there should be a letter
b - it would detail what this disciplinary actually is for!

Of course it can be legal.

Did your 'friend' actually ask 'what is this disciplinary for' when they were told about it?

LittleVoice

LMCD wrote: »

ask who and what exactly?!

there was no letter she was told there would be a meeting - what difference does it make on the context of the letter if there was one?!

my original query was - if you have a sick note whilst absent off work for a week is it legal that they should then get a disciplinary!?

If there was no letter then it shouldn't be a disciplinary. It probably is a back-to-work meeting.

And the answer to your original query is that it is legal for a company to begin a disciplinary process if someone is off work for a week.

Is it just for a week? Don't they allow self-certification for up to seven days absence from work? That's all that's required for SSP.

LMCD

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

Ask on here? Ask on other employment forums?

Anyhow....

The difference is that
a - there should be a letter
b - it would detail what this disciplinary actually is for!

Of course it can be legal.

Did your 'friend' actually ask 'what is this disciplinary for' when they were told about it?

I am asking on here cos you SOMETIMES get HELPFUL replies and I stated I was also searching the net for an answer too.

she was told it was because she was absent for a week...

I will find out if she did get a letter and I would probably be able to search for a better answer myself.

but thanks for your input to state that it can be legal that is what I was originally asking for you've been most helpful - but can't bring myself to click that thanks button for some reason.....:rotfl:

LMCD

LittleVoice wrote: »

If there was no letter then it shouldn't be a disciplinary. It probably is a back-to-work meeting.

And the answer to your original query is that it is legal for a company to begin a disciplinary process if someone is off work for a week.

Is it just for a week? Don't they allow self-certification for up to seven days absence from work? That's all that's required for SSP.

Thanks, not sure about the self certification - as in the way of some places of work employment you need to be severly ill before they excuse or accept the fact you are ill whether the doctor certifies it or not..maybe the doctor felt that this note would be more appropriate I cannot answer that unfortunately.

Sambucus_Nigra

LMCD wrote: »

I am asking on here cos you SOMETIMES get HELPFUL replies and I stated I was also searching the net for an answer too.

she was told it was because she was absent for a week...

I will find out if she did get a letter and I would probably be able to search for a better answer myself.

but thanks for your input to state that it can be legal that is what I was originally asking for you've been most helpful - but can't bring myself to click that thanks button for some reason.....:rotfl:

Righty ho. Many many apologies for trying to find out the actual facts. My bad.

You hadn't actually stated that this disciplinary WAS for being absent.....good job we kept asking

Googlewhacker

LMCD wrote: »

I am asking on here cos you SOMETIMES get HELPFUL replies and I stated I was also searching the net for an answer too.

she was told it was because she was absent for a week...

I will find out if she did get a letter and I would probably be able to search for a better answer myself.

but thanks for your input to state that it can be legal that is what I was originally asking for you've been most helpful - but can't bring myself to click that thanks button for some reason.....:rotfl:

No worries I did it for you

The problem with a company picking and choosing when to do their procedures if they have levels for absenteeism is that it makes it unfair on some people so they will have to follow it through. If your friend is on for a disciplinary and doesn't have absenteeism problems then really she should just take it with a pinch of salt and let the time go by until its of her records.

It helps companies get rid of the people that are constantly of sick in a fair manner

LMCD

LMCD wrote: »

hi...thanks for reading am currently tryin to search the web for an answer but know there is alot of useful advice on here...

someone I know was off work - with a sick line handed in yet the work are goin to conduct a disciplinery , is this legal?! :eek:


thanks for reading.

aka absent....not there..off sick HENCE sick line....

yeah nice to see a pat on the back session every so often on here.

you did try to find out facts but the un necessary comment bout peeing in the wind somewhat irked me....

LittleVoice

LMCD wrote: »

aka absent....not there..off sick HENCE sick line....

If you believe your original post was clear that the "disciplinary" would be about sickness absence then I'm afraid it wasn't to people who have contributed to a number of threads where others asked
(a) whether it is possible to dismiss someone while they are on sickleave where the dismissal would have been for something unconnected with the sickness absence
(b) whether they can be asked to go into work for a related meeting
(c) where the sickness absence is proposed as a reason for not dismissing or not continuing with a disciplinary procedure rather than itself being the reason for the meeting

Any way you now have answers from MSE forum members to the question you wanted answering but it was necessary to get more detail in order to know they were answering the right question.