Re sick leave and verbal warning

Jinx

I really think this is where the rolling year falls down, genuine staff can get stung for having a 'bad' year while over a longer period their absence isnt bad at all.... I spose there must be some guidelines. Hope it all turns out okay

missma

Thanks am going to try not stress! I understand they have to be equal to everyone and at end of day if I am ill I am ill. I know I have genuinely been off sick, just feel that they do not look at the whole picture and they do not take in account the lenghty periods with no sickness. I work wth vunerable people and would not want to come into work with a "bug" to spread it around everyone!

Savvy_Sue

missma wrote: »

I know I think the caring industry seems to be the most heartless. I just do not know what to do should I just sit and take it at end of day they cannot sack me.

They can sack you on capability grounds if you are not well enough to do your job. I know you don't need the stress, and this time is a verbal warning, but please don't think that you can't be sacked for being sick!

As Jinx said, the rolling year means that the absences last January and February have now 'fallen off' the radar, so you're back to 1 absence again.

Jinx wrote: »

I really think this is where the rolling year falls down, genuine staff can get stung for having a 'bad' year while over a longer period their absence isnt bad at all.... I spose there must be some guidelines. Hope it all turns out okay

Yes, but a calendar year could easily lead to abuse, couldn't it? DH isn't sure if his contracts specify a rolling year or a calendar year (I suspect they are ambiguous) so it's possible one of his colleagues things they will be paid for their latest bouts of sick leave, because we're in a new calendar year, whereas it's not so long since they got close to the end of their company sick pay last calendar year ...

SandC

Try not to stress about it. This is a procedural thing and something they do just to keep an eye on things. You've just gone into the threshold of the time concerned, so think about it - the chances of you being unlucky enough for that to happen again are very slim. These procedures catch the slackers who make all our lives difficult remember.

I'll be totally honest with you, I wouldn't have had any time off for the death of a brother in law - as would be the case for many others. In your case, you felt you were not capable of working at the time and that is fine, but it's not extenuating circumstances unfortunately.

Sometimes people go through a year when they fall ill more often or things happen that wouldn't normally. That's life but it's also where the discretion comes into it. But the discretion is a lot more useful when you really need it - ie not when all you've got is a verbal warning on your file. And please stop thinking of the 13 weeks full pay, 13 weeks half pay as an 'entitlement'. That is a benefit for the employee put in place so that if the worst should happen and you have to take a long period of work off sick you do not have the added worry of how you are going to pay your bills.

You probably won't be off sick for the rest of this year remember!

missma

Hi all thanks for replies,

SandC to be honest I would have had to have taken sick leave anyway as I had a severe rash and could not walk any distance due to blisters on my feet and over skin. My brother in law has a young family who needed to be looked after whilst he was on life support.

To update everyone, I spoke to my union yesterday who advised me to take the vebal warning but felt I had grounds to appeal it. They also told me that my boss should not have been forced to give me a warning.

My boss also spoke to me yesterday having spoke to someone senior in HR and her boss and in discussion with both of them has advised them and me, that she will meet with me on Tuesday but will not be giving me a warning, and will state this in the paper work. She feels there was only one day overlap and also feels my sick leave in over four years has been minimal.

Thanks Again

RexBanner

missma wrote: »

Hi all thanks for replies,

SandC to be honest I would have had to have taken sick leave anyway as I had a severe rash and could not walk any distance due to blisters on my feet and over skin. My brother in law has a young family who needed to be looked after whilst he was on life support.

To update everyone, I spoke to my union yesterday who advised me to take the vebal warning but felt I had grounds to appeal it. They also told me that my boss should not have been forced to give me a warning.

My boss also spoke to me yesterday having spoke to someone senior in HR and her boss and in discussion with both of them has advised them and me, that she will meet with me on Tuesday but will be giving me a warning, and will state this in the paper work. She feels there was only one day overlap and also feels my sick leave in over four years has been minimal.

Thanks Again

I'm glad you're feeling better about it - your situation shows how unfair cases are the necessary result of having a fair system. A manager with any degree of discretion would've acknowledged that your record over 4 years, coupled with the circumstances of this absence meant that a disciplinary was inappropriate, but that would make it imposible for the company to inforce their policy in other cases.

It's tough on you, but take care until it expires and you'll be fine.

missma

Rex Banner whoops forgot the word NOT be giving me a warning so had to edit above. Thanks for replies