Unfair sickness discipline? Advice?

Nothanks

This isn't uncommon OP, but I would suggest that you ask them to look at factors such as how your absence has improved and the pattern it followed. In more than one organisation I'm aware of, the sickness "Trigger points" are there to draw attention to a potential problem, NOT a tickbox exercise on the way to disciplinary land. The application of company policy has to come hand in hand with some common sense.

I once had a disciplinary case brought to my attention where a union member had been in a car accident and sustained an injury. The result was a few days off followed by several physio sessions. Because of her physio sessions (3 or 4 in total) she hit the trigger points and was disciplined. We got the case thrown out with HR's full support as the manager was applying the policy without thinking about the end goal - better attendance. They were just using it like a one-size-fits-all punishment mallet.

In one large banking group, the HR team had to issue an email to all senior managers telling them to stop being so ham-fisted with sickness disciplinaries as it was costing the company too much to keep losing tribunals!

Nothanks

LadyMissA wrote: »

yes as you are still off sick

Sorry to double post, but not all companies take this attitude. Some put operations and certain hospital visits under "special leave" along with things like compassionate leave, cancer screenings, jury duty and so forth.

C_Mababejive

Talk to your Trades Union rep and take advice...

In my company,if you are off sick and someone has to cover your work pattern,they dock your pay and give a chunk of it to the other person.

Emmzi

Nothanks wrote: »

This isn't uncommon OP, but I would suggest that you ask them to look at factors such as how your absence has improved and the pattern it followed. In more than one organisation I'm aware of, the sickness "Trigger points" are there to draw attention to a potential problem, NOT a tickbox exercise on the way to disciplinary land. The application of company policy has to come hand in hand with some common sense.

Having been the manager on the other side of the procdeure too many times, I would only advise this if the OP can find some contrition in her and stop being outraged about
a) maternity related leave
b) that they have dared to question her
c) the communications errors

Only a very calm approach would make me seriously consider the above. Calm, with an apology, and some sort of indication I had been tackling my health issues. OP was last seen wondering if a solicitor was the thing to do...

Uncertain

Emmzi wrote: »

Having been the manager on the other side of the procdeure too many times, I would only advise this if the OP can find some contrition in her and stop being outraged about
a) maternity related leave
b) that they have dared to question her
c) the communications errors

Only a very calm approach would make me seriously consider the above. Calm, with an apology, and some sort of indication I had been tackling my health issues. OP was last seen wondering if a solicitor was the thing to do...

Whilst I fully understand that the firms procedure may be completely lawful I can sympathise with the OP feeling outraged.

Although this type of aggressive sickness "management" is common in some areas it is not universal by any means. I could point you to other organisations where you would need to be off for months before they even vaguely wondered about suggesting occupational health. If you or your family have experienced that sort of environment you would be outraged by the sort of procedure the OP has described particularly when the main absence was caused by emergency surgery.

Sadly though I do agree that the OP needs to work within the employer's procedures and not fight against them - assuming they are legal which I fear they are.

Sorry.

*miaomiao*

First time I've read a post in this forum.

Just wondered if the advice of the above posters would apply differently if this was either a public or private sector post.

I agree with Uncertain, this kind of treatment would upset a lot of people who have tried to clear things with their management when it is emergency surgery. I'm appalled that so many of you think that for such a small number of days it would be appropriate that you are punished for being ill when it is a legitimate, documented illness. I hope none of you are ever in the situation where you have a heart attack, develop cancer or a longterm illness and need a few days off for surgery or recovery. Are we back to the Victorian era?

*miaomiao*

Emmzi wrote: »

I am confused. YOu have hit the trigger points for the procedure/ warnings, but somehow think this is unfair?

Absence management is not for those who pretend to be ill/ throw sickies. (That would be conduct/ disciplinary code.) It is for those who are genuinely ill, at too high a level for the company's preference.

I cannot see what the company are doing wrong other than managing your attendance in accordance with the stated policy, of which you have been informed.

What am I missing?

Emmzi wrote: »

Having been the manager on the other side of the procdeure too many times, I would only advise this if the OP can find some contrition in her and stop being outraged about
a) maternity related leave
b) that they have dared to question her
c) the communications errors

Only a very calm approach would make me seriously consider the above. Calm, with an apology, and some sort of indication I had been tackling my health issues. OP was last seen wondering if a solicitor was the thing to do...

Contrition? For an illness, possibly not lifestyle induced at all, involving a short period off work? Ridiculous.

Also, the OP stated that they weren't informed properly about sick leave and that their management flipped around several times.

So, yes, OP is a little confused and rightly so. I do hope OP takes some advice. In other sectors this wouldn't be permitted but regarded as bullying when it is a legitimate, documented illness.

Emmzi

*miaomiao* wrote: »

I agree with Uncertain, this kind of treatment would upset a lot of people who have tried to clear things with their management when it is emergency surgery. I'm appalled that so many of you think that for such a small number of days it would be appropriate that you are punished for being ill when it is a legitimate, documented illness. I hope none of you are ever in the situation where you have a heart attack, develop cancer or a longterm illness and need a few days off for surgery or recovery. Are we back to the Victorian era?

No, I'm actually trying to give OP advice so she doesn't burn her boats in her job. "Aww poor you" isn't a very pragmatic approach.


What we personally think of the policy doesn't matter. How the OP responds to her situation does.

Emmzi

*miaomiao* wrote: »

In other sectors this wouldn't be permitted but regarded as bullying when it is a legitimate, documented illness.

Attendance management is for legitimate, documented illnesses.

Conduct code is for lead swingers.

I am sure OP appreciates your sympathy but it's not going to help her with her meeting.

heretolearn_2

Hi Op, I can see why you feel this is unfair, but you are not understanding what absence management is all about. Yes, partly it's to clamp down on unwarranted sick absence - the skivers. But it's also to manage the level of absence due to genuine sickness absence as well - just because it's something serious doesn't mean that the absence gets treated differently, or that you are allowed extra sickness time off or you can't get a warning about the level of absence.

The 'bring representation' isn't their advice, or intended to be taken as a warning of some sort. It's as though you are interpreting this as 'you'd better get a lawyer!' It's not this at all. It is your legal right to be accompanied by either a collegue or a trade union rep at any disciplinary meeting and your employer has to inform you of that right in any letter inviting you to a disciplinary meeting.

You also need to realise that in sickness management disciplinaries, the line they are looking at is not 'is this a naughty person skiving off' or 'is this a serious illness or not', it's purely on capability grounds. Does your health make it impossible for you to perform your duties adequately with adequate attendence. Even if you were diagnosed with a long-term serious illness, if that meant a lot of time off, you can be dismissed under capability grounds, even if you think that is unfair as it isn't the person's fault they are ill. It's not about fault. It's about 'can they turn up every day to do their job'.

All that will happen is an internal warning, a written warning of some sort, it's not that big a deal under these circumstances, has a limited lifespan and is removed from your record after this, so don't go all drama queen about destroying your career.