Can you resign whilst on sick notice...if you get a new job?

Hezzawithkids

Uncertain wrote: »

Whilst I agree a bit more communication would have been polite it is often not actually terribly useful.

"Dear employer, I'm sorry but I've been signed off sick by my doctor for the next two weeks when he has asked to see me again to review the situation" doesn't actually tell you anything more than the sick note.

In a way you would have been better informed had the first sick note been for two months but doubtless you would then have questioned how the doctor could possibly know that so he can't win!

The point is that after the initial call to the office on a Sunday evening to leave a message on the answering machine that they had been in an RTA and had whiplash, there was no communication from them at all. It was in their contract that if they were off sick they had a duty to keep in touch with their line manager (i.e. me) to keep me informed of progress and when they anticipated returning to work (pretty standard in most employment contracts). I was calling, emailing and writing polite, friendly letters asking them - or a member of their family - to make contact just to keep us advised. They ignored me. I had no idea what was going on and - after taking legal advice - was about to instigate disciplinary proceedings when I got the text informing me they had resigned. I then had to go round to their house to collect our company equipment (phone, laptop, etc) and their 12 year old son handed it over, I never saw or heard from them again. Considering they held a senior position in the company it was at best unprofessional and at worst downright rude - especially as I had been paying them all along.

Uncertain

Hezzawithkids wrote: »

They ignored me. I had no idea what was going on and - after taking legal advice - was about to instigate disciplinary proceedings when I got the text informing me they had resigned. I then had to go round to their house to collect our company equipment (phone, laptop, etc) and their 12 year old son handed it over, I never saw or heard from them again. Considering they held a senior position in the company it was at best unprofessional and at worst downright rude - especially as I had been paying them all along.

OK, well it would be very interesting to hear their side of the story but I don't suppose we ever will.

Uncertain

Hezzawithkids wrote: »

Needless to say, after taking legal advice that was f-all I could do as an employer

Which tends to suggest there is another side to this.......

Uncertain

Hezzawithkids wrote: »

From my legal advisor who is a specialist in employment law...

Well I should get a different one then because the information you quoted is totally wrong!

From the DWP guide for healthcare professionals.....

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/healthcare-professional/news/statement-of-fitness-for-work.shtml

"A statement can only be signed by a doctor"

As stated earlier a "clinical psychologist" is not a doctor.

You can of course ASK your employee if they are willing to see a second doctor (at your expense) but you cannot force them to agree - although it may strengthen your case if they unreasonably refuse. There are tight professional rules governing what information the doctor can give you.

jackyann

Hezzawithkids wrote: »

From my legal advisor who is a specialist in employment law...

I suggest that you double check.

Googlewhacker

Uncertain wrote: »

OK, well it would be very interesting to hear their side of the story but I don't suppose we ever will.

As often we never hear the other side of the story about employees moaning about employers

Hezzawithkids

Uncertain wrote: »

OK, well it would be very interesting to hear their side of the story but I don't suppose we ever will.

I would have loved to have heard their side of the story! In fact I asked for their side of the story repeatedly but they wouldn't tell me!

Uncertain

Hezzawithkids wrote: »

I would have loved to have heard their side of the story! In fact I asked for their side of the story repeatedly but they wouldn't tell me!

So, from your various posts he worked for you for three weeks then was injured in a car accident and signed off sick by a doctor.

At some point during the sick leave he obviously decided that he did not want to return to the job but you have no idea why.

It crops up frequently on here that the is little point in resigning whilst on paid sick leave. It makes no financial sense and somehow I doubt if you would if the position was reversed. The standard advice to the employee is to sit it out and let the employer make the moves.

It is interesting that you got yourself (as presumably a small business) into a situation where you were paying full sick pay to an employee of only three weeks standing and particularly that you continued to do so for 10 weeks. Maybe you had to agree to this as a contractual term in order to get the employee you wanted in which case fair enough. Otherwise is does rather smack of mismanagement. Despite no contact apart from sick notes (and you claim his contract required more) you continued to pay.

I can't help thinking there is more to all this!

vulcan558

Thanks for all the responses.

Very helpful info & I'll pass on. The sick note is relating to depression & anxiety caused by the current employer.

Hezzawithkids

Uncertain wrote: »

So, from your various posts he worked for you for three weeks then was injured in a car accident and signed off sick by a doctor.

At some point during the sick leave he obviously decided that he did not want to return to the job but you have no idea why.

It crops up frequently on here that the is little point in resigning whilst on paid sick leave. It makes no financial sense and somehow I doubt if you would if the position was reversed. The standard advice to the employee is to sit it out and let the employer make the moves.

It is interesting that you got yourself (as presumably a small business) into a situation where you were paying full sick pay to an employee of only three weeks standing and particularly that you continued to do so for 10 weeks. Maybe you had to agree to this as a contractual term in order to get the employee you wanted in which case fair enough. Otherwise is does rather smack of mismanagement. Despite no contact apart from sick notes (and you claim his contract required more) you continued to pay.

I can't help thinking there is more to all this!

Ever had one of those days when you wish you hadn't started something............?

I am not going to go into all the details on here, my original reply was only to make the point that the employer is also affected by the employees decision about sick leave, using my own experience as an illustration.

FYI - not that I owe you any explanations - I was only paying SSP, which was in the contract. I continued paying because (a) it was in the contract that they got SSP and (b) they could have walked back through the door any day, which became my default position since they refused to answer any communications giving me any indication when or if they were ever coming back.

If the position was reversed I would have kept to my contractual obligations and kept in touch with my employer, you never know they may have been able to help if I was struggling, since they did actually value my contributions to the company that I had already made and had already invested a lot in my training and were only just beginning to see some payback. But that's just me.

I resent your explicit accusation of mis-management. I don't actually own the business any more (all this happened a few years ago) because I sold it as a going concern earlier this year and made a tidy profit in the process. To achieve that in this economic climate took some doing and I don't believe I would have if the new owner, or his bank, believed I was "mis-managing".

Please check your facts before you go jumping to conclusions about people's capabilities.