A verbal warning due to a medical condition

dickydonkin

As the attacks are happening at work, is there anything there that could be causing the reaction? For example, is he working with chemicals or in the vicinity of vapours or dust?

He really needs to determine the cause with some kind of allergy test as this is clearly causing issues at work and could lead to problems if he has an attack when operating equipment or driving.

miss_marsters

Thanks for the replies

I have managed to get more infomation from him.

His absent on thursday night prompted a 'return to work form' being filled out. As the manager was doing this he realised that none/very few had been filled out in the past. - This isnt because he has refused to sign them or fill them out - no one has mentioned it up until now.

He has anaphylaxis to what though we are unsure of he has been tested by specialists at the hospital but the outcome was unclear. Due to the nature of the condition it can be potentialy life threatening without use of the epipen when needed. He was diagnoised May 2010 and has always been open and honest with work.

He has had 8 absents from work due to attacks over the calender year - 6 directly due to attacks. He can prove this with medical notes and GP letters and of course using the pen at work

Last night they wanted him to sign the verbal warning for these absents including thurs night (many others are also getting warnings due to large absents) but he wont sign because they are directly due to his medical condition. They also want him to take the flack for the return to work forms not being filled out.

They also want him to see a company doctor - which he feels uneasy about due to the potentional bias

He has no problem seeing a independant doctor

whitewing

Are you happy that his medication is locked away? I guess that is probably better but is it definitely always accessible to him?

Sambucus_Nigra

He doesn't have to sign any verbal warning.

Perhaps a suggestion that if it happens again, he stays at work and sits down in a quiet room after an attack rather than going home [unless he actually goes to A&E in which case someone could drive him]. I know if I have attacks I'd not want to be driving home but would be much happier sat somewhere quiet for a while; and then get back to work once I've recovered.

miss_marsters

Whitewing - his epipen is always locked away as i guess you could see it as a potentional weapon due to the needle

Sambucus - I will let him know this, i think he has stayed at work before (i.e. he had an attack at 7pm and went home at 9pm) before the new manager there were times he was verbally told he could go home

He wants to look at the h&s policy to see if he is covered to stay after an attack - to see where he stands.

He was told to sign the warning to ackowledge it is this correct? he hasnt signed anything yet

Thanks x

LittleVoice

miss_marsters wrote: »

He was told to sign the warning to ackowledge it is this correct? he hasnt signed anything yet

It doesn't really matter whether he signs to acknowledge receipt or not. The warning is "verbal" in the sense of "oral" and it is actually sufficient that he was given the warning. His acknowledgement on a piece of paper is neither here nor there: he has received a warning.

Was he told it was part of a disciplinary process? Was he told he could be accompanied by a fellow worker/union official? Was he told what disciplinary action could follow if the event complained of happened again?

Emmzi

I suspect manager is making a balls up of an attendance process, versus a disciplinary. I'd expect it to go
- see company doctor (and yes, he *should* go. Generally the occ health dept at my workplace is more cautious than GPS!)
- have discussion about whether condition is disability per Equality Act
- be monitored on attendance improvement plan

8 absences is a hell of a lot to expect the employer to swallow. I think it's important he revisits preventative care with his doctor. If he is too ill to turn up to work reliably, the employer won;t want to subsidise that.

I'm still confused about what the current warning is for though there seem to be a lot of issues mixed up!

bigpound

The employer is expected to make readjustments to your job to help make any medical conditions more manageable. If attempts have been made but it is not working, then the employee can be dismissed.

Also, conduct issues and absense due to illness are two completely different things. See these pages for additional info:

http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?itemId=1075290120&r.i=1073793720&r.l1=1073858787&r.l2=1073876974&r.l3=1074200615&r.s=sc&r.t=RESOURCES&type=RESOURCES

http://www.netlawman.co.uk/info/connection-illness.php

Emmzi

bigpound wrote: »

The employer is expected to make readjustments to your job to help make any medical conditions more manageable. If attempts have been made but it is not working, then the employee can be dismissed.

Only if it is severe enough to be a protected characteristic under the Equality Act. I'm not sure we have enough info here to say it'd be regarded as a disability. It sounds like it could be, best to have an Occ Health referal.

t0rt0ise

The guidelines surrounding what constitutes a disability are odd. They tend to talk about considering what the condition would be like without treatment. Now without treatment, in this case it may well result in death so it sounds as though it could be within the guidelines. I suspect the problem is not the condition but that he left with a quick "I'm going" and just went. He needs to act reasonably even with a disability.