Disciplinary over very little sickness/accident... Hard done by?

StudentOfBusiness

Right I work in a call centre, 1500 people lots of germs. I have had the least amount of time off on my team and normally ignore when I feel rough and dose up on vitamins etc... Which normally works

I have recently been very Ill with the flu. I went into work with it and managed a full day, my manager even said I looked worse for wear.
The day after I woke up feeling even worse, constant aches, fevers, chills etc...

I decided to go into work, but could not stay and asked to go home so I could just go to sleep (something which I'd not had a lot of). So my manager said as it was my 3rd period of sickness within 6 months I'd have a disciplinary when I was back, which I feel is unfair... Here's why.

Back in October I had a vomiting bug, I was off on the Monday after I'd suffered with it all weekend, (even the Friday when I was in work).

In November I was in an accident on my way to work, I broke my 5th metacarpal in my right hand and broke a finger after coming off my bike. I continued on into work with this, got there and saw how much of a mess it was and I was in agony so asked to see a 1st aider, something which there wasn't any of! So went the hospital walk in centre, had X-rays, got plastered up and was sent to see a hand specialist at the fracture clinic same day. It was then put into a plaster for 2 months right to the end of my fingers... And my hand was bent into a hook shape... Horrible. I was right handed as well.

But I continued on into work the day after and onwards from that, which was extremely hard as I could not use my right hand at all. And spent my time doing our emails while in plaster, even doing more work than the rest of the people in my team! Not one thank you, not help. I could of had a sick note but I soldiered on. My left hand was feeling the pressure to say lol.

All other appointments after to do with my hand went down as medical, but not the day it actually broke.

Where do I stand with this? I work really hard and can't believe they are taking this route.

marybelle01

It maybe isn't fair but I bet as sure as hell that it's policy. Many employers have these sickness policies and when you hit a trigger you get warnings and targets to reduce sickness. They're legal and you're stuck with it.

elsien

Are you sure they said disciplinary rather than absence management review?It's not so much the number of days you've been off, as that they've all been comparatively close together which has probably triggered the review.

In our organisation you get called in for a sickness review if you are off 3 times in 6 months, regardless of how genuine the illness as that's what our sickness policy states managers have to do. They don't actually have much choice but to call you in if that's the case, but the rationale is not just to bollock you, it's to see if there is any underlying reason behind persistent absence (which your level of sickness is likely to fall under). Then the employer can look to see if any adjustments need to be made, or if they need to have GP access to see if there are any other health issues that might be relevant. All of which is unlikely if the situation is as you have described, as they're isolated non-related incidents.

They'll probably set you a target of no more than x days for the next 6 months, (and possibly requesting a GP note rather than self certification if you are off) then if all is ok, that'll be the end of it. That's what we do, anyway.
Even if you do work hard, sickness does have a cost implication for the employer and in the current economic climate they're all looking to minimise costs as far as is possible. It does seem unfair at times - in my line of work staff have to stay off for 48 hours if they have sickness/diarrhoea whether they want to or not. But there have to be guidelines, and you've been unlucky enough for it to fall within specific timescales. If you're generally healthy, then not taking time off in the next few months shouldn't be a problem.

KiKi

I appreciate it feels unfair.

What a lot of people don't understand is that they think the 'trigger points' for absence are to catch those who aren't really ill, and therefore if they are genuinely ill they shouldn't have to go through this process.

Unfortunately it doesn't matter that you were genuinely ill - the triggers are there to highlight that individuals are off work, and they need you to be at work. If they are genuine, and the three incidences are just unlucky - and you can show that - you should be fine. You can evidence your illness and tell them that. I would be very very surprised if anything happens as a result of this. But managers have to act on the triggers.

I think it's much more likely that this is an investigation meeting that they have to - according to their processes - do. In all likelihood they will talk to you, establish it's all genuine, and do nothing. I would be gobsmacked if it were a disciplinary without an investigation. For a disciplinary, they have to give notice, allow you to have a TU or colleague representative with you and formally notify you of this.

My advice is: don't worry. It's process which they have to follow for anyone, genuinely ill or not. They may monitor your absence in the next few months or so, but I'd be very surprised if anything else happened as a result.

I hope that reassures you a bit.
KiKi

System

where i work you would get a disciplinary for 3 separate periods of sickness in 6 months - it consists of a meeting and a "letter of concern", if you are off again in the next 6 months then it goes to the next stage warning

Annisele

I once got myself all stressed because I'd been sick for a week, and I knew that meant I had to have a "return to work" interview. I didn't have a sick note (I'd tried to come into work in the middle of the week, and lasted 15 minutes before some random manager who had nothing to do with my team insisted I leave - so technically two periods of absence).

I went back to work, stewed for a few days, then finally asked my manager when it would be. He said "We've already had that interview - you came in on Monday, I asked you if you felt better, you said yes, and that was the interview done".

I tell the story to reassure you that sometimes managers are just ticking boxes when they do sickness policy stuff.

BlueAngelCV

We've recently had a similar sickness policy put in place and it drives me mad because I think it's so unfair.

I don't see why it can't be done on a case by case basis so that if you think someone may be taking the mick then you say something but otherwise trust that if your employee says they are sick then they really are.

If a hard worker with no other problems has a couple of days off they have to go through a ridiculous rigmarole (and don't get any more holiday pay) all because some people are slackers.

KiKi

BlueAngelCV wrote: »

I don't see why it can't be done on a case by case basis so that if you think someone may be taking the mick then you say something but otherwise trust that if your employee says they are sick then they really are.

That's often how it is, though - that managers talk to the person to 'investigate' and determine it's genuine and they don't want to take it any further. But they have to ask the question and treat everyone the same otherwise they'll get grievances left, right and centre!

KiKi

eminemfan001

where i work they fill a "welcome back" form on your first day back after your absence and they calculate a percentage of absence and put it on this form. This gets reset every 3 months. If its over 3% then they do an attendance review which is horrible. Its basicly you and two managers in a room quizing you in why you were ill and what you can do to avoid it. I have been asked about my contraception because I was off to many times and the manager said it was hormone problems so I have to change it and tell them once its done!

Im in the union now and make sure they come with me to meetings so they wont ask me anything I feel is inapropriate again!

CFC

3 absences in 3 months is quite a lot of sick. Some employers will discount broken bones in a disciplinary, some will not - it all depends. It sounds as if you have passed the policy trigger.
Has the trigger been explained to you by your manager at some point, or made available to you via information that was in the handbook, your contract, or in internal polices you are presumed to have read?

purple.sarah

CHRISSYG wrote: »

where i work you would get a disciplinary for 3 separate periods of sickness in 6 months - it consists of a meeting and a "letter of concern", if you are off again in the next 6 months then it goes to the next stage warning

Is a letter of concern like a written warning or something different?