compassion fatigue

Pound

Nicki wrote: »

We pay a significant sum - more than 3 times national minimum wage - out of my husband's earned taxed income

Nicki wrote: »

she gets paid time off when we are away on holiday as a family in addition to her own paid holiday time

:eek:

So will there be a vacancy opening up?

blossomhill_2

This is beginning to sound like the opposite of a zero hours contract - where someone is nominally employed but gets no pay - your employee gets paid but does no work!

CFC

Nicki wrote: »

I don't ask for reasons when she phones in sick but these are usually volunteered. Usually something along the lines of "I have a sore throat so will be off" or "I have a bad cold", etc.

The 2 weeks sickness with a medical certificate was genuine, but added to another dozen odd days off over the course of the last working year pushes her sickness record into the massively unreasonable from an employers point of view.

She did not travel anywhere for the dead grandparent. The 3 days were to grieve at home. Her parents travelled to the country for the funeral but she didn't and never had any intention of doing so.

She has used all of her annual leave already. She actually requested to take it all in one block of 5 weeks at the beginning of the holiday year for a long trip abroad. That has no doubt added to the problem as she now has none left for occasionals. She still gets Bank Holidays and also paid days off if we are away as a family, which not including BHs has added up to another 3 weeks this year, so she has actually had 8 weeks paid holiday plus bank holidays but only 5 of those weeks at a time of her choosing.

I think it is more professional and appropriate to give her a revised set of policies than to lecture her on her diet and lifestyle to be honest which surely is none of my business. Businesses introduce new policies, handbooks, etc all the time - why do you think a written codification of something which should be obvious would be legally problematic?

As other posters have said, write a policy and go through it with her. Get her to sign a document saying that the new policy has been discussed with her.The slate is wiped clean of previous absences and absence is now managed under your new Absence Process. As reliability is important to you, I suggest that more than three absences in a rolling 12 months will trigger a review which may lead to a disciplinary. You may choose to have it apply to number of days absence rather than instances. You might also want to consider how you treat absence. It is not unreasonable to ask for at least one hour's notification of sickness absence prior to her start time and for her to call in sick every day she is absent. You might also want to specify that the policy also covers unauthorised absence of any kind - ie if she changes tack and says she wasn't sick but lost her house keys/purse/cat/boiler broke down/fridge went on the blink.If you haven't got a written disciplinary process policy, I presume you haven't, then put that in at the same time.

Keep accurate records and hold a written return to work interview with her when she returns from future sick leave. All this needs to be is a written description of why and when she was off sick, and signed by both of you. You need to ask in case it is absence triggered by some cause which may give her a protected status, so it's best practice.

I agree with other posters,, put in a Holiday Policy as well - no more than 2 weeks holiday at a time will be authorised and 10 days must be kept for Christmas.

If you are too generous, especially with young people, often they feel like you're 'their mum' and take the p.

Sambucus_Nigra

If she's hardly there [which by the sounds of it she is] have you really got a job for her? What do you do when she cries off all the time? If you do it yourself then make her redundant and then in a week or two, decide that you do need someone after all and rerecruit.

VfM4meplse

Nicki wrote: »

The employee's attendance record is not good. Since she started nearly two years ago, she has fairly regularly called in odd days with minor sicknesses which I personally would not have taken time off for.

Policy, schmolicy. To me the key is her length of service - as long as you are certain that you will not open to a counter-claim on the grounds of discrimination, let her go before the 2 years is up. You don't have to give a reason...if you wish to, just say that you can't afford her any more. These are tough financial times after all.

dizzyrascal

Having read this thread from the beginning I thought I would add something to the discussion.
I would look at it from the students point of view. This job is not her priority, her university life and work is at the moment and her future most probably lies elsewhere. In a career (presumably).
I think it is right to ask most employees to give their heart and soul to the job (and most do) but her focus is not on this role because it is simply a means to an end albeit a well paid one.

I do wonder why, as you are paying so well, you have not employed a nanny or someone more interested in this kind of work as a career. You have obviously seen that her holiday requirements are not the same as perhaps a career nanny.

In a way your generosity is a problem. It perhaps gives the wrong impression and maybe sends out the wrong message.
When I was a student I had a number of part time jobs and one of them was cleaning for 1/2 a day for a couple of lecturers.
It was better paid then my other jobs but the house was always spotless when I got there and therefore I had nothing to do. In effect I ended up playing with the dogs and washing the floor (not needed) and hoovering (again, unnecessary). They were very nice people but in truth, they did not need a cleaner.

They also paid me when they went away, which was frequently, and I had no work to do. In the end I was glad when they said they were going to live abroad.
It proved to me that I actually wanted to have interesting and demanding work rather than just money.

I know that I preferred the less well paid bar work where I worked with a team of friends and had fun whilst working. I also had a stronger sense of loyalty to that team.
This is just my view but it may have some bearing on the situation the op has discussed on this thread.

Evilm

VfM4meplse wrote: »

Policy, schmolicy. To me the key is her length of service - as long as you are certain that you will not open to a counter-claim on the grounds of discrimination, let her go before the 2 years is up. You don't have to give a reason...if you wish to, just say that you can't afford her any more. These are tough financial times after all.

2 years only applies if you were employed from April this year. Not if you've been employed 2 years in April this year.

The employee is still protected.

(unless you are talking redundancy payments - In which case 104 weeks/2 years does apply. But the OP shouldn't be forced to look at redundancy to get rid of a bad employee.)

Sambucus_Nigra

Evilm wrote: »

2 years only applies if you were employed from April this year. Not if you've been employed 2 years in April this year.

The employee is still protected.

(unless you are talking redundancy payments - In which case 104 weeks/2 years does apply. But the OP shouldn't be forced to look at redundancy to get rid of a bad employee.)

She shouldn't - but she hasn't already got a policy so has to implement that in order to deal with the situation. Thus taking a while to sort out.

Savvy_Sue

CFC wrote: »

I agree with other posters,, put in a Holiday Policy as well - no more than 2 weeks holiday at a time will be authorised and 10 days must be kept for Christmas.

If you always know well in advance when you plan to be away, you could also put into it that if you give more than 30 / 60 / 90 days notice of YOUR intention to take holiday, then she will take her paid holiday at the same time. Obviously if you take more than her leave entitlement (min 28 days incl BHs) then you'd have to pay her during your holidays, also if you didn't need her at short notice. But this would still be generous, IMO ... and obviously if she wanted a particular week you could negotiate, but you wouldn't be paying her so much when you DON'T actually need her.

If not for this employee, then the next one ...

marybelle01

Evilm wrote: »

2 years only applies if you were employed from April this year. Not if you've been employed 2 years in April this year.

The employee is still protected.

(unless you are talking redundancy payments - In which case 104 weeks/2 years does apply. But the OP shouldn't be forced to look at redundancy to get rid of a bad employee.)

I agree but maybe needs must. "We can't afford to keep you on" and three months down the line you can freely hire someone else. It's the quickest and easiest route, and it sounds like three months of doing it yourself is what you get anyway, whether you employ her or not!