Phased return to work

euronorris

Tealover - I would see it as preferential treatment which isn't on, in my opinion. If the person needs the time off due to health reasons, that's a different matter. But for annual leave, it should be equal unless they've earnt extra days (through overtime, exceptional work or length of service).

Although, tbf, I read it as if they might actually be the person returning to work, have requested the holiday and been told they had to take the full 5 days. Could go either way I suppose.

Janepig

tea_lover wrote: »

Does it really make any difference to anyone else though? Even if you're covering that person's work and they take 3 days AL instead of 5, that would only be an extra 2 days to cover during a whole year.

Forgive me if I've got the wrong end of the stick but the OP seems almost bitter in tone, over something that doesn't really matter.

I think it does matter. We don't know what this person is like to work with, whether they are swinging the lead, etc... and also how stressful a job it is, particularly when covering someone as well as doing their own job. I've never had a problem covering people's sickness, when I know they're genuine, like is happening this week where I work. We're a man (well woman actually) down, at a really bad time of year for us, but I know it's genuine and that's fine.

I have a real issue with struggling to cover work when I know for a fact the absentee is taking the right royal pi55. And for them to then have two extra days leave? Might not sound like much to you, but my annual leave is very precious, and I would hate someone to have more than me when they don't deserve it!!

I know what you're saying though - we used to have a half day at our managers' discretion at Christmastime, many years ago, and I had a spiteful colleague who made a fuss that part time employees should only get a quarter of a day because they were, well, part time. Now that I didn't agree with, even though I was full time. As long as they weren't going to get more than me then fine, but don't be so petty as to give them a special half a day pro rata (it didn't happen anyway).

Jx

maman

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

Of course, there is the danger that if she is refused, that she then relapses and needs a further six months off on full pay.

If the reason is that she's findng her return to work too much then she doesn't need leave she needs to go back to the doctor. I suppose it varies in different lines of work but a relapse wouldn't necessarily allow a further 6 months of full pay. It depends how much she's had already.

I take janepig's point about people using the system but maybe she wouldn't get away with exhaustion next summer when she wants four weeks off.

tea_lover wrote: »

Does it really make any difference to anyone else though? Even if you're covering that person's work and they take 3 days AL instead of 5, that would only be an extra 2 days to cover during a whole year.

Forgive me if I've got the wrong end of the stick but the OP seems almost bitter in tone, over something that doesn't really matter.

I think maybe the OP's tone is because she thinks her colleague is taking advantage. She may well be right. This doesn't make for good working relationships.

GobbledyGook

It depends if their holiday entitlement has been altered to take into account their time off and/or their reduced hours. If their holiday entitlement has been reduced then they should be able to just take the 3 days, but if it hasn't then they should take the 5 days.

It all depends on the policy in place. It should be however it would be for anyone else in the same situation.

Slinky_Malinky

Isn`t this person already using annual leave to cover the phased return?

When I returned to work after an operation my doctor said I had do a phased return to work. My employer said that I would have to book annual leave to cover the time that I was not at work so I booked a couple of half days then had to get back to normal working days. (I can`t remeber 100% but I think I could have asked for unpaid leave if I had not had enough leave days)

GobbledyGook

Slinky_Malinky wrote: »

Isn`t this person already using annual leave to cover the phased return?

When I returned to work after an operation my doctor said I had do a phased return to work. My employer said that I would have to book annual leave to cover the time that I was not at work so I booked a couple of half days then had to get back to normal working days. (I can`t remeber 100% but I think I could have asked for unpaid leave if I had not had enough leave days)

Some places have phased returns where you don't need to use your annual leave. Where I used to work if people were off for more than 3 months then they could come back on a phased return for 1 week per month off, but on full pay. So my colleague who was off for 6 months was phased back in for 6 weeks, but she was paid in full and didn't have to any annual leave.

They said the cost to them was better as they felt people got back to working full time quicker and better than throwing them straight in and they felt that people who'd had long term sick still needed their leave throughout the year or they could end up off again. It also meant people could use annual leave after that if they still wanting a bit of phasing in.

go_cat

If they are wanting only to take 3 day hols then they are taking the mick :eek:

Being paid full hours, working less hours but wanting to take less holiday the mind boggles.

Fire_Fox

Should take a full week of annual leave because they are not available for work for the full week.

Spirit_2

If they continue to be paid full time during the phased return then they should book a week of holiday if they are not at work at all during a seven day period.

If they are only paid for the days they work (ie part-time) then it should be part-time holiday .

RosaBernicia

I have previously had this situation with a member of our staff.

I was advised by HR that since the time not at work was sick leave (all covered by medical notes and OH recommendation) only the additional time not present should be taken as annual leave. So for example if s/he wanted to go away for two days during the 50% phased return, this would mean booking two half days of annual leave. I understand that doing otherwise could have looked like interrupting or refusing the recommended phased return, and potentially led to legal issues if the situation had worsened. In this particular situation it was a week-by-week increase as someone else has described, and the leave was requested at short notice due to a family event.

I would seek advice on this if you are making the decision (and document it).


From a personal moral view, sick leave is sick leave and I think asking people to take holiday for time their doctor says they should not be working is a very slippery slope. So I think the above is a reasonable solution.


Rosa xx