Appealing a Verbal Warning

Sambucus_Nigra

justagimmick wrote: »

Ok, I appreciate that point. The fact that they brought up a previous review to explain their decision seems to me that they are taking it into account. Additionally, as the majority of my sickness has been certificated by a doctor and of the 35 days I've had off in the last 12 months, 4 of those are non-cert how can they discipline me for a doctors decision deeming me unfit?

It doesn't matter about whether it is certified or not. It's about the number of days off and the Bradford calc just triggers the meeting.

I don't know why they brought it up, if they have the score and the procedure then they didn't need to. Why do you think they brought it up?

sniggings

justagimmick wrote: »

Ok, I appreciate that point. The fact that they brought up a previous review to explain their decision seems to me that they are taking it into account. Additionally, as the majority of my sickness has been certificated by a doctor and of the 35 days I've had off in the last 12 months, 4 of those are non-cert how can they discipline me for a doctors decision deeming me unfit?

they get around the sick note thing by saying the warning is not because you were sick/ill etc but only because you failed to meet their target.

They are not saying you were not sick but saying, whatever the reason was, you are taking too much time off, so either stop it or leave.

As for should you appeal, only you can really answer that as it's based on what your managers are like, if they are fair etc my guess is them mentioning the case 2 years ago was a mistake but my guess is 35 days in 12 months would be over what is allowed so they could justify the warning even without taking the last case into account.

My advice would be to keep your head down if you think you will not have any more time off but if you will need more for operations etc then you best appeal but I doubt it will change a thing.

valk_scot

Thirty five days off in twelve months is more than 13% of the working year, assuming you're full time at five days a week, 52 weeks a year. Certified or not that's a huge chunk of time and I can't imagine that any employer wouldn't be concerned about it tbh. If I were you I'd be making a point of trying to improve this tbh, unless as has been said above it's inevitable that you need more operations in which case try to work with your employers as to scheduling these, for instance utilising holiday time for these.

I don't think them mentioning the warning two years ago has any relevance actually, unless you're trying to catch them out on a point of order. If they said

"It was along the lines 'in light of your bradford score we are taking this action [verbal warning]' "

..that's you nailed, unfortunately. It doesn't sound as if you can dispute the bradford score after all.

Incidentally I was reading your other thread about you doing a full time university course at the same time as working nearly full time. In the other thread you said doing both wasn't impacting on your performance in either field but I have to say, 35 days off sick in a year doesn't sound like no impact. It has to be having an effect on your studies as well as not being fair on your employer. Would it be worth thinking about reducing your working hours for this last year so you weren't under so much stress? Your employers might go for it if they felt your reliability would improve. I remember when I was doing a part time MBA coupled with a 40 hour week I was a wreck by the end of the second year, I had to take a six month leave of absence to complete my studies. Fortunately my employers were sympathetic to this though.

denla

Needing time for operations and still have time for university. Sounds like you don't want this job and planning to leave soon as you graduate. That's what most employers would think. If you're able to study then you're able to work. Give up one.

Acc72

Hi OP,

There are a lot of "said so's" in your posts - these can be denied.

Have you received anything in writing from your employer ? (although it is a verbal warning, you should receive confirmation and reasons in writing).

Pricivius

From what the OP has said, it sounds as though the employer has given a verbal warning for the level of absence, taking into account the previous instance when considering mitigation. In other words, the level of absence is an offence for which the verbal warning is available as a penalty. Having found that you committed the offence, the employer must then consider what penalty to give. If this had been your first offence (as it presumably was last time), you may have been let off with some absence management (as you were last time). However, as they found this was not your first offence, they saw no reason not to give the verbal warning.

Appeal if you like, but have a think what you are appealing against. Is it the offence or the penalty or both?

justagimmick

valk_scot wrote: »

Incidentally I was reading your other thread about you doing a full time university course at the same time as working nearly full time. In the other thread you said doing both wasn't impacting on your performance in either field but I have to say, 35 days off sick in a year doesn't sound like no impact. It has to be having an effect on your studies as well as not being fair on your employer. Would it be worth thinking about reducing your working hours for this last year so you weren't under so much stress? Your employers might go for it if they felt your reliability would improve. I remember when I was doing a part time MBA coupled with a 40 hour week I was a wreck by the end of the second year, I had to take a six month leave of absence to complete my studies. Fortunately my employers were sympathetic to this though.

I suffered with tonsilitis repeatedly each month from January this year. The fact that I happen to be a student and work wouldn't have prevented these infections if I was one or the other instead of both. Previously, I have managed my attendance well enough (everyone gets sick time to time).
I do know that my boss isn't happy that I am a student, she is always trying to drive the point home that this is why I am 'sick' all the time. They are not sympathetic, it'll be leave or deal with it. Leaving my job is not an option and reduction of hours would leave me with no money to pay bills and my mortgage.

Thank you for all your responses, you have rationalised my thoughts for me and yes, given the time to think prior to the meeting a verbal warning is probably deserved even if I am not happy with it (what can you do?). I will keep my head down and move on when it is time. Thanks again.

Acc72

Looking at the cold facts, you have had 35 days sickness absence over the last year due to repeated tonsilitis.

Add to this an average holiday entitlement and bank holidays, and you are looking at being absent for around 14 weeks over the last year.

I can "understand" where your employer is coming from with regards to you also studying full time, as they may be thinking that your imune system may be low due to the combined workload ?

Did you also miss a similar amount of time at college ?

You employer may also be thinking that you are prioritising your studies over your work. This may be true (as you will hopefully benefit in the long term) but it does not benefit your employer in the short term.

dizzyrascal

Actually repeated bouts of Tonsillitis is a clear sign that you are run down and doing too much. Your immune system is not up to defending you as it should.
Have you checked that you don't have glandular fever. Infections like these are often a sign that things are not right, but working and studying without time to recover and relax do take a lot more out of you than you might think.
Perhaps your body is trying to tell you something.
Medically, people who are under a lot of stress do suffer from more illnesses/sickness than other workers.

ILW

justagimmick wrote: »

I suffered with tonsilitis repeatedly each month from January this year. The fact that I happen to be a student and work wouldn't have prevented these infections if I was one or the other instead of both. Previously, I have managed my attendance well enough (everyone gets sick time to time).
I do know that my boss isn't happy that I am a student, she is always trying to drive the point home that this is why I am 'sick' all the time. They are not sympathetic, it'll be leave or deal with it. Leaving my job is not an option and reduction of hours would leave me with no money to pay bills and my mortgage.

Thank you for all your responses, you have rationalised my thoughts for me and yes, given the time to think prior to the meeting a verbal warning is probably deserved even if I am not happy with it (what can you do?). I will keep my head down and move on when it is time. Thanks again.

With that amount of sick time, are you of any use to your employer?