Bradford Factor - Your opinion?

JWIOW

Hi all,

After having a disciplinary at the small company I work for recently due to my 'Bradford Factor' score being too high, I was just wondering everyone else's views on this method of monitoring sickness?

I had been off sick for a number of single days, I am generally quite a healthy person yet had some ongoing problems which caused nausia, sickness etc occasionally. For the days I was ill, I was genuinely ill - however for example I had 5 single days over a certain period, this would give me a higher score than if I had taken 5 days off in a row?!

I don't understand how this makes any sense and if anything - I feel alienated against the company I work for now.

Just wondering if anyone had any similar experiences? It's like I've been punished for genuinely having a medical problem!

Takeaway_Addict

Stops people taking odd days off, its a commonly accepted method though its not one we use.

the_donchichio

My current employer's policy is to regard The five days off as five separate sick days whilst someone taking off five days in a row is regarded as one absence...I suppose it makes sense and gwnerally speaking someone with a serious issue would take more days off in a row

the_donchichio

And what in the name is the 'Bradford factor'?

[Deleted User]

The Bradford factor is:
Number of 'times off sick' X Number of days off in total X 10

It's meant to penalise lots of times being sick, rather than lots of days off sick

FBaby

So in a 12 months time, you had five days when you felt too poorly to go to work on that day, but not enough that it lasted two days? Hangovers?

Personally I do find it odd, odd enough that if it was me and I wasn't pregnant or suffering from hangovers, I would want to discuss it with my GP.

James_B.

FBaby wrote: »

So in a 12 months time, you had five days when you felt too poorly to go to work on that day, but not enough that it lasted two days? Hangovers?

Personally I do find it odd, odd enough that if it was me and I wasn't pregnant or suffering from hangovers, I would want to discuss it with my GP.

I agree, it's a rare and strange condition that will lead to so may individual days off in so short a time, so should be checked out.

bap98189

ringo_24601 wrote: »

The Bradford factor is:
Number of 'times off sick' X Number of days off in total X 10

It's meant to penalise lots of times being sick, rather than lots of days off sick

No it's not. The Bradford factor is calculated as

B = S x S x D

where B is the Bradford Factor score, S is the number of times you were absent and D is the total number of days of absence.

Essentially it gives a higher score if you have a large number of short absences as opposed to a single long one.

agrinnall

What we think of it is irrelevant, your employer had decided to use it and you're stuck with it unless you can persuade them to change.

[Deleted User]

bap98189 wrote: »

No it's not. The Bradford factor is calculated as

B = S x S x D

where B is the Bradford Factor score, S is the number of times you were absent and D is the total number of days of absence.

Essentially it gives a higher score if you have a large number of short absences as opposed to a single long one.

Yes.. I was misreading a website! Doh. Oh well, only 1/2 a day off this year in sick leave. Gives me a BF score of 0.5!

Sanne

Our last HR system used it and the number was used as one criteria when people were made redundant.

I had a pretty high Bradford factor due to trying to help the business: I worked from home as much as possible when I struggled with my health a couple of years ago (while the GP tried to figure out what the hell was going on).
So I may have worked a few hours on Monday, took the afternoon off sick, did the same on Tuesday, may have had all of Wednesday off etc. Each half day (or even few hours) were classed as individual absence by the system so you can imagine what happened with my score.
(I should say that this approach was agreed with my line manager!)

Effectively, had the business used the Bradford factor, I would have been better off not working at all during that period - by trying to work wherever possible I significantly worsened the score though it immensely helped the company.

So, all in all, I think it's a good indicator for HR but only if there's fair rules around what's classed as one instance of absence.