Bradford Factor - Your opinion?

HurdyGurdy

They use it where I work, and it seems a silly system to me. If you are penalised for a period of sickness, then that would seem to be encouraging a certain type of person to take more than one day, even if that is all they need to recover.

pinkshoes

They use it where I used to work and highlighted those with a tendency to take one day off frequently. More so those that had lots of Mondays and Fridays off...

I can't say I ever took just one day. If I was ill enough not to go in, it usually took a couple of days to recover.

TheKeymeister

My previous employer used this, but they stuck to it rigidly, i.e. once you pass a certain number you get a verbal warning, any further absences within the next 12 months and you get a written warning, any further absences after that and you're sacked. I agree it is probably useful as an indicator, but sticking to it rigidly is excessive in my view. A colleague of mine had to fight really hard to find out what the trigger level was, I believe it took many escalations within HR before they'd reveal it, which again I found very odd!

Another_not_new_user

When it comes to sickness monitoring there is no such thing as a fair system. Only a system that applies to all employees. Opinions about systems are irrelevant. It isn't palatable but the base line of any system is you are supposed to be in work, and if you aren't you are an inconvenience. And especially so if your genuine illness coincides with the weekend hangover. Regularly. "Fair" is not up for debate. Employers pay employees to attend work. Harsh reality. Not even always a fair reality. But that's what it is.

dotdash79

My Braford Factor for the year is 360

I expect it by the end of the year to be 600.

I've only been off twice this year.

ShadowPuma

I worked somewhere where they used this as a reason to have meetings but work with you on why you are ill.

They were a lot stricter with the factory floor staff since 1 person down for 1 day a few times in a year/quarter was more lost productivity than 1 person down for the whole week (since they could bring in agency staff once they knew - harder to do for the day).

It is based off the idea of the 'chaotic' effect on a workplace like a factory where there isn't much flexibility in when things get done unlike an office where there can be.

Personally I hate it - especially in a role where if I was ill one day I could make up the work lost over the rest of the week. But I can see its uses.

From your post I believe you are trying to manage this matter with your GP which is good.

JWIOW

Yes, they were individual days - I am not a drinker at all, therefore this is certainly not a 'hangover' problem as suggested by some of the above users.
I am generally quite a well person, however occasionally get short periods of dizzyness and sickness for a few hours that then pass. My doctor is currently investigating why this is, however advised me that the day this happens should be taken off and an appointment booked with them, as it could just be flu which obviously I don't want to pass on - best to not risk it.
Each of the days I have had off sick due to this, I have also accompanied this with an appointment letter provided by the doctor for each time.

I feel that I should only take the one day off as I am committed to my work and do not want the rest of the team to pick up the slack.

Now it seems that if I had just taken off longer periods of time, it would have given me the same score. This seems as though it encourages people to take longer periods of time off sick.

Overall, I think if the employer is understanding of a situation and speaks to their employees about any problems there should be no need for this kind of system at all.

James_B.

JWIOW wrote: »

Now it seems that if I had just taken off longer periods of time, it would have given me the same score.

Of course it doesn't mean that!

Had you taken two days off each time instead of one, then it would have doubled your score.

As to "it could be flu", it wasn't, so why would you put non-flu symtoms down as "possibly" flu?

To be honest, I can see why your company may be getting the hump, if you are taking time off in case you have flu, but don't.

Gingernutty

The Bradford Score system is fairly poisonous for staff.

I work in an hospital and it is applied rigidly even to those who are disabled or chronically sick.

I see people coughing, snuffling and sneezing their way through the hospital corridors all ready to infect any passing patient or their relative.

There are people limping, cancer patients being actively treated and, of course, if you are not in the boss' favour, then it can really be used to crucify you.

Disability and chronic illness should be treated differently, IMHO.

the_donchichio

After closer inspection the bradford qoutient seems similar to most company policies wherein people with more separate days are penalised and people with less occasions but more days are treated leniently....makes sense as someone with some condition that forces them to miss 5 days in a year is different from the Five separate single days