Sick leave as a criterion

jjlandlord

I really like the effect the word 'normal' has these days. It's almost become banned, it seems.

dippy3103

jjlandlord wrote: »

I really like the effect the word 'normal' has these days. It's almost become banned, it seems.

I take your point but don't you think "normal" is difficult to define? Normal in what way? That's why I preferred healthy as that's the matter at hand. Somebody could be very very eccentric & far from normal, but fit & well and at work.

prowla

Well, I suppose that statement "A normal, healthy adult serious about his job does not call in sick 5+ times a year."is true, as generally being sick means you aren't healthy; therefore being healthy and calling in sick (even one time a year) should be a disciplinary matter.

Another_not_new_user

jjlandlord wrote: »

Now you are just trolling and misrepresenting what I wrote.

I was pretty clear and measured in my claim: "A normal, healthy adult serious about his job does not call in sick 5+ times a year."
I don't think that this is in any way inflammatory.

'Normal' has no negative meaning here, don't play me the politically correct card. I'm referring to a standard, typical adult.
This is no longer the middle ages and a 'normal', typical adult in this country in 2015 is in good health.

If your experience tells you otherwise, please let us know which is that hellhole of a workplace or town you work in so that we can all avoid it at all costs.

You just keep on accusing me of doing what you are doing - I have made my point very clearly. You went on to say that anyone who calls in sick several times a year must have a chronic illness. And then that calling in sick several times a year is not "normal", "typical" or whatever other "average" word you want. This is precisely the sort of language and thought process that underpins disability discrimination - that if people are ill then they are not "normal" and that they are therefore a burden to the employer.


Someone can be sick several times a year and be far more productive than someone who has never had a sick day, but neither do they bother to do much else other than turn up.


That is what is wrong with generic typing - assuming a sickness rate has an automatic link to productivity, efficiency or effectiveness in employment does not work. There are better ways of judging whether someone is a good employee, and blanket assertions that there is something wrong with people who have sickness absence, or that they are not serious about their employment, is just as offensive as saying that only "normal" or "healthy" people should be in employment.

jjlandlord

dippy3103 wrote: »

Somebody could be very very eccentric & far from normal, but fit & well and at work.

Obviously, in the context of sickness 'normal' has nothing to do with eccentricity.

normal
adjective
conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected.
...
noun
the usual, typical, or expected state or condition.

It is in my view a plain statement of fact that calling in sick 5+ (which is a number off the top of my head, but generous) times is not normal: It does not happen with a normal employee.

As you mentioned if you were off in that way your employer would ask why, which does show that most people would detect that pattern as being abnormal.

Now, there might be a perfectly reasonable reason for these absences.
Going back to OP and the criteria listed, in such case the employer would want evidence from GP and to assert whether the absence are related to a protected characteristic.

Hence, I don't think that the criteria listed are a priori unfair or discriminatory.
Of course, as said, criteria are often manipulated to get rid of the 'right' people.

Some protest too much, methinks...

warmhands.coldheart

My SIL works in the Public Sector, is 14 weeks pregnant and is off with "Maternity Related Sickness"..... Her "sick line" is to run out at the end of this week but she's going to get signed off again for another few weeks as she has a holiday booked for 2 weeks time and doesn't want to use holiday up!!! Don't you just LOVE the public sector !!

dippy3103

warmhands.coldheart wrote: »

My SIL works in the Public Sector, is 14 weeks pregnant and is off with "Maternity Related Sickness"..... Her "sick line" is to run out at the end of this week but she's going to get signed off again for another few weeks as she has a holiday booked for 2 weeks time and doesn't want to use holiday up!!! Don't you just LOVE the public sector !!

And it's people like that who cause the problem for the rest of us.

I work in the public sector & most people I know would not dream of behaving so dishonestly.

Long gone are the days where people talked about their "12 days sick entitlement" each year, and treated as extra leave.

I have a disability & long term health problems yet work full time & am rarely off sick. My 61 year old colleague came in whilst she was going through chemo (when she could). So please don't suggest we are all malingerers

warmhands.coldheart

dippy3103 wrote: »

And it's people like that who cause the problem for the rest of us.

I work in the public sector & most people I know would not dream of behaving so dishonestly.

Long gone are the days where people talked about their "12 days sick entitlement" each year, and treated as extra leave.

I have a disability & long term health problems yet work full time & am rarely off sick. My 61 year old colleague came in whilst she was going through chemo (when she could). So please don't suggest we are all malingerers

I ma not suggesting you are but you have no experience of the Civil Service / Public Sector here in Northern Ireland !!!! ..... Talk about a bloated, inefficient sector...... Those "days" you refer to are still alive and kicking over here....... Thankfully though the axe has been ground and is ready to fall over the next few years....

I have been living with a chronic inflammatory condition for over 13 years and have been rarely off sick so it really P's me off no end when people like my SIL swing the lead like this..

dippy3103

I truly hope the axe does fall. It's because there are people that abuse the system that the whole thing has become such an issue.

prowla

dippy3103 wrote: »

Long gone are the days where people talked about their "12 days sick entitlement" each year, and treated as extra leave.

Yes, I remember being in an office when people were planning which days to have off because they hadn't used them all.