Our own business new employee dilemma

Person_one

lazywife wrote: »

Thanks for your honest replies. We are only a small set up, to employ an extra member of staff over what we need just to cover sickness is not a salary we can afford. If the situation arose that someone was off longer term we would have to all pull together swapping part timers hours to cover as needed.

If I was a client, and a business let me down just because one person had called in sick that day, I might consider taking my business elsewhere, probably to somewhere bigger/better organised where that was much less likely to happen, depending on what service you provide.

I appreciate that running a small business is really hard, and that there isn't unlimited money, but a contingency plan doesn't have to mean an extra salary, and has to be worth looking into so that you don't lose goodwill, surely?

Anyway, back on the topic of this potential employee. I would go with the suggestion by bunty109 of a probationary period. If his sick days haven't been genuine, then maybe when he realises there's a different culture and expectation at your workplace he'll adjust. Do you have a sickness absence policy in place?

Jagraf

No one can ever know if someone is going to be poorly, including business owners. However with a business with so few employees I personally wouldn't take the risk unless I could find out for sure what the sickness was for / how long etc. if you have three staff that's 25-33% of your workforce.

You are likely to all have specialisms and workloads which are very hard to cover with absence. You could lose a lot of business with one person off sick.

Do you need to take on permanent staff?

tea_lover

lazywife wrote: »

Thanks for your honest replies. We are only a small set up, to employ an extra member of staff over what we need just to cover sickness is not a salary we can afford. If the situation arose that someone was off longer term we would have to all pull together swapping part timers hours to cover as needed.
Pulling a sickie, or not is where I'm struggling. It's odd single episodes here and there (approx 10 times in 2 yrs I was told) which makes me think it's just "urgh, I can't be bothered to go in feeling a bit rough" rather than genuine sickness so ill he can't work.
Bunty thank you. Your response is exactly the sort of cover all I wanted to hear, a way of take on the right guy, but covering ourselves if he turns out not to change his ways. This way we can also address it once we've got references, so truly know the details and can openly discuss it.

Based on what? There are any number of conditions that could lead to this sort of absence pattern. I'm struggling to see why you would automatically assume the person is not actually ill. Also, having made that assumption why would you then consider employing them? You're contradicting yourself.

Jagraf

If you run a business you need to stop listening to hearsay tbh - it's your business and your money and you need to protect it - you need to find out for sure what the situation is.

LannieDuck

A longshot, but does he have kids who have just started nursery/school?

duchy

You are making a business decision based on hearsay ?

I'd wonder why a friend would be gossiping and putting their"friend" at risk of losing a job offer . Sounds more like someone stirring.

That said there is nothing to stop you saying to the employee that their references did flag absence issues and you do things a bit differently to their last employer and spell out that any absence leads to a RTW interview and repeated instances can lead to disciplinary action (obviously this process must apply to all employees - but you should be doing it anyway). This doesn't need to be confrontational just matter of fact and a heads up that you as a company do things differently to their previous company.

heuchera

tea_lover wrote: »

You're assuming that he's 'pulling sickies' (in your words) rather than genuinely ill. Why is that?

and accessing somebody's confidential medical information through a "friend of a friend" says something about this employer too..


I'm tempted to say I hope this potential employee runs for the hills!

heuchera

lazywife wrote: »

Thanks for your honest replies. We are only a small set up, to employ an extra member of staff over what we need just to cover sickness is not a salary we can afford. If the situation arose that someone was off longer term we would have to all pull together swapping part timers hours to cover as needed.
Pulling a sickie, or not is where I'm struggling. It's odd single episodes here and there (approx 10 times in 2 yrs I was told) which makes me think it's just "urgh, I can't be bothered to go in feeling a bit rough" rather than genuine sickness so ill he can't work.
Bunty thank you. Your response is exactly the sort of cover all I wanted to hear, a way of take on the right guy, but covering ourselves if he turns out not to change his ways. This way we can also address it once we've got references, so truly know the details and can openly discuss it.

This is complete speculation, and supposition. Does this man know you've been accessing information about his health/sickness through gossiping to a friend of a friend?

shiny76

bunty109 wrote: »

use the references to flag the issue and set out expectations around attendance (written sickness policy is good) and offer a contract with a probationary period of 6 monthS, where you monitor performance and attendance. If he takes odd days here and there as sickness during that period then it will need nipping in the bud.

This ^^^

But also take HR advice if possible. My current employer uses a probationary period that can be extended (more than once) if anew employee isn't quite meeting expectations.

Another thing may be to discourage 'sickies' by having minimal sick pay.

Of course, the above may make you less attractive proposition as an employer!

lazywife

Thank you, a few comments for us to think about, I understand the criticism based on the minimal facts I have given to keep my anonymity.
I appreciate your honesty.