Being signed off sick, and need some support..

sangie595

Sanne wrote: »

I agree what everyone says in terms of sick pay, do ask for a copy of the policy.

In regards to dismissal, as some are quite negative - there are companies with policies that give the manager room to make a judgement on how they want to apply this. Most decent managers will want to support someone valued on one spell of long term absence but they might get more difficult if this is followed by several short absences. One of my direct reports had a heart attack and was off for three months and the only thing I tried to do was help him back by offering a phased return, flexibility with medical appointments etc. When he then started being off sick every week for a couple of days with colds, headaches and the likes it turned into a different matter.

This is the same at three places I've worked so far though I do know there are places around who just follow their policy (I unfortunately worked for one).

But you did follow policy / law! A heart condition is an automatic disability. We are not clear, as has been noted already, that the circumstances of the OP yet qualify, but the probably don't. Where possible an employer should make reasonable adjustments for an employee with a disability. You did. Colds and headaches aren't disabilities. And so shouldn't be treated as such. The OP hasn't yet got a diagnosis, the condition hasn't yet lasted a year or more, they don't know whether it will last a year or more, and so far it has not had a significant impact on their normal activities ( they haven't, for example, had other sickness time because of it) - so whilst we can believe it may be a disability, it doesn't yet meet the criteria. I don't disagree with your sentiment, but the OP needs to understand that, disability or not, most employers have a line; and how that line is drawn. Apart from anything else, being informed is the only way you can argue back when the line is being approached!

theoretica

sangie595 wrote: »

The OP hasn't yet got a diagnosis, the condition hasn't yet lasted a year or more, they don't know whether it will last a year or more, and so far it has not had a significant impact on their normal activities

While of course you are correct about the current duration of the condition and the enduring nature that is needed to qualify for disability protection, at present it sounds like it is having considerable impact on her normal activities, and the doctor who has signed her off for another month expects it to continue to do so.

Kitty777 wrote: »

I have been off work for almost 3 weeks due to breathlessness doing simple tasks (doing the washing, hoovering, walking up the stairs etc) and a really nasty cough.

sangie595

theoretica wrote: »

While of course you are correct about the current duration of the condition and the enduring nature that is needed to qualify for disability protection, at present it sounds like it is having considerable impact on her normal activities, and the doctor who has signed her off for another month expects it to continue to do so.

I meant within the context of the definition of disability under the Equality Act. Three weeks of breathlessness doing normal activities and a nasty cough can also be bronchial pneumonia - believe me, I know! I was nearly six weeks knocked off my feet with it a few years ago. But that wouldn't be a disability. For the purposes of the Act the significant impact must be more than three weeks, and the definition is generally a year or will last at least a year. Without a diagnosis that cannot be stipulated to by a medical practitioner. So, for example, someone with diabetes may not have a visible disability, but it will have a daily impact on their normal activities. It is therefore not necessarily the "size" of the impact, but the significance and length of it.