Bradford factor

Manxman_in_exile

Xbigman wrote: »

This highlights the biggest issue with this system. The whole Bradford Factor is an integrated absence management system but individual employers are picking out the bits they want to use and not looking at the consequences.
In the instance quoted above the NHS has done away with the part time worker calculation in favour of using calendar days rather than working days. Thats OK as it is but if I have the last day of my three day week off sick and return the following week I would be put down as having 5 days off and not 1. That could have a pretty dramatic effect after a second instance.
The OP's company is looking at the record over 18 months (which is perfectly legal) and bringing it in retrospectively. As long as they adjust the number of points needed to trigger disciplinary action upwards it is not nescesarily unfair. What is an issue is that people like the OP with a lot of odd days can find that on a percentage based absense system 6 days is only 2% or 3%, on the Bradford factor its far more serious. That of course might be why they have done it. Too many staff having odd days off has resulted in a system being introduced that excessively penalises that behaviour.



Darren

Hi Darren


Actually I agree with you about Bradford Scores, but they can provide some useful information.


I can't recall exactly, but I'm pretty sure that our trust's sickness policy did not rely solely on Bradford. In fact I'm not sure if it was even mentioned in our sickness policy. However, I certainly did use Bradford to analyse sickness absence.


I wasn't a great fan of it but it did produce interesting information. However, as I said before, having a bad Bradford Score was not necessarily a problem. Conversely, having an OK score did not make you immune from falling foul of the policy.


It's not correct that the NHS does (or did) not take account of part-time working. At an overall trust or directorate or ward level I would work both with calendar days lost and full time equivalent days lost. Apologies if I confused you by not making that point clear.


But at an individual employee level, if you've been off sick for two months (or three or four), you've been off sick for two months (etc). At an individual level we weren't interested in the number of working (or FTE) days off, just the duration of the absence. And I think that is correct.

t0rt0ise

Xbigman wrote: »

...if I have the last day of my three day week off sick and return the following week I would be put down as having 5 days off and not 1.

Then you call in on your first day off and say you are fit for work but day off so that it counts as just one day. That's what I have to do in my job.

Xbigman

My sickness would end at my return to work interview which must be on my first working day back. That said, my point was hypothetical as its working days that count for me.


Darren