Unfair sickness policy?

marcarm

Work part-time, 15 hours per week to be worked flexible as long as I do the hours
Been there for over 4 years
Work solely from home, only occasionally in the office for a meeting, no more than 2 times a year

Had my first period of sick this week, had Tues and Weds evenings off. Was emailed today from my company asking if I wanted to take the days as unpaid sick or annual leave.

Company handbook states:

‘All sickness payments are made at the discretion of the Directors and no sickness will be paid in the first year of your employment. XXXXXXXXXXX reserves the right to withhold sick pay in circumstances where the certification procedure described above has not been followed or it has reason to doubt the validity of your sickness absence claim and may request you to undertake a medical examination by a doctor selected by it.’

I have met all the criteria, all procedures followed etc, so I queried why it was unpaid, to be told:

I know it does say at the discretion of the Director, but unless someone has been in the office and told to go home we don’t normally pay sickness...........

As I never travel to the office, and about 50% of the workforce do not either as they are home based and travel to different clients, is this policy unfair as some people will be paid for sick and others like myself will NEVER be paid sick as we cannot be sent home.

How can they have a policy where one employee is treated more favourably than another due to their working situation?

motorguy

They didn't say NEVER though did they? They said "normally"


"I know it does say at the discretion of the Director, but unless someone has been in the office and told to go home we don’t normally pay sickness..........."


Even with that they're saying people who ring in sick wont get paid. I would imagine they're saying if you come in to work and clearly are going down with something contagious they'll send you home and you'll probably get paid for that day.


If you would prefer to have that "benefit" then see if your company will facilitate you working permanently from the office - though I suspect the downsides of that will outweigh the advantage?

arbroath_lass

If it's flexible why not just make up the hours?

marcarm

I can't work from the office, I work from home in the evenings as I am a look after the kids during the day while my wife works full time, hence why also working in the evenings when she is home to take over with them.

marcarm

arbroath_lass wrote: »

If it's flexible why not just make up the hours?

I can only work tonight and tomorrow, as I would be working anyway tonight I can only work tomorrow extra so there is not enough hours left to work.

I can only work 6:30pm onwards, so cannot work 8 hours from then and be up for the children at 6am the next day, so that still leaves a shortfall.

But that still leaves the question, am I being treated less favourably than office based staff as there are criteria that have to be met and I am unable to meet them?

motorguy

marcarm wrote: »

I can't work from the office, I work from home in the evenings as I am a look after the kids during the day while my wife works full time, hence why also working in the evenings when she is home to take over with them.

Then i guess you have to accept the potential downside, for the clear upside for you?

motorguy

marcarm wrote: »

am I being treated less favourably than office based staff as there are criteria that have to be met and I am unable to meet them?

Surely they only pay sick by exception? Thats what they're really saying isnt it?

So if your office based colleague rings in sick some day they arent going to get paid sickness either.

Likewise if you happened to be in work attending a meeting and started projectile vomiting then i suspect they'd send you home and pay you for that day.

Therefore, you're being treated like your office based colleagues are you not?

Undervalued

marcarm wrote: »

Work part-time, 15 hours per week to be worked flexible as long as I do the hours
Been there for over 4 years
Work solely from home, only occasionally in the office for a meeting, no more than 2 times a year

Had my first period of sick this week, had Tues and Weds evenings off. Was emailed today from my company asking if I wanted to take the days as unpaid sick or annual leave.

Company handbook states:



I have met all the criteria, all procedures followed etc, so I queried why it was unpaid, to be told:



As I never travel to the office, and about 50% of the workforce do not either as they are home based and travel to different clients, is this policy unfair as some people will be paid for sick and others like myself will NEVER be paid sick as we cannot be sent home.

How can they have a policy where one employee is treated more favourably than another due to their working situation?

Quite lawfully!

It is a popular myth that employees must all be treated the same. There are a handful of protected characteristics (race, sex, religion etc) but apart from these an employer can discriminate in any way they please.

The firm must pay SSP according to the government's rules to those employees that qualify. Beyond that any other sick pay is a contractual matter.

marcarm

Well there we go.

Thanks for the answers everyone.

TELLIT01

I suspect that you don't earn enough to qualify for SSP, and there wouldn't be any entitlement in this scenario anyway as you were only sick for 2 days. Unfortunately if the company chooses not to pay for sickness absence there doesn't seem to be much you can do about it.