.............

rjh29992

The company I work for is actually a charity and I'm a support worker for people with learning disabilities.

Be thankful I haven't been sacked? I think if I was sacked for having a total of 15 days off sick due to genuine ongoing illness, which I have hospital discharge notes and doctors notes to prove, would be a pretty strong case for unfair dismissal.

I picked up extra shifts this month as it has been over a month since any 'episodes' and I feel fine, and my workplace is aware of this.

The Bradford factor seems like a pretty flawed scheme, I think it would work well for some, but when it's basically punishing staff who are genuinely ill, as well as encouraging staff with contagious illnesses like flu or stomach bugs to come into work even when sick because they don't want to mess up their bradford factor. Which is pretty bad when you work with vulnerable people.

milliemonster

Why can't you understand that this has nothing to do with you being genuinely sick, or not, any employer needs their employees to be in work, working, earning money for them/providing an essential service, they can't do that if their employees are off sick all the time, irrespective of whether it is genuine or not.

No one is disputing the genuine reasons for your absence, but if you were let go, you wouldn't have a case for dismissal as you have been employed for less than 2 years and they can get rid of you for any reason they like at the moment, even the colour of your shoes if they so wish.

And to be honest, doing extra shifts when you have been having seizures without warning whether you feel fine or not would raise an eyebrow with me as an employer, in all honesty at this moment you should just be doing your required hours and no extra until your medical issues are sorted out

rjh29992

No I do understand that, my main issue is that I had 15 days off and if I had had them all off at once there would be no issue, my Bradford factor would be 30, but because it was over 5 different occasions my Bradford factor is over 300. I understand that this method would work if someone kept calling in sick for the odd day off for minor things but for genuine and serious illness I think you should be allowed a reasonable amount of time off over different occasions (i had no control over the fact that I had to take time off on 5 different occasions) And since in my contract it says we will get full pay for 2 weeks sick leave, therefore my 15 days is just over that and so I feel I should be paid for it.

Luckily my manager is more understanding than everyone on here! And has put forward an appeal.

rjh29992

Also my senior has been off sick for over 2 months and has not been dismissed so obviously my workplace has a different policy on sacking for being off sick if you think that I should be sacked for a total of 15 days...

Undervalued

rjh29992 wrote: »

Also my senior has been off sick for over 2 months and has not been dismissed so obviously my workplace has a different policy on sacking for being off sick if you think that I should be sacked for a total of 15 days...

They may have been employed for more than two years so have protection against unfair dismissal. You don't!

Also it is quite common for a firms sickness policy to become more "forgiving" with seniority and / or length of service.

I am not saying they will, but keep in mind that you could be dismissed for no reason at all regardless of any Bradford factor. Even if you are disabled (for employment law purposes) that only obliges the firm to make "reasonable adjustments" and certain doesn't give you total protection.

Nicki

It's really bad luck that you have this illness, which I agree sounds very genuine.

The question though is, should the effect of that bad luck be on you, or on your employer? They haven't done anything to cause your illness, and they are trying to provide a service for very vulnerable people. If they are using the charity's funds to pay for your sickness absence, then they have less to spend on the disabled people the charity is supposed to support.

Assuming that part of their funding comes from the local authority to provide these services, they may well not be allowed to circumvent their normal rules to pay you when you don't meet the contractual entitlement as the project will be costed out, including staff costs, and the charity will need to account for how money has been spent. Donors to the charity would also expect that their donations mainly go to support their disabled clients, not to give their staff extra-contractual benefits.

I think you need to stop fixating on whether you are genuinely ill or not. If you weren't genuinely ill and were taking excess time off, that would be a sackable offence. Here you are clearly genuinely ill, and as I understand it you are not being threatened with dismissal, but you are being told that you do not qualify for sick pay. As I have said, your illness is terrible luck but the consequences sadly fall on you, not your employer as is the case for most people with chronic or long term health conditions. I hope you get to the bottom of this soon and can get back to working normally if this is causing financial hardship.

Undervalued

rjh29992 wrote: »

..........................

Why delete the opening post?

In any case it is complete pointless as it has been quoted in full by the first person to respond!

xapprenticex

rjh29992 wrote: »

Be thankful I haven't been sacked? I think if I was sacked for having a total of 15 days off sick due to genuine ongoing illness, which I have hospital discharge notes and doctors notes to prove, would be a pretty strong case for unfair dismissal.

Oh no you wont, if they want to get rid of you, they can, very easily.

theoretica

rjh29992 wrote: »

No I do understand that, my main issue is that I had 15 days off and if I had had them all off at once there would be no issue, my Bradford factor would be 30, but because it was over 5 different occasions my Bradford factor is over 300. I understand that this method would work if someone kept calling in sick for the odd day off for minor things but for genuine and serious illness I think you should be allowed a reasonable amount of time off over different occasions (i had no control over the fact that I had to take time off on 5 different occasions) And since in my contract it says we will get full pay for 2 weeks sick leave, therefore my 15 days is just over that and so I feel I should be paid for it.

Luckily my manager is more understanding than everyone on here! And has put forward an appeal.

One of the things the Bradford factor determines is how your health is likely to impact the business going forward. If someone is off for 3 weeks for something in a block and then returns are they likely to go off again or how likely that it is cured and over? On the other hand someone who is off for the same number of days on several occasions, are they more likely to have more absences in future? It is much harder for a business to cope without knowing if someone will be in or not, and that is what the Bradford factor is for. It is a business tool, for the business' benefit.

jobbingmusician

I would consider whatever you have to be a disability, since it must have a profound effect on your day to day life. Presumably, if you 'just pass out' you are not driving and so have to use public transport if you are supporting people in their own homes? Do you drive?

You do need to ensure that your employer is kept informed about your illness and its progress since your employer will need to do risk assessments (especially if lone working is ever involved). If your illness is considered a disability, as i believe it should be, this should protect you against dismissal, even in the first 2 years of employment.

And you state that 15 days' absence is 'only just over 2 weeks' sick leave'. This statement in itself would raise enormous concerns for me if I were your employer. You have actually already exceeded your allowance by 50% - 2 weeks is only 10 working days, normally.

Your employer does have responsibilities to their funders, as previous posters have pointed out. They are not there to pay you for extra sick leave, no matter how genuine the sickness!