What is considered a lot of time off work?

JustAnotherSaver

Something i was wondering about yesterday. I remember reading on a website, might've been this one i'm not sure, but someone said that 3-4 days a year was a lot & it was sort of a blanket statement.

I've just started thinking about it as i'm going to be looking in to income protection.

I will readily admit i've had a fair few days off work in previous years. The only thing is is that i would dare to say that 90% of them could've been cut had i been in a different type of job. Ok i'm not in a different type & it is what it is. Most of my time off has been through physical injuries, operations that kind of thing & they've been blocks of weeks at a time. Very few have been scattered 'sick' days for illnesses.

My job is quite physical. Lots of heavy lifting & climbing so if i get a serious injury that stops me from lifting or climbing then i can't work. Due to the nature of the job i've picked up a fair few injuries on the job also that has laid me off - torn knee cartilage, torn arm muscle for example.

Before i'm seen as a workshy trying to get out of work, i don't want to be off. While off i've actually asked for work in other departments as well as asking for light duties. I was told no - if you can't do your job then there is no job. Others have been told this also so not just me.

If i had worked in an office for example then the vast majority of my time off would've been dramatically cut. I was once off work cracked ribs, had i done office work i'd have had a better chance at being able to work. And before anyone starts up - i've previously done office work so i'm not just a labourer implying office workers can't possibly have time off. I'm not saying that.


Does anyone take time off in relation to types of job or is it just a case of x-days is x-days regardless of job?

Guest101

There is no set rule.


but here's some common ones:


1. Be off if you have any chance of spreading infection (flu, norovirus, cold even) - very common in health and care industry, and given the nature of the work, common to lose a week or more per year.
2. Have a 5 day sick policy, paid in full for those 5 days, otherwise is SSP.
3. Any sick leave is SSP and is considered 'too much' - generally this is short sighted.


In your case, even in a physical job there should be minimal injuries. You should not be lifting too much and the should be regular H&S reviews.


Income protection is often not worth it as I believe it doesn't cover the first 7 days typically.


To be honest, if you worked in an office and had cracked ribs or knee ligament damage, you should be sent home for a recuperation period, the risks in an office or making that injury worse as the same as on a building site.

Undervalued

Income protection policies are normally intended to cover you against longer term sickness. I imagine getting one with a very short deferment period would be prohibitively expensive as it is obviously open to abuse.

Maybe look at building up you own buffer fund as short term cover and then consider insurance for illness that keeps you off for a month or more?

Remember you are only looking at covering the net shortfall (after tax) between SSP and your normal take home pay, not your whole salary.

Takeaway_Addict

You should be looking more at why you keep injuring yourself and try and prevent this

TELLIT01

My wife and I worked at different places but both had broadly similar figures for acceptable sickness absence i.e. the point at which disciplinary action may be considered necessary. That was 4 periods of absence or 8 days absence in a rolling year, whichever came first.

JustAnotherSaver

My post must've been misleading. Sorry.

I had previously been rejected for income protection as the 5 years prior to that my attendance was exceptionally bad. This is because it interoperated a few operations with long recovery time.

The fact that when the doctor for the company called, i just babbled on & probably said a bit too much that didn't need to be said & i should've just answered the questions probably didn't help matters either.

The policy i was looking at had a 6 month period before it would kick in but as i say - i was rejected for those reasons. So i've been trying to get myself as good a 5 year span as possible.

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

You should be looking more at why you keep injuring yourself and try and prevent this

I've done this. A number of the injuries were sport related - so i gave up the sport since it was affecting work.
However the knee ligament injury was done at work - lifting something heavy & my knee giving way. Another was lifting something (25kg this time) & my arm muscle tore.

I've asked the doc why i seem so 'accident prone' especially with joints but they don't know. My family think it's funny that i am actually an extremely careful person yet seem to pick up injuries so easily whereas my brother (for example) takes absolutely zero care & never picks up an injury. It's a weird one that's been that way since as long as i can remember. Even as a child i picked up injuries pretty easily.

Undervalued

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

My post must've been misleading. Sorry.

I had previously been rejected for income protection as the 5 years prior to that my attendance was exceptionally bad. This is because it interoperated a few operations with long recovery time.

The fact that when the doctor for the company called, i just babbled on & probably said a bit too much that didn't need to be said & i should've just answered the questions probably didn't help matters either.

The policy i was looking at had a 6 month period before it would kick in but as i say - i was rejected for those reasons. So i've been trying to get myself as good a 5 year span as possible.


I've done this. A number of the injuries were sport related - so i gave up the sport since it was affecting work.
However the knee ligament injury was done at work - lifting something heavy & my knee giving way. Another was lifting something (25kg this time) & my arm muscle tore.

I've asked the doc why i seem so 'accident prone' especially with joints but they don't know. My family think it's funny that i am actually an extremely careful person yet seem to pick up injuries so easily whereas my brother (for example) takes absolutely zero care & never picks up an injury. It's a weird one that's been that way since as long as i can remember. Even as a child i picked up injuries pretty easily.

If you withhold relevant information when applying for any insurance (whether directly asked or not) you run a serious risk of the policy being invalid.

Unfortunately the worse your medical history the more likely you will struggle to get satisfactory cover at an affordable price.

theoretica

The average sickness absence is about 6.5 days a year.

http://www.personneltoday.com/hr/sickness-absence-rates-and-costs-revealed-in-uks-largest-survey/

Savvy_Sue

My employer has recently introduced a policy that if you have more than 10 days' sickness in a rolling year, you have to have a formal structured return to work interview (rather than the "hi, you're back, are you OK now?" which it's been up to now ...)

So I'd say 10 days was a lot.

I'm the first person to breach this limit. I just had two weeks off with something which turned into a chest infection, with some shorter absences earlier in the year for other things. As this is the first one we've done, our HR consultancy company are coming in next week to do this, with my manager sitting in.

It's scheduled to last 1.5 hours and I'm not sure I've got much to say ...

PixelPound

A lot of places use the Bradford Factor (instances squared times number of days) though others might have simpler formulas e.g. number of times in a rolling year. No hard/fast rule.

Most jobs involving manual lifting do have H&S guidelines that should be followed though sometimes these are ignored because of the workload. The problem is if an injury occurs then an investigation will show the company has ensured H&S training to ensure its not at fault. So if you are injuring yourself is it because you haven't been told, or are choosing to ignore because things are done quicker that way, or because others are telling you to?

ThinkingOutLoud_2

Sounds like any income protection that is going to respond quickly is going to be expensive.

So if I instead you put that "Premium" into a cesible savings - as suggested - you could potentially build up a buffer against this and other stuff life might throw at you.

Of course, until that bigger is there, there are issues. But giving big sums to an insurer, due to your recent history when you might not hit 7 days off and claim often, has its issues too.

Good to be thinking though and do what makes you feel OK.