Suspension of sick pay

sangie595

Nual wrote: »

Not partying. Being invited to accompany friends who are doing weekend activities, going home to visit parents, going on a prebooked holiday with child. Trying to hold it all together and be normal.
Jeez you are a very suspicious bunch!

I don't think you understand. The employer doesn't believe him. Whether we do is irrelevant! But you need to understand that in the public sector, what you are describing is exceptionally unusual. For a reason. And that reason is that they would generally, in the exceptional circumstances of not believing someone, ask first and stop pay later. The fact they have taken this route is very worrying and indicative of very bad things.

What people here are saying is probably exactly what his colleagues are saying. And that definitely influences a lot of things. But in the end, we don't yet know what evidence they have. I just suspect it's bad. And if that is the case then the legislation won't help him - but the legislation is also clear. Occupational sick pay is subject to the employers terms. Most public sector employees don't realise this because it is rarely ever suspended. But once it is, the legislation doesn't help them.

However, until we know what the employer is saying and what they have, it's all guess work. Although I'll endorse the comments made - social media and work are an explosive mix.

ohreally

Nual wrote: »

Jeez you are a very suspicious bunch!

Suspicious, try battle hardened.

I had a member who did something similar, off sick and went to a Euro football qualifier. Video of him was posted singing and chanting outside a pub. I received an email from senior HR with a link to said video posted on you tube asking for my comments.

Some individuals don't have the sense they were born with, your friend needs to be much more mindful of the situation in future.

Nual

Thanks sangie. I hear what you are saying, that it is v serious and HR think they have watertight evidence otherwise they wouldn't be stopping sick pay. I am saying
1.HR are incompetent
2. the evidence is inconclusive ( see 1.)
3. I worked with this person for 10 years and do not accept that they would swing the lead in this way ( although they might screw up other things)

nicechap

Nual wrote: »

Hello
A friend of mine has been on sick leave with stress symptoms. He has provided sick notes and been assessed by Occupational Health as not fit to return to work. He has now received a letter saying that an investigation is being carried out in relation to allegations about the genuineness of his absence due to his social activities. A meeting has been called for 2 weeks time to determine if there are grounds for a disciplinary hearing. It also says that due to the nature of the allegations, sick pay will cease immediately.
This is a public sector employer with thousands of employees. How can pay be suspended on the basis of a yet to be investigated allegation?

Nual wrote: »

Sorry, don't know who you are referring to re members? He is in Unison. My guess is that the evidence is from FB, which shows holidays and other social activities. Maybe not the smartest thing to show you are having a good time while off sick, but if the stress is due to impossible work pressure then doing things to make you feel less stressed/ forget about work for a bit seems reasonable?
The allegation bit seems strange to me - can you explain why it is worded like this?
I used to manage this person and I do not believe he is faking the stress.He had a lot of shortcomings but was hardworking and very keen to do the right thing. Since I left he has been put into an impossible role which does not suit his skill set or personality.

I suspect you may be a little too close to see the woods for the trees. I can understand wanting to help a friend, and/or an employee who became a friend, but as Sangie had said, the employer must have some pretty persuasive evidence to take the line they have.

That doesn't mean its a complete lost cause, there was once an London Underground employee off sick with a dodgy ankle who was sacked after being found playing squash - he claimed it was part of his recovery programme, but until your friend/ ex employee knows what's the allegation, we're all shooting in the dark.

I couldn't find the actual reinstatement quote but this was in the run up to it.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/storm-over-squash-game-strike-6972402.html

NeilCr

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2004/may/08/transport.world

Think he won it mostly on wrong procedure

ETA

In the end LU did not appeal. They settled withi Mr Barrett

nicechap

NeilCr wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2004/may/08/transport.world

Think he won it mostly on wrong procedure

ETA

In the end LU did not appeal. They settled withi Mr Barrett

Thank you for finding it.

I wasn't involved in it but my memory of it from the press was it was because he was a union official that the union spent so much on lawyers etc.

NeilCr

nicechap wrote: »

Thank you for finding it.

I wasn't involved in it but my memory of it from the press was it was because he was a union official that the union spent so much on lawyers etc.

No problem. I had friends in HR at the time who were interested

I do agree with you that the OP is too close to this. I was involved in a similar sort of situation at work and HR were painstaking in making sure everything was done properly. As you and sangie say they must have some pretty persuasive evidence.

TELLIT01

There was a case in our local paper recently of a police officer who called in sick and then was caught on camera at a horse race meeting. He was dismissed despite glowing references from many people who knew him well, or at least believed they new him well.

sangie595

TELLIT01 wrote: »

There was a case in our local paper recently of a police officer who called in sick and then was caught on camera at a horse race meeting. He was dismissed despite glowing references from many people who knew him well, or at least believed they new him well.

You live near me!

But yes I agree that the OP is too close. They don't even know what evidence HR have, but they "know" it is inconclusive? And people change - the person you knew for ten years may be very different now - or may just now be showing true colours. You don't help someone by taking their part without prejudice. You can sympathise that way. But sympathy doesn't build a defence. You need to know what HR have. And bear in mind that your "friend" (former member of staff?) may not be telling you the whole (or any) truth! Be objective and you are more help to them.

TELLIT01

sangie595 wrote: »

You live near me!

West of England somewhere between Worcestershire and Somerset