Large Company - Written Attendance Warning

sparkovic

I am not aware that this warning will drop off my record and have not been informed that it has.

TELLIT01

It's entirely possible that the length of absence was the trigger for the action taken by the company rather than the number of absences. Without knowing the full details of the company's sickness absence policy it's impossible to do more than guess.
As others have said, I don't think you will be doing yourself any favours by bringing it back up two years after the event. The situation will almost certainly have been reviewed by people not involved in the original decision making, so there is absolutely nothing to be gained by raking it all back up.

Savvy_Sue

sparkovic wrote: »

I am not aware that this warning will drop off my record and have not been informed that it has.

That's the only thing that's worth asking about. How someone else was treated is not relevant to your situation. How you think others were treated is not relevant to your situation.

TELLIT01

sparkovic wrote: »

It has been recently been brought back into focus for myself when one of my colleagues who was also off with work related stress could not deal with how his return to work was dealt with and has resigned (this is someone in a well paid job with 2 young children with no other job to go to).

Although you aren't a union member, there is nothing to stop you raising the general concern about how long term work related stress is handled by the company with one of the union reps. They may want to investigate further, but that won't change your own situation.
Think very carefully about which battles to fight.

sparkovic

Policy is 10 days absence / 3 individual absences in a rolling 12 month period.

I accept the guidelines were followed but it is the consistency of the implementation I am struggling to accept.

sangie595

sparkovic wrote: »

Policy is 10 days absence / 3 individual absences in a rolling 12 month period.

I accept the guidelines were followed but it is the consistency of the implementation I am struggling to accept.

You are not entitled to know the details of anybody else's circumstances - what happens to them does not mean that the same should happen to you, or to somebody else.

It is two years ago.

If it were yesterday, there is still nothing you can do - there is no right to an external appeal against a grievance decision.

You were told more than two years ago to join a union. You still haven't.

jobbingmusician

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

That's the only thing that's worth asking about. How someone else was treated is not relevant to your situation. How you think others were treated is not relevant to your situation.

Plus one for this. It would be EXTREMELY unusual for your company to have a disciplinary policy where warnings last for ever. Plus the ACAS guidelines recommend that employers should tell people how long their written warnings last for.

Why not ask your employer for a copy of the disc policy? You don't have to say what it's for. And it should say how long warnings stay on file. (And yes, joining a union does sound like a good idea.)

nicechap

sparkovic wrote: »

Policy is 10 days absence / 3 individual absences in a rolling 12 month period.

I accept the guidelines were followed but it is the consistency of the implementation I am struggling to accept.

Can you see the point of being in a union now?

Cheeky_Monkey

As I see it you have two choices - get over it or resign.

TBagpuss

OP, I suggest that you check your employers policies or if you can't find the answer, ask HR, whether the warning has expired or will expire after a set period of time.

Given this was 2 years ago it's likely that it has already 'fallen off'your record 9 i.e that it would not take effect if you were now to be off sick) or that it will do so. It may be that how long it remains valid is linked to how long you were off for, but your employers policies should set that out.

Also, what makes you think other people have not been given warnings? This type of thing is usually confidential so unless you are the manager of another person who has had lengthy absence due to sickness, there's no reason you would know whether or not they've been given a warning.

You mention that when you appealed you were told that the guidelines were followed and that the decision was your manager's. That sounds as though under your employer's rules, managers have a degree of discretion in whether they issue a formal warning or not. The fact that they issued own to you, and not to other employees with a different pattern / length of absence doesn't mean they were wrong