Employer accusing workers of abusing companies sick pay

Barny1979

What were the absences?

Farmer_Johnson

holow666 wrote: »

so again i will ask same thing, if i sometimes get ill, i should not be employed?

Correct. If you are I’ll too often, or for too long then you can be dismissed.

Your employer is not employing you to be nice, he is employing you to do something for him.

If you cannot do it properly because you are sick too often then he will possibly choose to remove you and to get someone healthier in.

This is neither unfair nor illegal.

There are some protections if your illness is classified as a disability, but even then it’s not carte blanche to not turn up often enough.

Farmer_Johnson

holow666 wrote: »

I don't know how there is UK mentality, but i wish they business will vanish... In the end we all humans and if you act in such a way with employees, you will get same return

That’s really not how the universe works.

You seem quite confused about your relationship with your employer. They are not your parents, or your friends, you are entering into a deal, you work, they pay you. If you can’t hold up your side of the deal then they will often need or want to replace you.

Why do you think that this is wrong, or unfair?

holow666

Farmer_Johnson wrote: »

That’s really not how the universe works.

You seem quite confused about your relationship with your employer. They are not your parents, or your friends, you are entering into a deal, you work, they pay you. If you can’t hold up your side of the deal then they will often need or want to replace you.

Why do you think that this is wrong, or unfair?

So can i at least know clearly what exactly is my side of the deal, i dont think its to much i'm asking? Do I?

jobbingmusician

Isn't that what your contract is? It explains to you your side of the deal, part of which that you will attend work for x hours per week. If you are unable to do this, they have no obligation to keep paying you, and no obligation to keep employing you.

holow666

jobbingmusician wrote: »

Isn't that what your contract is? It explains to you your side of the deal, part of which that you will attend work for x hours per week. If you are unable to do this, they have no obligation to keep paying you, and no obligation to keep employing you.

Yes, it explained to me, so i my absence is in acceptable limits regarding they absence policy, but they accusing that im taking time of by using companies sick pay, so is they stating that i'm faking sickness or what?

nicechap

holow666 wrote: »

Yes, it explained to me, so i my absence is in acceptable limits regarding they absence policy, but they accusing that im taking time of by using companies sick pay, so is they stating that i'm faking sickness or what?

You have a habit of not answering simple questions put to you so I'm guessing that attitude has played a part in your employer's decision.


All of your problems could have been defended on your behalf if you'd been in a union but I'm guessing you thought you could save yourself the fees.


I'll have one last try at explaining things and then I'm out.


Your employer has a reasonable belief that you have abused their sickness policy. It doesn't matter whether it was just two periods of sick in a year. They think you were not sick when you say you were. You told OH that your health DOES NOT affect your work.


I do not know why you were off sick, but to give an example. You called in sick because you had a sprained ankle expecting to take 3 days off but didn't book back on till 10 days. Whilst you were on sick leave your boss saw you on facebook on a trampoline, or 3 of your workmates saw you digging on your allotment. In such a case, the employer is fully entitled to terminate your contract.

holow666

nicechap wrote: »

You have a habit of not answering simple questions put to you so I'm guessing that attitude has played a part in your employer's decision.


All of your problems could have been defended on your behalf if you'd been in a union but I'm guessing you thought you could save yourself the fees.


I'll have one last try at explaining things and then I'm out.


Your employer has a reasonable belief that you have abused their sickness policy. It doesn't matter whether it was just two periods of sick in a year. They think you were not sick when you say you were. You told OH that your health DOES NOT affect your work.


I do not know why you were off sick, but to give an example. You called in sick because you had a sprained ankle expecting to take 3 days off but didn't book back on till 10 days. Whilst you were on sick leave your boss saw you on facebook on a trampoline, or 3 of your workmates saw you digging on your allotment. In such a case, the employer is fully entitled to terminate your contract.

I clearly understand what you explaining to me
So should i come to work being sick to avoid any further actions with the reason that employer does not believe me or my GP?
they provide they evidence why they believe it because the gap between 2 absences is 3 month and 10 days, so no actions, if it would be less for 10 days they would put me on absence attendance monitoring, they saying that i made this to avoid absence policy

Barny1979

Barny1979 wrote: »

What were the absences?

OP? What were the absences and when?

Comms69

holow666 wrote: »

so again i will ask same thing, if i sometimes get ill, i should not be employed?

If that’s your employers choice, then yes you shouldn’t be employed