Employer accusing workers of abusing companies sick pay

gomer

holow666 wrote: »

i accepted to much already, and i would expect this time also, just i don't understand the allegation and i will not except it only if they explain it to me and that's true.

I said Except. Not accept.

gomer

What does the policy say is poor attendance? Why do you think it does not apply to you?

holow666

gomer wrote: »

What does the policy say is poor attendance? Why do you think it does not apply to you?

it say if i have 3 absences in 1 years it will be restricted to 2 next year, so 1 absent i had long time ago i forgot, and in last tree month i had 2 more, than they calculated, and the third occasional was 1 year and 10 from first. So i could not get restriction, and they stating that because i got sick 1 year and 10 days later from 1 occasion i avoiding restrictions and making time off and abusing companies sick pay

polgara

seems feasible

holow666

gomer wrote: »

..... Except....

i dont get your point then

gomer

holow666 wrote: »

i dont get your point then

Never mind. It's not important.

gomer

holow666 wrote: »

it say if i have 3 absences in 1 years it will be restricted to 2 next year, so 1 absent i had long time ago i forgot, and in last tree month i had 2 more, than they calculated, and the third occasional was 1 year and 10 from first. So i could not get restriction, and they stating that because i got sick 1 year and 10 days later from 1 occasion i avoiding restrictions and making time off and abusing companies sick pay

In that context it sounds like they do not believe you were genuinely ill on that occasion.

holow666

polgara wrote: »

seems feasible

if i would get restrictions, i still would get paid companies sick pay, cause i been before, and wile i was on restriction i got paid when i was ill, so restriction does not have anything to do with sick pay, it lower absence next year.
they dint need to put me on restriction if they think i dint qualify, they just dint pay company sick pay. Its they discretion, not my abuse

holow666

gomer wrote: »

In that context it sounds like they do not believe you were genuinely ill on that occasion.

if they dint believe, so they would not pay companies sick pay, why they paid me then, just to accuse me? once again, i did not asked them to pay me companies sick pay

lincroft1710

holow666 wrote: »

it looks like here is more managers and other employer representatives then employees at this forum, and that is obvious why most of it tells that employee is loosing they contract rights if they have been sick.

No.

Just people who do not live in the 1970s, know that there is little in employment law that actually favours the employee, know that an employer only needs a suspicion that an employee is not playing by the rules and that it is fairly easy for a determined employer to be rid of an unwanted employee.