Absent levels

TELLIT01

Undervalued said:

Marvel1 said:

2 People srsrt work the same day on temporary for 12 months, times comes close to the 12 month period, the company needs 1 to stay permanent and 1 let go.

Not sure how this works but my thinking as an employee only, 2 are really good, their output roughly the same, however 1 has been off sick on 3 different occasions for a cold.  The other has not taken sick. 

Just wondering who would be offered the permanent position?

Quite possibly the one with the better sick record. However, given that neither have any security of employment the company can decide on whatever criteria they please.

It's not that straightforward.  2 people with similar output.  One is really easy to get on with but has 3 short periods of sickness, the other is difficult to work with despite being productive.   I'd go for the one who is productive and easy to get on with.

Jillanddy

TELLIT01 said:

lincroft1710 said:

JGB1955 said:

Jillanddy said:

Not that extraordinary though - I'm public sector (who always get told we have such great terms) and our first trigger is 9 days in any 12 months period (or three separate occasions). 

Things have obviously tightened up since my Civil Service days in the 1980s.... we used to be reminded if we hadn't 'taken' our '2 weeks sick leave' every year!

I heard about this in the early 1970s, but certainly in the CS department I worked, this had died out. Didn't realise it was still in existence in some CS departments as late as the 1980s!  

It's certainly not true in the Civil Service, but I know somebody who works for Royal Mail who was told by his union rep to make sure he took all his sick leave entitlement!  The other side of the coin is another person I know who also worked for Royal Mail was off following hip replacement and was warned on his return that his absence record was unacceptable.  He had no absence other than the time around the operation.

It can also depend on how managers for the same employer interpret the discretion they have. I had two lengthy periods off sick for surgery - one of 13 weeks and one of 9 weeks. Plus a couple of weeks for flu, and odd days because of my arthritis. On a couple of occasions I missed my stage one targets and the manager could have put me in stage 2. They didn't - they had the discretion to recognise that the absences were unavoidable AND that with the exception of the period of flu (when I couldn't have moved I was that close to death!!!) I had done work whilst off sick, including from the hospital. Give and take was his approach - I never let him down so I remained in stage 1.

More recently he left and I had another manager who wanted nothing more than rid of me and tried so hard to achieve that (and failed). But the result of that was that I am so close to retirement that they couldn't possibly get me through to stage 3 now if they tried - which the Chief Officer admitted they wouldn't because I had them bang to rights on disability discrimination, and I still retain all the evidence. But that experience has changed my approach too - if I am sick I will now take every day I am entitled to take. I won't "pull a sickie" because that isn't in my nature, but all goodwill has now gone on my part. 

Same policy, two different managers, entirely different outcomes. 

TELLIT01

Jillanddy said:

TELLIT01 said:

lincroft1710 said:

JGB1955 said:

Jillanddy said:

Not that extraordinary though - I'm public sector (who always get told we have such great terms) and our first trigger is 9 days in any 12 months period (or three separate occasions). 

Things have obviously tightened up since my Civil Service days in the 1980s.... we used to be reminded if we hadn't 'taken' our '2 weeks sick leave' every year!

I heard about this in the early 1970s, but certainly in the CS department I worked, this had died out. Didn't realise it was still in existence in some CS departments as late as the 1980s!  

It's certainly not true in the Civil Service, but I know somebody who works for Royal Mail who was told by his union rep to make sure he took all his sick leave entitlement!  The other side of the coin is another person I know who also worked for Royal Mail was off following hip replacement and was warned on his return that his absence record was unacceptable.  He had no absence other than the time around the operation.

It can also depend on how managers for the same employer interpret the discretion they have. I had two lengthy periods off sick for surgery - one of 13 weeks and one of 9 weeks. Plus a couple of weeks for flu, and odd days because of my arthritis. On a couple of occasions I missed my stage one targets and the manager could have put me in stage 2. They didn't - they had the discretion to recognise that the absences were unavoidable AND that with the exception of the period of flu (when I couldn't have moved I was that close to death!!!) I had done work whilst off sick, including from the hospital. Give and take was his approach - I never let him down so I remained in stage 1.

More recently he left and I had another manager who wanted nothing more than rid of me and tried so hard to achieve that (and failed). But the result of that was that I am so close to retirement that they couldn't possibly get me through to stage 3 now if they tried - which the Chief Officer admitted they wouldn't because I had them bang to rights on disability discrimination, and I still retain all the evidence. But that experience has changed my approach too - if I am sick I will now take every day I am entitled to take. I won't "pull a sickie" because that isn't in my nature, but all goodwill has now gone on my part. 

Same policy, two different managers, entirely different outcomes. 

Very true Jillanddy. To be fair to my line manager when I was at DWP, she was very much a 'people person' as was our department manager.  They actually took a chance by not applying the letter of the law so to speak but judged each case on its merit.  Other managers in the same building were not as caring.  In fact one department manager actually visited one team leader who reported to her when she was still in hospital recovering from breast cancer.  She wasn't there due to concern over her health, she actually wanted to know when she would be back at work because they were short staffed

lincroft1710

TELLIT01 said:

lincroft1710 said:

JGB1955 said:

Jillanddy said:

Not that extraordinary though - I'm public sector (who always get told we have such great terms) and our first trigger is 9 days in any 12 months period (or three separate occasions). 

Things have obviously tightened up since my Civil Service days in the 1980s.... we used to be reminded if we hadn't 'taken' our '2 weeks sick leave' every year!

I heard about this in the early 1970s, but certainly in the CS department I worked, this had died out. Didn't realise it was still in existence in some CS departments as late as the 1980s!  

It's certainly not true in the Civil Service, but I know somebody who works for Royal Mail who was told by his union rep to make sure he took all his sick leave entitlement!  The other side of the coin is another person I know who also worked for Royal Mail was off following hip replacement and was warned on his return that his absence record was unacceptable.  He had no absence other than the time around the operation.

I was told about this sometime between 1970-73. The person who told me was in their late 50s and had worked in at least 2 CS departments. It seemed to be older employees who had taken their "2 weeks" hence why it had died out during the 1960s as they would have retired by the time I joined.

TELLIT01

Back then I don't doubt for one minute that it happened.  My dad was in the RAF in the 60s and had a number of Civil Servants reporting to him.  He was shocked when he asked one person to do something only to be told that they didn't do work for that section.  The person in question was sitting reading a paper!