Sick leave over Xmas

kimwp

MattMattMattUK said:

Ella_fella said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Ella_fella said:

If a companies holiday period runs from January to December and it has a shut down period over Xmas where one has to use their annual holiday allocation to cover this shutdown, if one was unable to attend work prior to and during Xmas due to sickness (also covering some days prebooked as holidays prior to the Xmas shutdown) then didn't return from sickness until the New Year would the business have to allow the employee to carry over holiday into the following year? (Assuming they would be paid company sick pay rather than SSP)

Even if it's policy states that it doesn't allow the carry over of holidays from one year to the next and the absence wouldn't be classified technically as LTS?

If so, would the Xmas Bank Holidays be included in the holidays allowed to be carried over? 

I would expect under these circumstances that the employee messing around like this would be wise to spend the Christmas period looking for new employment as they may be at serious risk of being disposed of in some way, come the new year.

Not sure where your comments come from regards "messing around" as am sure it isn't an uncommon phenomena that employees do have periods of genuine sickness which span the Xmas holidays and still aren't able to return to work after Xmas. 

Employees suddenly deciding they are sick whilst on holiday so they should get that holiday back is always something that employers have found particularly unpalatable, combine that with claiming it over the Christmas period, bank holidays on top and then trying to insist that they carry that into the next year is an employee taking the proverbial. If that person had been there less than two years that would be it, more than two years most would manage then out. 

Is it taking the proverbial or trying to understand ones rights? Admittedly I am currently sick and not going to ask for my holiday back, but it would be reasonable to do so. 

Ella_fella

LightFlare said:

Ella_fella said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Ella_fella said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Ella_fella said:

If a companies holiday period runs from January to December and it has a shut down period over Xmas where one has to use their annual holiday allocation to cover this shutdown, if one was unable to attend work prior to and during Xmas due to sickness (also covering some days prebooked as holidays prior to the Xmas shutdown) then didn't return from sickness until the New Year would the business have to allow the employee to carry over holiday into the following year? (Assuming they would be paid company sick pay rather than SSP)

Even if it's policy states that it doesn't allow the carry over of holidays from one year to the next and the absence wouldn't be classified technically as LTS?

If so, would the Xmas Bank Holidays be included in the holidays allowed to be carried over? 

I would expect under these circumstances that the employee messing around like this would be wise to spend the Christmas period looking for new employment as they may be at serious risk of being disposed of in some way, come the new year.

Not sure where your comments come from regards "messing around" as am sure it isn't an uncommon phenomena that employees do have periods of genuine sickness which span the Xmas holidays and still aren't able to return to work after Xmas. 

Employees suddenly deciding they are sick whilst on holiday so they should get that holiday back is always something that employers have found particularly unpalatable, combine that with claiming it over the Christmas period, bank holidays on top and then trying to insist that they carry that into the next year is an employee taking the proverbial. If that person had been there less than two years that would be it, more than two years most would manage then out. 

Again you've totally misinterpreted or chosen to ignore the OP - there was no mention of "suddenly deciding they are sick whilst on holiday". 

Well - if they were sick before the holiday then they could/should have cancelled the booked leave and would probably have a doctors note in place.

can you elaborate on exact dates/timescales

Booked leave started/due to end = xxx
Fell Ill = yyy
Expected return to work = zzz

Personally, it would depend on the exact illness and attendance history of the employee before I would take any “action”

I think this scenario is getting slightly too messy now - it was merely to elicit information regards if a person is off sick say a week before Xmas and this sickness then continues into the New Year would they be eligible to carry over any pre booked holidays (including the Xmas shutdown) that they were unable to take due to their illness? Assuming that for the first week of sickness as per any employee they self certed followed by a GPs note.

Am not sure how one could cancel the already booked leave if they say woke up for work that morning and didn't feel well enough to attend work (and subsequently for next x amount of days including Xmas?)

I've maybe seen a handful of posts which actually answers this OP, the remainder seem just to want to cast aspersions on the validity of this scenario, which for these purposes are neither helpful nor answer the initial question. 

Savvy_Sue

Jackie1813 said:

Holidays can usually be carried over as you cannot be on holiday and off sick at the same time. I  have never known bank holidays to be carried over.

It depends whether the BHs are part of the statutory 28 days annual leave entitlement, or additional.

BHs don't have any special status. 

So if your employer gives you 28 days (or any other number above 20) PLUS BHs, and you're sick at the end of the leave year, then you must be allowed to c/f any days you've not taken UP TO 28 days. You'd lose the extra (usually, HR might be generous,or less than competent).

But if your employer gives you 20 days PLUS BHs, and you're sick at the end of the leave year, then you must be allowed to c/f any days you've not taken UP TO 28 days. 

Same applies to an annual shutdown. No requirement to allow you to c/f anything more than your statutory 28 days. 

All the above based on someone working 5 days pw, and also applies to taking other statutory leave, eg maternity leave.

Tabieth

MattMattMattUK said:

Ella_fella said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Ella_fella said:

If a companies holiday period runs from January to December and it has a shut down period over Xmas where one has to use their annual holiday allocation to cover this shutdown, if one was unable to attend work prior to and during Xmas due to sickness (also covering some days prebooked as holidays prior to the Xmas shutdown) then didn't return from sickness until the New Year would the business have to allow the employee to carry over holiday into the following year? (Assuming they would be paid company sick pay rather than SSP)

Even if it's policy states that it doesn't allow the carry over of holidays from one year to the next and the absence wouldn't be classified technically as LTS?

If so, would the Xmas Bank Holidays be included in the holidays allowed to be carried over? 

I would expect under these circumstances that the employee messing around like this would be wise to spend the Christmas period looking for new employment as they may be at serious risk of being disposed of in some way, come the new year.

Not sure where your comments come from regards "messing around" as am sure it isn't an uncommon phenomena that employees do have periods of genuine sickness which span the Xmas holidays and still aren't able to return to work after Xmas. 

Employees suddenly deciding they are sick whilst on holiday so they should get that holiday back is always something that employers have found particularly unpalatable, combine that with claiming it over the Christmas period, bank holidays on top and then trying to insist that they carry that into the next year is an employee taking the proverbial. If that person had been there less than two years that would be it, more than two years most would manage then out. 

We have no idea what’s going on in this particular situation. None. I prefer to assume the sickness is genuine than assume it’s a skive. Some people do genuinely get seriously unwell over the holiday period. 

I have managed people who have abused the system, taken every Friday before Bank Holiday Mondays off sick for example. I’ve also manages people who have genuine, real, oftentimes scary health conditions that resulted in a lot of sick leave. Both scenarios were managed appropriately. 

MattMattMattUK

kimwp said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Ella_fella said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Ella_fella said:

If a companies holiday period runs from January to December and it has a shut down period over Xmas where one has to use their annual holiday allocation to cover this shutdown, if one was unable to attend work prior to and during Xmas due to sickness (also covering some days prebooked as holidays prior to the Xmas shutdown) then didn't return from sickness until the New Year would the business have to allow the employee to carry over holiday into the following year? (Assuming they would be paid company sick pay rather than SSP)

Even if it's policy states that it doesn't allow the carry over of holidays from one year to the next and the absence wouldn't be classified technically as LTS?

If so, would the Xmas Bank Holidays be included in the holidays allowed to be carried over? 

I would expect under these circumstances that the employee messing around like this would be wise to spend the Christmas period looking for new employment as they may be at serious risk of being disposed of in some way, come the new year.

Not sure where your comments come from regards "messing around" as am sure it isn't an uncommon phenomena that employees do have periods of genuine sickness which span the Xmas holidays and still aren't able to return to work after Xmas. 

Employees suddenly deciding they are sick whilst on holiday so they should get that holiday back is always something that employers have found particularly unpalatable, combine that with claiming it over the Christmas period, bank holidays on top and then trying to insist that they carry that into the next year is an employee taking the proverbial. If that person had been there less than two years that would be it, more than two years most would manage then out. 

Is it taking the proverbial or trying to understand ones rights? Admittedly I am currently sick and not going to ask for my holiday back, but it would be reasonable to do so. 

It is not taking the proverbial to understand the legal right, but I know very few people who thinks that ruling, nor an employee taking this route is morally right.

MattMattMattUK

Tabieth said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Ella_fella said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Ella_fella said:

If a companies holiday period runs from January to December and it has a shut down period over Xmas where one has to use their annual holiday allocation to cover this shutdown, if one was unable to attend work prior to and during Xmas due to sickness (also covering some days prebooked as holidays prior to the Xmas shutdown) then didn't return from sickness until the New Year would the business have to allow the employee to carry over holiday into the following year? (Assuming they would be paid company sick pay rather than SSP)

Even if it's policy states that it doesn't allow the carry over of holidays from one year to the next and the absence wouldn't be classified technically as LTS?

If so, would the Xmas Bank Holidays be included in the holidays allowed to be carried over? 

I would expect under these circumstances that the employee messing around like this would be wise to spend the Christmas period looking for new employment as they may be at serious risk of being disposed of in some way, come the new year.

Not sure where your comments come from regards "messing around" as am sure it isn't an uncommon phenomena that employees do have periods of genuine sickness which span the Xmas holidays and still aren't able to return to work after Xmas. 

Employees suddenly deciding they are sick whilst on holiday so they should get that holiday back is always something that employers have found particularly unpalatable, combine that with claiming it over the Christmas period, bank holidays on top and then trying to insist that they carry that into the next year is an employee taking the proverbial. If that person had been there less than two years that would be it, more than two years most would manage then out. 

We have no idea what’s going on in this particular situation. None. I prefer to assume the sickness is genuine than assume it’s a skive. Some people do genuinely get seriously unwell over the holiday period. 

I have managed people who have abused the system, taken every Friday before Bank Holiday Mondays off sick for example. I’ve also manages people who have genuine, real, oftentimes scary health conditions that resulted in a lot of sick leave. Both scenarios were managed appropriately. 

I have sacked several people over the years for abusing the sickness system, they complained, they cried, entirely their own fault that they had their employment terminated, no sympathy for them at all. I have also kept on employees with long term health issues because they were entirely genuine, even if it did mean they were off 5+ weeks a year with health related issues. 

Someone booking holiday then wanting it back because they were ill during that time might be covered by the stupid ruling, but I do not know anyone who thinks it is right, nor do I know any employer who looks upon an employee taking that course of action as good for their career. I say that as someone who gives all my employees 43 days holiday a year, plus an Christmas office closure on top (depending on the year, so this year five days), so I recognise employees need a break.

kimwp

MattMattMattUK said:

Tabieth said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Ella_fella said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Ella_fella said:

If a companies holiday period runs from January to December and it has a shut down period over Xmas where one has to use their annual holiday allocation to cover this shutdown, if one was unable to attend work prior to and during Xmas due to sickness (also covering some days prebooked as holidays prior to the Xmas shutdown) then didn't return from sickness until the New Year would the business have to allow the employee to carry over holiday into the following year? (Assuming they would be paid company sick pay rather than SSP)

Even if it's policy states that it doesn't allow the carry over of holidays from one year to the next and the absence wouldn't be classified technically as LTS?

If so, would the Xmas Bank Holidays be included in the holidays allowed to be carried over? 

I would expect under these circumstances that the employee messing around like this would be wise to spend the Christmas period looking for new employment as they may be at serious risk of being disposed of in some way, come the new year.

Not sure where your comments come from regards "messing around" as am sure it isn't an uncommon phenomena that employees do have periods of genuine sickness which span the Xmas holidays and still aren't able to return to work after Xmas. 

Employees suddenly deciding they are sick whilst on holiday so they should get that holiday back is always something that employers have found particularly unpalatable, combine that with claiming it over the Christmas period, bank holidays on top and then trying to insist that they carry that into the next year is an employee taking the proverbial. If that person had been there less than two years that would be it, more than two years most would manage then out. 

We have no idea what’s going on in this particular situation. None. I prefer to assume the sickness is genuine than assume it’s a skive. Some people do genuinely get seriously unwell over the holiday period. 

I have managed people who have abused the system, taken every Friday before Bank Holiday Mondays off sick for example. I’ve also manages people who have genuine, real, oftentimes scary health conditions that resulted in a lot of sick leave. Both scenarios were managed appropriately. 

I have sacked several people over the years for abusing the sickness system, they complained, they cried, entirely their own fault that they had their employment terminated, no sympathy for them at all. I have also kept on employees with long term health issues because they were entirely genuine, even if it did mean they were off 5+ weeks a year with health related issues. 

Someone booking holiday then wanting it back because they were ill during that time might be covered by the stupid ruling, but I do not know anyone who thinks it is right, nor do I know any employer who looks upon an employee taking that course of action as good for their career. I say that as someone who gives all my employees 43 days holiday a year, plus an Christmas office closure on top (depending on the year, so this year five days), so I recognise employees need a break.

As someone who gives their employees more than 43 days holiday in recognition of them needing a break, you can also understand that someone who gets the statutory minimum and is ill during that should reasonably be able to have their holiday allowance re-instated because being ill is not a break and in fact often introduces more stress in trying to get the same life-admin things done with less energy and time?

Ella_fella

MattMattMattUK said:

Tabieth said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Ella_fella said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Ella_fella said:

If a companies holiday period runs from January to December and it has a shut down period over Xmas where one has to use their annual holiday allocation to cover this shutdown, if one was unable to attend work prior to and during Xmas due to sickness (also covering some days prebooked as holidays prior to the Xmas shutdown) then didn't return from sickness until the New Year would the business have to allow the employee to carry over holiday into the following year? (Assuming they would be paid company sick pay rather than SSP)

Even if it's policy states that it doesn't allow the carry over of holidays from one year to the next and the absence wouldn't be classified technically as LTS?

If so, would the Xmas Bank Holidays be included in the holidays allowed to be carried over? 

I would expect under these circumstances that the employee messing around like this would be wise to spend the Christmas period looking for new employment as they may be at serious risk of being disposed of in some way, come the new year.

Not sure where your comments come from regards "messing around" as am sure it isn't an uncommon phenomena that employees do have periods of genuine sickness which span the Xmas holidays and still aren't able to return to work after Xmas. 

Employees suddenly deciding they are sick whilst on holiday so they should get that holiday back is always something that employers have found particularly unpalatable, combine that with claiming it over the Christmas period, bank holidays on top and then trying to insist that they carry that into the next year is an employee taking the proverbial. If that person had been there less than two years that would be it, more than two years most would manage then out. 

We have no idea what’s going on in this particular situation. None. I prefer to assume the sickness is genuine than assume it’s a skive. Some people do genuinely get seriously unwell over the holiday period. 

I have managed people who have abused the system, taken every Friday before Bank Holiday Mondays off sick for example. I’ve also manages people who have genuine, real, oftentimes scary health conditions that resulted in a lot of sick leave. Both scenarios were managed appropriately. 

I have sacked several people over the years for abusing the sickness system, they complained, they cried, entirely their own fault that they had their employment terminated, no sympathy for them at all. I have also kept on employees with long term health issues because they were entirely genuine, even if it did mean they were off 5+ weeks a year with health related issues. 

Someone booking holiday then wanting it back because they were ill during that time might be covered by the stupid ruling, but I do not know anyone who thinks it is right, nor do I know any employer who looks upon an employee taking that course of action as good for their career. I say that as someone who gives all my employees 43 days holiday a year, plus an Christmas office closure on top (depending on the year, so this year five days), so I recognise employees need a break.

Do you also accept that there are employees whom don't abuse the system and have genuine sickness absences (some of which may also coincide with the Xmas period)?

Whom also would be perfectly entitled to request that those holiday days where they were subsequently sick be transferred over to the following year?

itsthelittlethings

If you don’t ask you don’t get but I’m not sure you’re legally entitled to carry over the holiday. I’ve heard about getting holiday back when you’re sick but never heard of anyone doing it and I’ve never seen that you’re legally entitled to. Long term sick is different I think.

Savvy_Sue

itsthelittlethings said:

If you don’t ask you don’t get but I’m not sure you’re legally entitled to carry over the holiday. I’ve heard about getting holiday back when you’re sick but never heard of anyone doing it and I’ve never seen that you’re legally entitled to. Long term sick is different I think.

If you could not take your statutory leave entitlement because you were ill or on some other form of statutory leave (eg maternity) then you are legally entitled to carry it forward to the next leave year.