Signing off sick note

LittleVoice

tigtag02 wrote: »

This is not right. If you have a running Dr's sick note then you MUST be signed as fit to work by the GP in order to return before the end of the original Med4.

As per post:
#3
#6
#8
#10
#12

AFAIK a Med4 is never shown to an employer.

tigtag02

LittleVoice wrote: »

AFAIK a Med4 is never shown to an employer.

My apologies ~ I meant 3

dmg24

subsoniccoyote wrote: »

tigtag02, can you tell me where I would find the guidance or legislation on this issue? I have had trouble trying to find information to support either what I have said or yourself.
I raised this issue with USDAW when I was a rep and had a letter from them stating that it is a myth that you MUST be signed back to work by a doctor.
The only reason why a doctor MUST sign you fit to return to work is if the employer has doubts about the employees ability to return to work. As far as I was made aware, as long as the employee has declared themself fit to return to work and the employer agrees, the return to work note is not required from a doctor.

AFAIK it is not a statutory requirement, but rather an insurance/ liability issue. Please see former posts which elaborate on this point.

tigtag02

What she said ^^^^^^^^^

dmg24

subsoniccoyote wrote: »

My apologies I was assuming that you were stating that it was a legal requirement.
Would we agree that it would be dependant on the company policy if you require the return to work note from the doctor then?
I know Tesco did not require you to get a doctors note to return, when I stated "As long as you have signed a form declaring you are fit to return to work this covers them for insurance and negligence purposes." I was basically making the point that as long as the employer agrees that you would be allowed to return you are allowed to return.
The employer is not forcing you to return so you could not claim your employers insurance for negligence if you really shouldnt have gone back to work earlier than your doctors line says you should.

No offence, but I am assuming that your background is not in law or HR?

An individual signing a form to say that they are well will not override a current med cert. The individual is not more qualified than a medical professional, and the employer knows this.

Equally signing such a form will not override any possible claim (which would be against the employer, not their insurers) by the employee (for the same reason as given above).

tigtag02

dmg24 wrote: »

No offence, but I am assuming that your background is not in law or HR?

An individual signing a form to say that they are well will not override a current med cert. The individual is not more qualified than a medical professional, and the employer knows this.

Equally signing such a form will not override any possible claim (which would be against the employer, not their insurers) by the employee (for the same reason as given above).

Also, at the end of the day I would assume an employee could argue they signed a form under *duress*.

I would NEVER advise an employee to go back to work whilst under a current sick cert no matter what they signed themselves.

dmg24

subsoniccoyote wrote: »

Not got a background in law, I was a union rep.

I am only going with personal experience and information given to me by the Union legal dept.

Not trying to be arguementative but if the employer and employee agree that the employee can return to work then they can - although I would never have recommended this to any of my union members. I dont think the insurance companies and the head of HR for the employer would be happy with the manager and would try to put all of the blame on the employee if there was something to happen but as far as I am aware there is nothing in law that states that you must get your doctor to agree you're allowed to go back to work. I hope I am wrong and there is legislation somewhere that states this but I doubt it.

I'm sorry you are just not getting this, and I can't be bothered to reiterate what I and several others have stated several times.

dmg24

subsoniccoyote wrote: »

I agree that I would never advise anyone to go back without the approval of the doctor but some people cannot afford not to work.

If there is a very high absense percentage an employer can get rid of you and the very income for long term sick leave would be crap - I have and probably shouldnt have, returned to work with a bad back as I would have been unable to afford by rent & bills otherwise.

This is not strictly true either. A person cannot be dismissed for reason of a high absence rate alone, without several other factors being taken into account.

Employment law (and the law in general) is not about such sweeping generalisations.

tigtag02

subsoniccoyote wrote: »

Not trying to be arguementative but if the employer and employee agree that the employee can return to work then they can - although I would never have recommended this to any of my union members.

So if you would never recommend it why are you banging on and on about it?

subsoniccoyote wrote: »

I agree that I would never advise anyone to go back without the approval of the doctor but some people cannot afford not to work.

This doesnt even make sense? Its easy, you go back to the GP, say *Im better, please sign me back on*, they do ~ job done, money in the bank

subsoniccoyote wrote: »

If there is a very high absense percentage an employer can get rid of you and the very income for long term sick leave would be crap - I have and probably shouldnt have, returned to work with a bad back as I would have been unable to afford by rent & bills otherwise.

Not without following procedures and policy they cant!

brazilianwax

On the other hand, sometimes the union reps know a little bit about what they're talking about :rolleyes:

Oh, Coyote, thanks for reminding me why I've never joined! :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Tigtag and dmg, you are :A s