Advanced search

Advice - please?

(7 Posts)
isthegrassgreener16 Sat 04-Jun-16 10:29:04

I have recently applied and have been accepted for a new job role. The acceptance based on satisfactory Vetting, medical, fitness and references. I have passed all areas and am currently awaiting a decision on my vetting.

My question - as part of my vetting meeting, the employers discussed previous sickness rates (for my medical I have to supply the past 3 years record). They informed that my current employer had not supplied this in my reference, and was I willing to write a letter to authorise the release of this info (which I agreed).

The new employer noted that I had had a baby during the 3 year period, and due to Health and safety restrictions with my current role, meant I was to be removed from the environment and placed on 'garden leave' pending a suitable alternative job role'. The new employer then requests I provide a 6 year sickness record based upon the fact I was on pregnancy garden leave, followed by maternity leave, and that a 6 year record would provide a more accurate record of sickness.

To me this seems unjust - I appreciate they want reliable staff and reassurance that I would fulfil this - but to extend the sickness record request because of my pregnancy and maternity leave seems unfair.

Any advice would be useful smile

Shakey15000 Sun 05-Jun-16 10:05:39

6 years worth?? Blimey, I've never heard the like. But I'm not a HR bod and I'm sure one will advise. Can you say what sector?

isthegrassgreener16 Sun 05-Jun-16 10:50:59

It's a public sector role.

I just can't see how it's fair (or legal) to request 3 years from all potential employees as standard, but move the goal posts for me due to my pregnancy/ maternity leave.

Thanks for commenting smile

LunaLoveg00d Sun 05-Jun-16 15:06:35

I can see the new employer's point of view though - they want to see 3 years' worth of sickness records from work, and for around half of that you were not in work because of pregnancy or maternity leave. Not sure of the legalities though.

GahBuggerit Sun 05-Jun-16 15:20:39

Hr person here.

i reckon this amounts to discrimination, and ive never heard of a company wsnting sickness records so far back, my policy is not to divulge sickness info on a rdference and many companies adopt this approach now.

i cant be 100% on the discrimination, but usually if someone is having a policy applied to them differently due to pregnancy or maternity then it is. id question if id want to work for such an employer tbh. VERY odd to wsnt 3 years sickness, they must havd a problem with their rates which makes me suspicious of the culture there

flowery Sun 05-Jun-16 15:44:49

How much of the previous three years were you in work as opposed to on garden leave/maternity leave? Do you feel they could form an accurate view of your sickness absence rate without going back further than the usual 3 years?

Whether they do or not, if you've passed fitness requirements now it is very unlikely they could justify withdrawing the offer based on an absence issue that took place 5 years ago.

isthegrassgreener16 Sun 05-Jun-16 17:09:32

During my garden leave my usual conditions of employment still stood - in effect I was on 'standby' for when a suitable job became available. So, my manager was to be informed of any annual leave, sickness and pre-natal appointments to ensure availability.

So physically I was out of my job role for 19 months out of 36, but of that 19 - 8 months I was available to commence duties.


Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now