to call in sick myself if DD is ill

[Twiceover]

If I call in sick to work I get a full day's pay. If I call in because DD is ill, I have to take a day's unpaid leave to look after her. I know it's dishonest and wrong to call in sick myself when DD is ill and I feel bad about it.

But several of my colleagues take loads of sick days and I have only had two so far this year - one when I was ill and one when DD was ill. So it seems unfair that I should lose a day's pay if DD is ill when I could potentially take plenty of sick days myself with no bother. I only work a couple of days a week so one day's pay is quite a big deal to me.

Am I being unreasonable to do this?

I'll get flak for this, but YANBU I'd ring in sick.

You might need that sick day at some point in the future if you're poorly, but you definitely need it now.

However, by doing this you will be the reason everyone hates working mums/scourge of the workforce/dishonest etc etc etc.

YABU because you aren't sick.

The thing is if they are ever assessing absence records for any reason, promotion, redundancy etc they should not take into account absence for child related matters.I won a sex discrimination case against my former employer for this.

hmm I can totally see where you're coming from. However, if it's not a problem with your employers for you to take a days unpaid leave to look after your child then YABU... i.e. if you're not going to face a disciplinary/the sack for taking a day to look after sick child, then I would just ring and tell the truth

Up to you though, if you really need the days wages then YANBU

Yanbu. Call in sick. I have done before.

I don't know how your work works in terms of sick allowance, but my work has a points scale, if you go over a certain amount you're hauled in to 'chat' about your health.

If you've only taken a coupls of days this year, and if you'd seriously struggle losing a day's pay, then I would say rightly or wrongly YANBU.

I would call in sick. I also crawl into work when I'm really not that well so I don't have to have the 'chat'. I cannot afford to lose one day's pay.

It IS wrong, it's dishonest, and all of that, but real life isn't clear cut.

What will you do if they find out you were lying?

"The thing is if they are ever assessing absence records for any reason, promotion, redundancy etc they should not take into account absence for child related matters"

No but they do take into account sickness and if your company uses Bradford scoring, it will make a big difference. Especially if you have already had sick days this year.

It's obviously up to you OP but if you want to progress within your company I'd say don't. Sick days are also passed between HR departments of other companies as far as I know too so can hinder your chances of other jobs.

It's not "unfair" that your work only let you take paid sick days when you are sick yourself. It's also not unfair that other people get sick more than you do, and so get more paid sick days off.

So please don't try to argue that you in any way "deserve" to be allowed to take paid sick days to look after your child.

However if you really need the money then I can see the temptation, and so long as you don't do it much I don't think it's morally terrible to do it. But it isn't "right" to do it, and it certainly has nothing to do with it being "unfair" - it would just be that the moral wrong of lying to get the paid sick day might be less bad than the moral wrong of a system which leaves low-earners in a situation where paying the bills and putting food on the table is this much of a struggle.

So YABU, but the job/pay situation you are in may be more U than you are.

I'd call in sick .. But that's just me :) lol

I think people should be allocated sick days to either look after children, or if they're sick themselves. I'd call in sick. I wouldn't feel bad about it.

Why don't you take a day annual leave?

YANBU I'd do it if I had to (but I don't as my employer pays me if I'm off with a sick child)

The bradford scoring system... thanks DisappointedHorse. In my workplace I get angry that my colleagues feel they have to use their (pretty small amount) of annual leave when they are genuinely ill, just so the record doesn't look bad.

I think that it depends on your workplace as to whether it's unreasonable or not.

Yabu. You are not sick. It is dishonest.

Yes, of course your employer should pay you to be at home looking after your child

Of course YABU.

Why don't you take a day's annual leave as suggested below?

People abusing sick pay schemes offered by their employer are one of the reasons many employers decide they only want to pay statutory sick pay instead.

Everyone knows its wrong, everyone knows we shouldn't do it, but everyone knows that we do (well not me cos I work for myself at home lol).

If you are losing money when your child is ill, which lets face it can be pretty regular for some parents, but not when you are, then it is inevitable that its going to happen.

i wouldnt but only because i once had a client who ended up with a criminal conviction, and a dwp tribunal thingy due to ssp when he was not sick

If you didn't KNOW that this is unreasonable, you wouldn't have asked, would you?

It's tempting as all get out, though, if I'm out of annual leave!

i do it sometimes. LP with 2 kids, finances very very tight and finely balanced. I come into work unless my legs are falling off, so I dont feel too bad about it

Can you afford to lose your job if you are found out?

There is a thread going at the moment about keeping kids at home for 48 hours after V or D, and posters saying you should stay in the house if you have a virus
Its all very well being honest and loyal to your employer; but the system is not workable to alot of people

how is anyone going to 'find out'?; you cant prove someone wasnt ill