AIBU to have 2 days off work as my child has been sick and I need to follow 48 hour rule

[peppajay]

AIBU that I need to take time off work when my child is ill as I don't have family close by to help. I am going to have to take the next two days off as my son has been sick so he now needs 48 hours off school. Most of the other members of staff leave their kids with family but I have no one close by and I don't think I can expect a friend to look after a child who is probably contagious. I had 2 days off when my DD was sick last year and it was frowned upon. I am so very very tempted to just keep him off for 24 hrs as I know alot of my colleagues do this so they only have to find childcare for the one day. So as I working parent how do I get round this??

Well, you'd have to here! Either that or take it as unpaid leave. No other options. And I think that's fair enough. Why should an employer pay you to stay at home?

My DH gets 5 days paid emergency leave every year. I definitely don't so I make him do his fair share.
We both work in the City. Pay and conditions vary very widely.

John maybe you should of negotiated your contract differently. It's not usual to have a few days emergency leave which isn't just childcare, I also think there is a law somewhere for emergency parental leave where you don't get paid but they won't sack you. my old manager didn't agree

There are childcare agencies that provide ad hoc care for DC with common illnesses, for a price! The ideal for me would be to find a babysitter (with no DC of their own to worry about getting ill) willing and available to do the odd weekday, but have never managed to find them!

Negotiate the contract differently? I suppose that would be fine if the company had the resources to offer several days of emergency leave to all employees. Parenthood doesn't entitle an employee to more favourable conditions.

I agree absolutely with that ILS but there are times (just like someone without children) that unavoidable things will happen; I think that's the long and short of it really.

Of course. Unavoidable things happen to everyone, and nowadays people will increasingly have emergencies involving elderly parents too.
Unfortunately the hard fact is that people's personal emergencies aren't really relevant to an employer, and usually the only way of dealing with things after the initial period is to accept that you're expected to take unpaid leave.

We get up to 5 days a year in paid dependents leave to cover these kind of things but to be honest I am lucky that I am able to work from home in this kind of situation.

Johncusackswife - the reason companies offer these perks is the same reason they offer anything above statutory for pensions, sick leave, holidays. It is to attract and retain the best people who are committed to the organisation. My company gave me 2 weeks paid compassionate leave when my dad died this year. They didn't have to but I was very grateful and as a result I will not leave this year (I was considering it). They have therefore kept my expertise, saved recruitment fees of thousands and the upheaval of a new start. Win win situation

Well yes, and I would - but if somebody can't I can see why it would be tempting to lie.

I can see being in similar predicaments as I'm starting work soon, have young babies and no backup to take them if they are ill so - I don't know what I'll do!

"well I've only got 2 days holiday left but I've still got 10 days sick left so just book it for that week and I'll call in sick"

I am a sympathetic employer and working parent.

One day is fine, but then I need people to make up the hours, work from home, take annual leave or take unpaid leave.

Unfortunately it is one of the expenses involved in parenting - nursery or childminder before school age, and take holiday or unpaid leave once they are at school. Employers, even supportive ones, can't be expected to take up all the slack and lose days of paying absent employees.

I'm glad you have solved it this time, OP - I can see your DH has already done a chunk of 'family responsibilities' - another of my bugbears as an employer (and as a fellow woman watching women's jobs get treated as less important) is when it is always the mother who takes time off and always the woman's employer who picks up the day's absence.

Yeah, I'm a bit gobsmacked that no DH was mentioned by OP. That's me put in my place.

I have just had a shocking converstation with my step uncle - I suddenly thought one of my cousins who hasn't gone back to uni yet could look after my son tomorrow- but my step uncle gave me a total barrage of abuse as he is appalled at me at letting my employer down and the fact that my DH is going to do the same tomorrow. I am the mum I have kids so therefore I shouldn't work. His first wife never worked as he didn't allow it- hence why she left him because of his male chauvinst ways. He runs his own company and only has one female member of staff as he doesn't believe women should work!!! Fuming now wish I hadn't asked- my cousin can't do it anyway!!! Feel even more guilty now xx

I get 3 days paid dependants leave a year and the rest is unpaid. I can use annual leave at my managers discretion

I tend to rope ex husband in as he's self employed and if he's in his office they can sleep on the sofa

at a push my ex MIL can have them but she's 80 and I don't like exposing her to illness

There is a website that finds emergency childcare and it looks like they do not exclude sick children here

I know some people on here will think this is disgraceful - but next time just say it is you that is sick - as you'll get more understanding and acceptance for this - than if you're out to look after a sick child

It's impossible when you have to work - and have no back up - and need to take time off for a sick child.

Our sick leave/family leave/etc is all wrapped up in 'personal leave'. So you get a certain number of days per year. If your child is sick it comes off your personal leave. So those of us with kids just pray that we don't get sick ourselves and can use those days for when the kids are.

'My child's primary school had the 48 hour rule - but now they're at middle school it's 24 ..... which I don't understand at all, surely the age of the child makes no difference to their level of contagion?'

Actually there kind of is in so much that most bugs are faecal orally transmitted, so the way you catch them is by poo germs going in to your mouth, I can see that infant children are probably not reliable enough at handwashing to be able to stop the transmission, but by middle school (is that 8/9?) a NT child should be capable of going back to school practicing excellent handwashing and knowing not to share food etc. for a couple of days. It's one reason why adults can often be around other adults with D&V and not catch things (certainly before DC DH and I rarely caught stuff off each other if we practiced scrupulous hygiene, even when sharing a bed) - young children are much more effective vectors of disease!

You may be on to something there Mrscog - though judging by the grubby state of many of the kids at my child's middle school I think the theory of improved hygiene is probably just wishful thinking ! (middle school here being Yr5 to Yr8)

I agree with Mrscog that the reduced time is most likely because older children should be more able to wash hands properly. Very young children are also more likely to put random things in their mouths that may have been contaminated. However, I spent a week at scout camp this summer (due to the nature of 7000 people camping in close proximity the 48 hour rule was strictly enforced), when thr cr??che for staff children got a d&v epidemic they said it was the older children (age 6-9)!that were the worst for hygiene, maybe cause the younger ones are more closely supervised.

I agree with parental leave but not that it should be paid. Same with snow days. Either unpaid, holiday or work the hours back. Otherwise it's unfair on colleagues who have to pick up the slack and may not have kids or dependants.

Anyway, glad you're sorted OP. This should definitely be shared between parents. I know my employer is more likely to allow parental leave when it's not mum always doing it, managers will tell people they need to split it more with the dad. Obviously single parents the exception.

Personal leave is a good idea. And fair on offering family-friendly policies to individuals, those with ill parents or partners etc as well as ill children. Because the lack of sympathy form employees is not a lack of understanding, it is because parents of small children have their own sick leave, as any adult does, AND for children.

HoursTunIntoDays - more understanding IF you are sure your employer won't mind being treated as an idiot, when they know that you have a small child just starting nursery and you suddenly start taking more days off, (believe me, it is so obvious), won't mind being lied to, losing the days work etc. Be honest and work out a solution about holiday, unpaid leave or more flexi time. I trust my staff in this way if they are honest and realistic about what is going on and we can work together to sort their needs and make good use of the pay they receive!

Lots of managers would frown on it as it puts a strain on other people and the business, especially if it's tightly staffed. Basically it's a pain for the manager, and they want people to think twice before phoning to say they won't be in because little jimmy's got a cold. But it's usually less frowned on if you are someone who willingly covers for others, is flexible and puts in extra hours, (so you usually have a day's time off in lieu in hand) or you can take a project home with you. Have a chat with your manager before the next time and see what you can arrange.
I have also bundled a child with a cold/ random bug (not d &v) into a car to be handed over to Nana at a service station if my job couldn't be covered.