Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to think that pregnancy relate sickness should not be included in a reference

28 replies

Helpmeescape · 02/08/2017 18:32

NC as this is extremely outing and posted here for traffic

Just wondering if anyone has any knowledge on this.

Essentially I've been in a job I've hated for few years and have been offered a really exciting new position with another organisation subject to references. I've been told by HR that all sickness from the last 2 years will be included in my reference. I've had 3 days off normal sickness and about 50 due to pregnancy related sickness (signed off, hospitalised, put on bed rest, plus self certified due to hg/pgp & bleeding). HR have said that they won't include reasons for sickness literally just the number of days on the reference.

AIBU to think that as pregnancy related sickness doesn't count towards sickness management disciplinary measures that it shouldn't be included in my reference? Any experience anyone has on this would be great appreciated.

OP posts:
Genghi · 02/08/2017 18:41

You are right, legally it should be seperated. If your HR team isn't appropriately qualified then maybe a union or your legal team can assist?

Genghi · 02/08/2017 18:42

Also if they include sick days in your reference, you are free to sue them if you don't get a job because of that. That's why references should just stick to dates and job title confirmation

NewUser24 · 02/08/2017 18:45

Pregnancy related sickness should not be included.

I worked at a big retail company and was a manager so dealt with this and we had a disaplinary procedure based on sickness where if you had too much you could get sacked. When we were calculating this we could not take in to count any pregnancy related or disability related sickness.

It would be really crappy of the old company to include this.

In is not unreasonable to be annoyed with them

GahBuggerit · 02/08/2017 18:49

Pregnancy related sickness should be recorded separate, I'm not sure if keeping it separate on a reference is ok or not tbh, interesting one ive never come across.

It is incorrect however to say sickness cannot be included at all. Of course it can. Tombstone references aren't a legal requirement and an employer can put anything they want as long as it's factual.

NapQueen · 02/08/2017 18:50

Have they said they will he including the 50?

Original poster
Helpmeescape · 02/08/2017 18:56

Thanks for all of your feedback so far. Yes they said they would all days off sick (50 odd and the 3 combined)
It's a standard template they used and I asked if they could change "number of sick days over the past 2 years" to "number of sick days over the past two years excluding pregnancy related sickness" and the HR manager I spoke to said no as this would be "inaccurate".

OP posts:
GahBuggerit · 02/08/2017 19:05

I really don't know op, it has me stumped slightly, it would certainly be daft for them to include it becase imo if it's treated differently and discounted for absence management purposes then it shouldn't be in a reference but that's not to say they can't, but I'd have thought it should be written as X days sick (50 of which pregnancy related). OTOH your prospective employer is not allowed to use this as a basis to withdraw an offer due to discrimination, and they'd be sailing close to the wind if they withdrew an offer based on sickness anyway without further investigation with the candidate.

Original poster
Helpmeescape · 02/08/2017 19:15

Yes @GahBuggerit, my thoughts exactly.

I know it's highly unlikely that this will cause a withdrawal of an offer but it will force me to disclose the fact that I have a young child, which I fear due to the nature of the position may make me be looked at a bit less favourably. That's my main concern really.

OP posts:
GahBuggerit · 02/08/2017 19:21

I know, it is a sad fact that as mother's we have to start proving our worth before we even get to steal the stapler from the previous incumbent and start adjusting our new chair :(

Employers are becoming more enlightened but we're still a long way away.

GahBuggerit · 02/08/2017 19:25

Hold your head high, style it out, "oh those 50 days? Yes terrible HG, won't be going through that again let me tell you, I know it's all treated separately but I was still so disappointed at my rotten luck. Am really looking forward to starting this new chapter of my work life and I look forward to being a valuable member of the team"

FuzzyOwl · 02/08/2017 19:25

I would call ACAS and Maternity Action to get a definitive answer and I think morally they should be putting a clause in to say what days were pregnancy related or excluding them altogether. However, legally it is only stated that pregnancy related sickness must be recorded separately and cannot be used for disciplinary, dismissal or redundancy reasons.

Nonibaloni · 02/08/2017 19:26

What?! Does pregnancy related sickness not count in dicipline terms? Like if you have to go to hospital because of bleeding and cramping and they keep you in. Do you have to request a difficult kind of sick leave?

Sorry for thread derail.

MovingOnUpMovingOnOut · 02/08/2017 19:29

Sorry are they doing you a reference from 2002?

Nobody includes sickness absence these days unless they are an idiot. Actually you'd have to be a fool to maternity related sickness in 2002.

That's my CIPD qualified professional opinion there btw :)

SaturnUranus · 02/08/2017 19:29

I recently wrote a reference for someone, using a form/template from their new employer.

One section asked about time off for sickness over the past 2 years but specifically said that pregnancy-related illness should not be included.

GahBuggerit · 02/08/2017 19:29

As long as you make your employer aware that it's a pregnancy related sickness they have to isolate it for disciplinary/absence triggers etc etc Noni

GahBuggerit · 02/08/2017 19:32

Movngon - I had one returned the other day with sickness info on, from a VERY well known company who's HR dept should put me to shame.

It happens a lot more than you'd think!

Nonibaloni · 02/08/2017 19:35

Thanks Gah, it would appear that my contract was renewed for the wrong reasons. I'm not surprised, I fainted at work, the first aided didn't clear me to go home, later I was spotting and cramping. They new I was pregnant and I basically freaked out when the the first aided started telling me it was normal.

BeepBeepMOVE · 02/08/2017 19:39

Maybe I'm being stupid but surely there's no difference? In fact the pregnancy related stuff is actually sort of self-induced and avoidable. Bu too an employer these are the number of days that you couldn't work whether you were faking it, had a mild headache, were seriously ill in hospital is not distinguished so why should being pregnant?

Babypythagorus · 02/08/2017 19:40

Sorry to derail the thread slightly - but should references definitely not ask for sick days? Can you point me to some legislation, or case law, or something, to show my LA, who are still doing this...

Original poster
Helpmeescape · 02/08/2017 19:43

@FuzzyOwl - spent ages trying to get through to Maternity Action today with no avail but will try again tomorrow

@MovingInUpMovingOnOut - I'm an Associate Member of the CIPD but not currently working in HR - do you think there's any support I could get from the CIPD regarding this in terms of clarification?

Thanks @GarBuggerit - will definitely try that approach!

Yeah my organisation is a bit of a joke - no legal department as far as I'm aware. Wasn't really treated the best throughout my pregnancy due to all the sickness - was told that my absence was having a detrimental affect on a team I was working with and then to top it all off had my open ended seconded role given to someone else whilst I was on maternity leave...

OP posts:
GahBuggerit · 02/08/2017 19:45

Because only a woman can get pregnant, and pregnancy is likely to cause a number of health conditions and they should not be subject to detriment because of this.

GahBuggerit · 02/08/2017 19:48

You'd have to be a current member and pay a sub to get advice from the cipd although I think u can register on their community message board as a guest?

Baby - references can ask for sick days, but companies aren't obliged to give that info out and shouldn't imo

YoullShootYourEyeOut · 02/08/2017 19:48

Yes pregnancy is self induced (most of the time), but HG certainly isn't! I would rather have been working than hooked up to a drip in hospital puking my guts up. Maybe one day scientists will figure out how to grow babies in a lab rather than in the womb, then employers will be much happier! Hmm

FuzzyOwl · 02/08/2017 20:11

@BeepBeepMOVE Maybe I'm being stupid but surely there's no difference? In fact the pregnancy related stuff is actually sort of self-induced and avoidable. Bu too an employer these are the number of days that you couldn't work whether you were faking it, had a mild headache, were seriously ill in hospital is not distinguished so why should being pregnant? Hmm

You're being stupid and thankfully the law can see this. Look up the Equality Act 2010 for a start.

Original poster
Helpmeescape · 02/08/2017 20:20

I am a current member of the CIPD - let's see what they have to say!

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread