That this work sickness policy is utterly crazy?

[SongforSal]

Been with the company over 2yrs and have always had a good sickness record. A few months ago I was very worried and in lots of pain as I had a period problem. My menstrual cycle lasted a good 3mths with only the odd day off. Other than a hospital appointment I had been waiting for an internal (I took a holiday day) there was one other day during this time, where I had to call in sick as I was in no position to work.

Last week, I called in sick for the day as I woke up in the night vomiting. Couldn't keep even water down. Didn't fancy the prospect of throwing up at my desk!

After a meeting with my boss, I was informed that having had 2 separate sick days, within a 6 month period, if I took another sick day within the next 6months-I would get a disciplinary!

Now, my contract allows 10 days per year paid sick leave. There are no stipulations, nor references to and reprimands, verbal or disciplinary procedures which may be enforced within this contract. Not that I have ever taken the piss.

Here comes the what the fuck rabbit hole have I just fallen down.

So. A colleague came into work today sweating, coughing, kept running to the bathroom, clearly very much unwell. On the back of a couple of weeks ago, when another colleague came in and spent 3 days at his desk with a cough, headache ect and chugging back lemsips. I asked my boss ''What happens if I catch this bug?'' and the reply I got was I could basically soldier on in as it is my choice to work, however if I got ill, and stayed home. You guessed it-a disciplinary.

So I am thinking I may need to invest in a hazmat suit for work, and fill the pockets with bloody dettol spray, as people are having to come in ill-or face reprimands! I can see why they feel forced to do so, but the knock on effect (selfishly) is I will get ill from being at work, and effectively punished if I take time off as to recover and not infect everyone else.

Does my place of work sound like a 18th century factory to you? Is this common?

holiday
"Really? I think it is! I have had one (3 day) absence in about 3 years"

I've had probably 4-5 off in 15 years. But I wouldn't consider 3 periods of sick leave in a year "a lot". Unless each period was 2 weeks or something.

Most sick days are 1 or 2 days.

This is pretty standard in most companies, mine is the same.

As pp said, this system disciplines the person who has two single-day absences in a short period of time but not someone who takes a full week off in one because they “might as well finish the week” as one person in my office admitted to doing

3 absences in 12 months must surely be well over average? It's right that it should be investigated, and are you OK, I do you need a y support etc a D sometimes disciplinary will be appropriate.

I think the manager has willfully used the wrong language. I'd imagine the policy requires a meeting but that doesn't automatically mean disciplinary action

I have only had 2 days off though!

It doesn't go by number of days, they base it on periods of sickness. So, in theory, one absence of three weeks would be looked on more favourably than two absences of a single day.

Two periods of sickness in six months is a fair amount, but sometimes it just happens like that. I've been with my company three years - never had a sick day until December when I had three (over two periods of absence) in three weeks due to a vomiting bug and then a sinus infection.

No action was taken because both instances were genuine and I'm not known to take the piss iyswim. I get sick pay so could easily have milked both instances and stayed off longer each time as well.

Busholive They were very aware all along. I went in to work the whole time other than the planned holiday day for the hospital, and the sick day where I was literally doubled over in pelvic pain. I am, thankfully OK and healthy now. Touch wood!

It is ridiculously unfair but sadly normal. If we have more than three “spells” off in a year we have similar - it’s usually a chat to make sure there isn’t piss taking.

Thing is - one day or one week counts as one “spell” so if you take one day off, drag your sorry arse in for a day and then take another day off, that’s two “spells”. You then just need one more day off sick and you trigger it.

Total nonsense.

I’m not odd sick much but when I am, I take thee days off!!!

In my old job you had to have a meeting with HR after every single absence. They were trying to cut down on the piss takers but it just ended up upsetting most of the staff. Sadly it is all too common now, gone are the days of fancying a duvet day once in a blue moon.

Mine is the same. 3 absences. If you get sick have more than one day off, have 5 days off. It still only counts as 1 absence. If you are going to have a disciplinary make it worthwhile. Alternatively, go and get signed off by your GP - that can't do anything about it if you do that.

The annoying thing is, back when I had my hospital appointment, prior to that my Doctor told me I needed to take a couple of weeks off work. I said I didn't want to let my colleagues down, as whilst I was in mild pain and discomfort, I was otherwise well. Shit. I should have just taken a couple of week of on hindsight!

This is very very common. Yes it is shit and it is one of the reasons why if you have a chronic illness it can be so hard to work.

If your contract allows for ten paid sick days off, I suggest you wave that contract in his face. Is he unaware of the content of your contract?!

My sister works in the civil service and has the same policy. She was sent home sick after forcing herself to go in a few weeks ago and that triggered a disciplinary and written warning. She's not allowed to apply for promotion for six months whilst she's on the warning.

3 days off sick in a year is nothing! It’s when your calling in sick every other week for different things it’s the problem.

I think it's the same most places now tbh. The company I work for will pay 6 months full sick pay, but will also call in HR if "trigger points" are reached which are either 2 weeks off (pro rata) or 3 separate incidences, both in a 12-month period.

SongforSal "I should have just taken a couple of week of on hindsight!"

agree. After hearing about that stupid Bradford thing, I've heard a lot of people take extra days, e.g. 3 or 4 instead of 1, because you might as well!

Alternatively, go and get signed off by your GP - that can't do anything about it if you do that.

Yes, they can. A sick note doesn't protect you from being dismissed for poor attendance.

And this sort of shit is why as a (fairly) intelligent and capable adult, I have to be self employed, because my health is so variable I am unemployable.

This is also why chasing the chronically sick and disabled to work is a stupid and feckless plan!

OP - next time you are sick, have three weeks. :)

As a manager we are expected to monitor sickness patterns and will have a review meeting if a certain threshold is reached.

It isn’t a disciplinary at first - maybe your boss is just clunky with their language?

I’d check your hr policies.

You are better taking off three weeks in total than three single days. Batshit stupid policy.

Assuming the exact policy wording is something like "meeting to discuss", he's wrong to threaten a disciplinary as being the default. I'd be inclined to tell him to fuck off, though this probably isnt the best approach.

I'd tell my union rep to tell him to fuck off instead.

I'm not exactly putting myself in danger of fast track promotion, I know.

Standard, same in my company.

A disciplinary meeting is not the same as getting a disciplinary though.

I work in a large company and the rule is 3 sicknesses in 6 months triggers a "disciplinary" meeting but this is basically just a check in with HR to ensure all ypur sicknesses are legit and to see if you have any health concerns they should know about. If they all are considered justified (and unless someone is lying than they would be) than its fine and no action is taken. It isnt worded the best as the word disciplinary does sound very negative but its essentially to weed out the ones who take the piss and call in "sick" when they arent really.

Yeah you need to get a full copy of the policy and speak to HR to ask they explain it to you. Disciplinary is only valid if the reasons for sickness absence were not justified, ie, you were faking it and there is some potential evidence to suggest that. Many employees just accept what their manager says but their manager is often wholly untrained in how to execute the policy and no one does anything about it unless its called out.

generally you should also be filling out a return to work form for each absence so they can identify if there is a pattern of illness. HR have a responsibility for your wellness and should be asking if everything is ok and whether there is anything they can do.

but the bradford factor is clear, if you get the flu, don't fuck around with one day, only to come back and go off sick again 3 days later. Take the right amount of time off in the first place.

Companies that still use that are outdated (approx 99.9% of companies then . . . )

Calling it a disciplinary is extremely heavy handed on their part. I am in the leadership team at a large org, our approach is that every absence should be followed up quickly with a back to work meeting. This is as much for our employees benefit as ours, to ensure they’re actually better and that we’re helping them best we can to avoid further absence. Disciplinary action would only kick in after a pattern of absenteeism becomes apparent with no real justification (E.g. Mondayitis).

That Bradford score stuff is awful, and we don’t use it because it’s such a cold, number crunching way of managing absence. When companies are fully staffed by half human robots, fine, but in the meantime I think it’s an appalling way to manage people. We have one of the absolute highest staff retention rates in our industry. It pays to treat your staff like humans.