AIBU to fight my case against my employers!!!!

[mum2taylor]

I am due to have a 2nd disiplinary hearing with my employers tomorrow due to my attendance record. I have been with my employers for 8 months and have had ten days off sick, four of which were due to my daughter being ill. Now I know six days off sick in 8 months is not ideal but I dont think it warrants two disciplinary hearings. I had my first hearing after four days sick and was told it would be on my record for three months, but I had two days off sick in the three month period and that is why I have another hearing tomorrow. Are they in the right here???

mum2taylor, the second HR lady is to corroborate what the first HR lady says, if this case ever ends up in a tribunal. If the first HR lady is of the opinion that you are genuine, why is this being brought up again in another hearing. If this carries on, you should consider bringing someone in with you on these hearings, preferably a lawyer friend.

Did you or they do notes of the meetings?

What are the actions required of you after the first hearing? What, like make sure you and dd don't get sick again?? The no back-up argument is not fair - it is precisely for the situation of no back-up that the domestic leave days are for. Are they pressuring you to not take your entitlement? That is not on.

Are they accusing you of lying? 6 days' sickness and 4 days' domestic leave is not a big deal. Why are they making such a big issue of this?

Sorry for the barrage of questions. I am on your behalf. Sounds like they are taking the piss. I would not bow to this bullying pressure. Subtly hint that you are taking advice.

blueshoes...I had to ask for a copy of the note of my sickdays that they had at the first hearing so that I knew what was being discussed at the second hearing....no notes of the meetings have been given to me but they have issued memos to me to inform me that the hearings are taking place and to tell me what the outcome is, i.e. that I have been given a verbal warning first time round. Im better prepared this time around as i know that I have to fight to keep my job! I was told my hearing would be on Monday and then never heard anything until yesterday when I was handed a memo to say it was being held on Thursday! Talk about keeping you dangling!

What exactly did they spell out as your 'crime' in the first verbal warning? It is clear what you are supposed to do if subsequently, you or dd fall ill?

Under company procedure, is the second disciplinary hearing the final one before dismissal? Check your company procedures - heck, ask HR for the written procedures if necessary. If this is the final hearing, I would try to get someone else to sit in on the meeting and postpone the meeting if necessary.

Where is your boss in all this BTW?

I work at a large City law firm. Check the intranet for all the information concerning your employment contract. Go in with as much knowledge as you can. Make a note of all your conversations, meetings with HR (dates and times, length of call, who called whom), so if they try to build a case, you have a counter argument for everything.

Oh, and if you work for a partner, he does have influence over HR - he's shirking and doing the usual "I don't want to get involved" thing. As a partner, he is an equity owner in the business and therefore has a stake and pays for HR out of his share of the profits. Make a note of the conversation you've had with him too and also ask him to back you up with an email to HR, if he says he supports you.

I think that you should have a look at the firm's policy on discipline.

If you are already in the disciplinary hearing stage and getting verbal warnings you need to clarify that what you have done (ie taken time off unpaid as you were ill) is actually covered by the policy.

Seems v v heavy handed to me.

I work in the public sector and used to supervise someone who has on average 3 days off each month and NOTHING has ever been done. NOTHING. So I am amazed that you are being acutally disciplined for what seem to me to be short periods of time.

Agree re older people and issues with family leave etc as I have suffered from that attitude too when DS had chicken pox and I took four days paid family leave and all heel broke loose with the older women in my office (incl the one who takes sick days on a weekly basis more or less)

Law firms are looking at cut backs at the moment and ways to cut costs, including salary costs. It's the credit crunch thing -have you noticed a slow down in new work for the fee earners? It's happening at my place and they have got a lot stricter with sick days - one of the legal secretaries in our team has a similar thing happening (she has know family, so I know it isn't you ).

Can you ask a friendly secretarial co-ordinator or someone to sit in on the meeting with HR so you have a witness too?

"no" family

Well done you for not sitting back and taking it this time.

It seems they are being very heavy handed.

Agree with Gryffin, your boss, as Partner, is above HR and could certainly make his thoughts known.

Have you posted in the Legal section? There are plenty of qualified peeps there who will be able to give you advice.

Good luck. Keep us posted.

This is my second hearing (not sure if this counts as the final). My boss has said that he supports me and thinks that they are going over the top (although he is just back after being off for 3 months as he got so drunk at a works event that he fell down stairs and knocked himself unconscious!!!).

My "crime" which triggered my first verbal warning was four days off sick for myself and four days off sick due to my dd being ill.

Does anyone know the difference between parental leave and time off for dependents. I know that I am not entitled to parental leave as I have not been there a year, but what is the actual difference between these?

mum2taylor, you are a permanent employee. You need to have a good squint at the written employment policies of your firm. It is all contractual between you and your firm.

The policy will explain what is the difference between parental and domestic leave.

I am happy to help you interpret it if you email it to me (CAT).

where i used to work they monitored abscence as a % of days worked, i think we were allowed an acceptable limit of 4%, yours i think is 16% abscence. for whatever reason they must think this unacceptable.

Parental leave is unpaid leave that can only be taken in blocks of one week (up to four a year, 13 weeks maximum). Time off for dependants is simply that - if you take a day off or so because of something like your child being ill. It is usually unpaid (unless your company lets you make up the time/take a holiday).

Managing short-term absence (which is what your HR department would call it) is really nothing to do with whether or not the absence is genuine or not, its to do with whether or not the absence is considered to be high/problematic/excessive. Lots of companies have quite strict policies on dealing with what they see as 'frequent' short term absences. What is considered frequent or excessive varies according to company/industry/sector.

If there is someone you trust - I would take someone to the meeting with you. That way they can take notes for you and give you an alternative perspective on the meeting.

Whatever they call this hearing you are enitled to be accompanied-friend/ relative/union rep whatever. They also should have handed you a letter stating why they were calling the hearing, & what form it is taking (ie written/final warning.)They do not need to go into details.

They then have to let you have a copy of all/any notes taken with all parties signing to agree them. If it looks like they're taking notes you do the same,don't agree anything at that time just elucidate wht the situation is and what they are proposing and say you would like time to ask for further advice on the matter if you feel you are being dealt with unfairly.

Good you have the backing of your manager, goodluck.

thanks blueshoes - had a look on the intranet and they state " [company name ] recognise that it can sometimes be difficult for employees to balance the responsibilities of work and home life. Regardlesss of length of service, all staff are entitled to take a reasonable amount of unpaid leave to deal with family emergencies relating to dependants. Family emergencies may include the serious illness of a member of your immediate family, the illness of a child, normal childcare arrangements breaking down, to deal with a burglary/flood/fire or appearing as a witness in court.

For these purposes, a dependant is a spouse, parent, child or any other person living in the same household as you and whose welfare is your responsibility."

They class this as short term parent leave for family issues.

Well my hearing is tomorrow so I will let you all know how I get on - thanks so much for all of the advice you have all given me....it is very much appreciated and has given me a renewed sense of determination to make my point .

dramaqueen, I am very interested in what you wrote: "Managing short-term absence (which is what your HR department would call it) is really nothing to do with whether or not the absence is genuine or not, its to do with whether or not the absence is considered to be high/problematic/excessive. Lots of companies have quite strict policies on dealing with what they see as 'frequent' short term absences. What is considered frequent or excessive varies according to company/industry/sector."

Are you from an HR and/or legal background?

The issue is whether the company has a right to 'manage your short-term absence' if the employee is taking what (I assume in mum2taylor's case) is perfectly within her entitlement without any evidence that the sickness is not genuine.

Looking at the sickness policy of my law firm, staff are allowed 4 weeks fully paid, 4 weeks half-paid and then unpaid sick leave (supported by medical certicate) over a 12 month period. No mention of managing absences, which I assume would have to be written into the employment policies if a firm were to choose to invoke this.

mum2taylor, just read your post on the policy on your intranet: the question is what is "a reasonable amount of unpaid leave to deal with family emergencies". 6 days over 8 months is less than one day a month and not unreasonable in my book. Do you work part time?

If this were to end up in tribunal, I would say that the firm would have been in a better position if the policy actually stated that staff are only entitled to x number of days leave for parental emergencies (or whatever they are calling it). In my firm, it is 20 days a year.

What is "reasonable" would be a legal minefield. And if my company in the same legal field gives all its staff including legal secretaries 20 days parental leave, your company is going to have a hard time showing 6 days in 8 months is unreasonable.

Maybe the other mn posters on this thread could tell you how many days parental leave they are given a year.

let us know how it goes mum2taylor. Good luck for tomorrow

mn posters on this thread who work in law firms ...

Hi blueshoes - I am indeed from HR background and logged onto mumsnet straight after a seminar in absence management delivered by an employment law firm (which is why this thread caught my eye!).

I wasn't trying to say that mumt2taylor's absence was unreasonable as I wouldn't try and advise anyone about a disciplinary case without knowing all the full details - I was just giving some general info as different companies have very different ideas on what is an acceptable number of absences in a given period.

IME many companies (but not all) will have procedures/policies for managing absence in their employee handbook and not their contract. Just because someone is eligible for company sick pay up for a certain timeframe it doesn't mean that if the company believes their absence is a problem that they cant investigate it until after they've exhausted their company sick pay.

For the record - I do think using disciplinary procedures to manage absence is harsh. My own company has a capability procedure which is used for managing excessive absence which tries to support employees with high absence rates rather than punish them. We would only go down a route leading to dismissal for persistent high absence after all other options had been exhausted.

Unfortunately, not all companies take that approach!

following what blueshoes says, this is my law firm's parental leave statement (p.s. I don't know how this compares generally, but they are not generous with benefits here and the maternity policy is poor compared with other City law firms)

"The Firm follows the government?s model. Parents with one year service qualify for parental leave (unpaid) providing the following criteria are met. The criteria differs for disabled children:

? you must have prime responsibility for the child;

? the child must be under 5;

The following conditions apply:

? the allowance is for a max of 13 wks (per child);

? leave must be taken before the child?s fifth birthday;

? you must give min 21 days? notice;

? leave should be taken in multiples of one week (exceptions for disabled children) up to a maximum of four weeks per year."

thank you, dramaqueen. I agree that a company can 'manage' sickness ahead of an employee exhausting their leave.

But that is just 'managing' - ie sit down, chat, how can we help sort of way. Do companies really have the legal right to invoke disciplinary procedures based on an arbitrary formula of how an employee is allowed to consume their contractual entitlement of sick leave.

I would expect that if a company wants to monitor sick leave in this way, they should write it into the employment contract or at least say the approval of sick leave is discretionary(!). Otherwise, they would be skating on thin legal ice to sack anyone for this, who is perfectly within her entitlement.

GryffinGirl, a bit of confusion with terms here.

What you describe is indeed parental leave ie my law firm is exactly the same (do we work in the same place?): 13 weeks per child unpaid. Also accrues only after 1 years' service

What mum2taylor describes sounds like family & domestic leave. Mum2taylor, I correct myself. At my firm, it is 5 (not 20) days of leave per rolling 12 month period to deal with family emergencies like child falling sick. But that leave is paid. In your case, it is unpaid.

Our contracts do say that company sick pay is discretionary so I would agree with you their.

Just dug out some info on the 'fair reasons for dismissal' in the law relating to capability:

'capability of the employee for performing work of the kind which he was employed by the employer to do. Capability is assessed by reference to skill, aptitude, health or any other physical or mental quality'. Essentially a company could legally argue that someone's sickness absence meant they weren't capablie of fulfilling their role.

As a complete guess - mum2's company might think that mum2's absence is too high and are going hell for leather through the disciplinary procedure before she gets a year's service. Before a year's service she wont be able to claim unfair dismissal.

Right - I have to get back to work before I'm posted as absent .

"Before a year's service she wont be able to claim unfair dismissal." - I didn't know that. Just goes to show I am just a lawyer, but not an employment lawyer.

mum2taylor, my advice therefore is to drag it out.

Does your company policy say sick leave is discretionary or that they can monitor and 'manage' absences? My feeling is that your firm will not look good in a tribunal -how can being absent for 10 days get in the way of your doing your job as a legal secretary, a role which can easily be covered IME. What have they done with other employees (eg mothers like yourself who have to take time off for little ones). Are they more lenient because they are longer term employees.

If you can show that they were more lenient with other legal secretaries but not with you, you have a strong case. Raise it at the meeting.