Working second job while off sick from main job

[EasterBenny]

That's it really - is it appropriate to work your second job while being off sick (stress related) from your main full time job?

Best friend is in this situation, I don't want to stress her out more my bringing it up, but I'm worried that if her main employer finds out (and it would be pretty easy for them to, to be honest) that she'll be in trouble.

[Northernlurker]

MisKL, I think you're wrong about NHS contracts. It's perfectly possible to have more than one. I've line managed somebody in that situation. As far as I'm aware staff working extra shifts through NHS professionals also have two contracts. Certainly the shifts carried out through NHSP are on different terms than their substantive shifts. That's been the substance of the fraud prosecutions that the counter fraud service has pursued - staff off sick from one contract but who have worked under another.

[MissKeithLemon]

katiemiddleton - I just wanted to say... I agree with Flowery.

Misinformation about employment legislation is no joke. Agree all you like - but you'd be wrong too

[KatieMiddleton]

...assuming you are right. Which I doubt seeing as you are talking about something else entirely.

[flowery]

I accept your apology however would be interested in your answers to the following questions:

Which statutory right/s would an employer be breaching if it, say, withheld occupational sick pay, or imposed a disciplinary warning on an employee who was off sick from their job but doing an identical job elsewhere?

This tribunal claim that they'd supposedly win 'hands down', what actual legal claim would you be advising they bring?

Sorry but I think people with a tiny bit of knowledge who come on here giving advice based on a very small amount of information saying tribunal claims would be won are at best irresponsible and at worst dangerous.

[MissKeithLemon]

I'm out at the mo but i will get back to you all when i have time! I think it is some of you that have misunderstood me tbh. I was only answering the op's question initially and my advice to her still stands and seem's to be correct. Earlier poster's made some very sweeping assumptions's fgs! For being rude to flowery i apologise.

[ElphabaisWicked]

This is laughable. Flowery knows nothing. Ha ha. Having read nothing but completely factually correct employment legislation over several years from her and having had information of my own properly corrected I reckon I'll go with the tried and trusted.

Flowery is an acknowledged expert on such matters. She has quite correctly said that you can't make a judgment without knowing vital further information.

[HomeEcoGnomist]

It doesn't nec follow that being off sick from one job automatically makes you unfit from another eg I recall a case concerning an accountant who was also a swimming instructor. Doing her 2nd job was held to be important to her recovery from stress related symptoms.
But we would need to know much more before being able to definitively comment on this employee and her specific case

[PinkPanther27]

I have 2 jobs and just assumed I woudnt be able to do either, better check what my Dr. thinks when I see him

[PinkPanther27]

PS someone asked me a question about why my colleague got into trouble for this - I can only go on what I have heard but they were signed off with back issues from their main job and allegedly seen carrying out heavy manual work in their other job while off sick.

[KatieMiddleton]

[flowery]

I have absolutely no problem at all with my 'authority' being questioned and welcome different viewpoints. Indeed, I don't claim any particular 'authority' here.

I would disagree that you were the only one who answered the OPs question. The OP asked whether it would be appropriate to work at a second job when signed off sick for the first one, and expressed concern that her friend might run into some trouble with the first employer. The answer to both of those questions is "possibly", depending on various factors.

Looking at your answers they all seem to be about SSP which the OP didn't ask about or mention. No one asked whether employer 1 could withhold SSP and no one suggest employer 1 could do so. Seems to me therefore that you were the only one who didn't answer the OP's question, which had nothing to do with SSP.

You've said I'm 'wrong'. I'm always happy to be corrected and if you can tell me where your posts or HMRC links or anything else proves that my opinion that whether the OPs friend could get into any kind of trouble depends on the circumstances is wrong, that would be enormously helpful.

Once you start bandying about phrases like 'tribunal' and 'hands down' and 'statutory rights' with what is obviously advice given based on a bit of knowledge about SSP and very little knowledge about employment rights and absence management generally, that's when I get concerned.

[Yeahthatsnotgonnahappen]

It would entirely depend on what is on her fit note. If it said she was fit to work if certain conditions were met, but work A were unable to meet them but work B were able to, she would be fully entitled to continue with work B but be off sick for work A.

I could entirely understand a nurse getting into trouble for working a nursing shift in one trust but not her main one, but only if she was working a standard shift in her second job. For example, if her trust said that they weren't willing to put her on light duties (not helping lift patients, extended breaks etc) but her other trust were more than happy to do so, then I can't see the problem.

If however her GP/doc has just ticked the 'not fit' box then she needs to go see him/her and get it changed sharpish, because she could get in trouble as she is deemed to be unfit to work any job. It would entirely depend on what her two jobs are and why she is off sick.

[Metters]

I agree not enough information provided to make statement about winning "hands down at a tribunal". Also emloyees in the NHS do have more than one contract. I have known nurses working whilst off sick loose their NMC pin number once discovered and this despite the primary employee causing the employee to be off?. So please do not base advice solely on an entitlement to SSP, so many other factos have to be considered.

And as aside no need to get personal about other posters, you can just disagree.

[flowery]

missingmumxox I obviously remember our last discussion very differently. You were making a significant statement about legal status of something which I wasn't aware about and which I was interested in learning about, hence asking you for the information you were referring to. It was a genuine question on my part and not an argument as I remember it at all. As I've said before, I'm perfectly happy to learn from others.

You are right you are not at work and don't have to help me or anyone if you don't want to, that's fine but I'm a bit disappointed to see my request of you brought on to another thread and represented so negatively tbh. Won't be asking you for help again!

[flowery]

Actually. Having thought about it, I regret my last statement as I shouldn't be drawn in to respond to passive aggressive criticism but should instead allow anyone reading who is remotely interested to make their own judgments about my posts.

My greatest concern on the Employment topic is always that OPs or people reading who are in a similar situation might take action based on comments made with little or no knowledge of their actual situation.

Perhaps I'm not granting people with enough intelligence, but would like to draw attention to the disclaimer at the top of this topic, and would urge anyone who thinks as a result of this or any other thread that their rights may have been breached to check out exactly what those rights actually are and do some proper research/seek proper advice before making any claim, grievance, tribunal or other accusation.

I'm off to enjoy my bank holiday now, and will leave my opinions to stand for anyone to think whatever they like about them!

[MissKeithLemon]

Thanks missing you are right, MN is only an internet forum and not NATO!!

With this in mind I will not be PM'ing you my credentials Flowery... I don't need to; I know I am secure in my knowledge . I like my user name and outing myself would mean having to change it.

But, I will answer the points raised above, if for no other reason than MN is a useful source of information for others and I wouldn't want to just walk away without doing so.

So, firstly katieMiddleton - here have a

Turning up to a thread and backing up someone just because you 'know' her is a bit like playground bullying imo. So yes, maybe you should give your HR badge in...

You said You are talking about statutory sick pay which is not the same as sick leave.
No it is not necessarily - but SSP and its defining criteria is the minimum legal right to pay when an employee is sick, as laid down in law. So it is pertinent to any situation regarding sick pay.

Employers can choose to offer more, but not less than SSP in relation to employee sickness.

Next, Northernlurker Every NHS HCP is employed ultimately by the Secretary Of State. All NHS Bodies (including but possibly not substantive - Primary Care Trusts, NHS Trusts, Special Healthcare Authorities & Strategic Health Authorities) use contracts of employment as set out specifically to NHS Guidelines.

Yes an employee can have more than one contract of employment within this framework, but ultimately only one employer. The contracts of employment may affect the general terms and conditions of each of the specific roles, but the employee still has only one employer in relation to statutory rights.

For example, a nurse who works 20 hours a week in one hospital and 20 hours a week in an another, for a different Trust would only receive one set of maternity pay even if she meets fulfilling criteria in both jobs.

This would be why NHS employees cannot be 'off sick' from one job and still be working in another area of the NHS. They can however work outside the NHS for another employer as a second job and continue to work while they are off from the NHS.

As per my previous posts - tis all about the individual employments.

Its quite complicated as regards the NHS, but they still have a duty to meet statutory employee rights. Your handbook will probably detail the above, in specific relation to your role/s within the NHS framework.

ElphabaisWicked - you have added nothing but derision of me to this thread.

Pinkpanther - as per my earlier posts. It is up to an employer to prove that an employee can work in that employment, and not that they cannot work in the second employment.

You gave an example of a colleague 'getting into trouble' for being off sick with back problems whilst being seen doing heavy manual work elsewhere.

I would agree that the first employer (paying the sick pay) would undoubtedly be able to provide evidence that the employee in question was able to work given these facts. Although, it would still be up to the first employer to actually provide this evidence/proof at tribunal. In your example the employee was hardly likely to take them to tribunal had he/she been dismissed over the matter given the bad back/doing manual work scenario.
This is why your colleague in this circ. 'got into trouble'.

Flowery the reason that I talk about SSP a lot is because SSP is the basic statutory minimum rights to pay during times of sickness for all employees, as set down in laws passed in Parliament.

An employer can choose to offer more than SSP, but they cannot in any circumstances not meet the requirements to pay as set out in SSP guidelines including fulfillment criteria.

For example, an employer can choose to pay a sick employee from day one of their absence. SSP guidelines state that there are 3 waiting days before SSP begins. An employer cannot therefore decide that employees must have 4 waiting days before being paid.

See here for clarification of the statutory rights of sick employees - www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/work_e/work_time_off_work_e/off_work_because_of_sickness.htm

I talk of tribunals because they are the ultimate judicial decision makers for disagreeements beteen employees and employers. See here for Acas information re tribunals www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=1889

So, in conclusion, and referring to your final point directed towards me:-

"Once you start bandying about phrases like 'tribunal' and 'hands down' and 'statutory rights' with what is obviously advice given based on a bit of knowledge about SSP and very little knowledge about employment rights and absence management generally, that's when I get concerned."

Any contractual obligations of an employer MUST be at the level of Statutory Rights for Employees.
A Tribunal is the final decision maker, and therfore authority, on disagreements between employer and employee.
SSP is the minimum level at which an employee must be paid during times of sickness.

I think that the OP had her answer given her second post. One would assume that she will also seek confirmation elsewhere of what has been said on this thread.

HTH.

[StealthPolarBear]

flowery didn't ask you to PM her your credentials, you suggested it. HTH.

[MrsSchadenfreude]

Blimey MissKL, you've been a bit rude! Flowery was v helpful to me once on here (years ago!) and her advice was spot on.

I've worked at NATO. I think the UN might be a better comparison.

[dontcallmehon]

Does anyone know what happens if you're signed off from employment (because of stress) but you are also self employed and want to carry on with that?

[trixymalixy]

at the rudeness. There is a big difference between offering a different viewpoint and just being plain rude.

[Staryeyed]

can I just say that flowery has been fantastic in the advice she has given to different people on mumsnet including myself. She has been invaluable. Totally uneccessary to be rude and dismiss her as knowing nothing and quite patently not true.

[StealthPolarBear]

Yes she doesn't know everything so advises where she knows theanswer and is clear about where her knowledge ends an where people can go for more advice. It's the professional approach.