Being managed out to avoid paying redundancy (long sorry)

[blondieminx]

Hello.... I'd be very grateful for advice on what to do next as I'm in a situation where I think my employer is going to try and manage me out to avoid paying me any redundancy.

I've worked at the company for nearly ten years. There have already been redundancies in the department and I think more are likely in the autumn - and I think my boss wants to fire me and one other long serving member of staff without paying redundancy. He's got where he is by shredding costs and always getting in the cheapest staff.

I have had health issues (repeated chest/throat infections for several years for which i've always had doctors notes, and migraines which are triggered by stress - its a busy City role and I've had a lot on my plate in terms of sick parents and grandparents (cancer and dementia) on top of that). I also have a DD who is in nursery the days I work and so obv she can't go if she has any kind of infectious illness (family back up is non existent because the parents are all ill and other family members work). DH has just started a new job and is obviously reluctant to take time off while he's on probation.

Since february, DD has had both an ear infection (covered by me) and chickenpox (covered by me and DH) and I've had bronchitis and a migraine all of which has added up to 9 days out of the office.

Today I've been called to a meeting to say tomorrow I have to meet with a HR specialist at 3pm (their title in the internal directory says "employee relations specialist") and I fear that they're about to start some sort of disciplinary about my absences.

The other thing that makes me very wary suspicious is that after years of good appraisals and being praised for my time management skills and effectiveness this year I was told I wasn't getting through as much work as other team members (I refuted this and asked then to provide examples and have had ongoing discussions about this and indeed today I got through literally twice as much as a colleague (not the same one who I think the boss is also trying to push out). So I feel like he is almost attempting a pincer movement of absence management/performance management so he can try and get rid of me without paying redundancy

This particular boss was not great while I was pg (I posted at the time and got some very helpful advice on this board for which I am still grateful).

Sorry for such a long post, and thank you if you've got this far!

You've had 9 days off since February? That would raise flags at my employer for sure - or do you mean you've had to work from home a bit (I assume pre-approved) or took unpaid parental leave or something?

What were the 9 days classed as exactly?

Also how many incidents do the 9 days span, if you've taken them off sick, say? Is it a day off here or there, or e.g. 2 periods of leave (like a 4 day and a 5 day)...?

I do think 9 days in a few weeks would be flagged up by most employers as a problem. How many have you taken as annual leave, how many sick leave and how many were unpaid?

Absence disciplinaries are triggered when the Bradford Score (i think it's called) reaches a certain number. Can't google cos on phone, but basically it takes into account amount of absences and days, so for example, someone who was off every Monday for six weeks would have a higher score than someone who wax off for six months. Or something.

Sorry, but nine days since February is a lot.

In most companies I think that would put your Bradford score over a limit and you'd have a meeting with HR, but they will have a procedure that needs to be followed.

Initially I would expect them to talk to you about why you've been off and see if they can offer you any "support".

Your best bet is to find out exactly what the procedure is and make sure that they follow it, you will probably be entitled to take someone independent in with you. Please don't get too worried in advance, wait until you know exactly what they are expecting from you.

As AP said, I was also thinking about this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradford_Factor when I asked how the leave was structured (fragmented days here and there being worse than taking a week off and then another 4 days off, for example).

My current employer uses the BF for working out if there are absence issues that need to invoke warnings/bring in HR. We also have to fill in a back to work form for any period of time off (even if it's just a day), which is signed at a small meeting with your manager and is the opportunity to produce supporting evidence (such as hospital forms or something if appropriate).

Unless I'm missing something there's no indication that the OP's employer uses Bradford Factor or any other trigger system is there? Plus assuming the days for DDs illnesses were emergency dependents' leave or similar, not sickness absence for the OP, then the relevant figure for a trigger system would be less than the 9 days.

Anyway, I think going in your mind from a meeting with HR following a fairly significant amount of time off to it being some kind of dismissal to avoid redundancy is a pretty big mental leap tbh.

This meeting is not a disciplinary, because if it was, you'd know. It's more likely to be a 'this is quite a bit of time off is there anything we need to be concerned about' meeting. That's not to say a disciplinary for excessive sickness absence isn't possible at some point, but even if that happens in the near future, they are still way way off being in anything like a position to dismiss you.

Thanks everyone. I know it is a lot but I just have a gut feeling there is more to this than "support"

To answer the question about how it breaks down I have had 5 days sick - 1 for migraine, and 4 for bronchitis (I got a sick note from the GP for this along with my prescription).

My DD has had 2 separate bouts of illness - an ear infection and chickenpox. I took the week of the ear infection off as DH had just started his new job and wasn't really able to take time off and he agreed that he'd take the time off next time DD was ill but unfortunately just a few weeks later she came down with chickenpox so I said DH would need to cover it and he then said his boss was off on the Monday so I'd have to stay home as he had to go in to cover the department. He did cover my other work days though grudgingly.

Thanks for taking the time to post

Sorry just to add that the days I had to care for poorly DD were taken as parental leave 3 days and one day of unpaid leave. Sorry quite stressed about the meeting tomorrow

Are you sure three of the days were taken as parental leave? Parental leave has to be requested in advance and taken in blocks of a week or more. If you had to take three days off at short notice that would normally be emergency dependants leave but that is usually only meant to cover a day or two while you arrange alternative cover. If it has been logged as emergency leave, the fact that you have had three days together may also be triggering the meeting.

I know it's difficult to distance your feelings that there is more to this than meets the eye but do try tomorrow to focus on providing some reassurance to the company that you have your health and childcare under control. How old is your daughter and how much time off have you had with her since she started nursery? Could you investigate some family cover/emergency nanny back-up for future instances of illness? What about your own health? If you have been having repeated migraines and infections for years, something is not right. Your boss may be trying to cut costs but perhaps the company as a whole thinks it has a responsibility to provide some support to you?

No, there was no indication in the OP that Bradford was being used. I suggested it only to reassure blondieminx that it's quite normal for companies to have an absence management procedure and that it's nothing particularly sinister.

Hope it went ok Blondie.