Sickness absence query

[MrsHewer]

I work in a school-related job and have a term-time contract. Last year I had an operation at the end of July (purposely planned so I could recover without feeling I'm letting the side down) and was given a sicknote for 4 weeks which I gave to my boss without a thought. My absence from work was actually only 3 days at the end of July. I was astonished to find that my absence has been recorded as 4 weeks when I was not actually meant to be there for 3 1/2 of those weeks. This seems really unfair to me especially when your sickness record counts against you these days. I've queried it with HR who say if I was not fit for work it has to go down as sickness and that's just the way it is. I said, even if I'd been fit for work, I wouldn't have been there and the argument went round in circles from there.

Any thoughts?

Unfortunately I think they are right. So unfair I know but legally am sure they have the facts right. It would have been better to sign a self certificate for the 3 days.

I might be completely wrong here, but where I work HR only stress about sickness absence when you have taken many days off here and there, rather than a block. And your absence was a year ago, so provided you haven't had time off since then you should be fine. Incidentally, my work and the last place I worked also insisted if you were part-time and better following sickness that you let them know regardless, if that makes sense.

If you have been signed off sick, you were not on holiday. In these circumstances, most employers would give you 4 weeks annual leave or pay in lieu. If they are insisting on sticking to the book with your sick note, it's probably worth asking what their position is on this as you could be losing out on a month's additional salary or extra holiday (although, it will depend on their policy etc).