Please or to access all these features

Work

Chat with other users about all things related to working life on our Work forum.

Advice - please?

6 replies

isthegrassgreener16 · 04/06/2016 10:29

I have recently applied and have been accepted for a new job role. The acceptance based on satisfactory Vetting, medical, fitness and references. I have passed all areas and am currently awaiting a decision on my vetting.

My question - as part of my vetting meeting, the employers discussed previous sickness rates (for my medical I have to supply the past 3 years record). They informed that my current employer had not supplied this in my reference, and was I willing to write a letter to authorise the release of this info (which I agreed).

The new employer noted that I had had a baby during the 3 year period, and due to Health and safety restrictions with my current role, meant I was to be removed from the environment and placed on 'garden leave' pending a suitable alternative job role'. The new employer then requests I provide a 6 year sickness record based upon the fact I was on pregnancy garden leave, followed by maternity leave, and that a 6 year record would provide a more accurate record of sickness.

To me this seems unjust - I appreciate they want reliable staff and reassurance that I would fulfil this - but to extend the sickness record request because of my pregnancy and maternity leave seems unfair.

Any advice would be useful :)

OP posts:
Shakey15000 · 05/06/2016 10:05

6 years worth?? Blimey, I've never heard the like. But I'm not a HR bod and I'm sure one will advise. Can you say what sector?

isthegrassgreener16 · 05/06/2016 10:50

It's a public sector role.

I just can't see how it's fair (or legal) to request 3 years from all potential employees as standard, but move the goal posts for me due to my pregnancy/ maternity leave.

Thanks for commenting :)

OP posts:
LunaLoveg00d · 05/06/2016 15:06

I can see the new employer's point of view though - they want to see 3 years' worth of sickness records from work, and for around half of that you were not in work because of pregnancy or maternity leave. Not sure of the legalities though.

GahBuggerit · 05/06/2016 15:20

Hr person here.

i reckon this amounts to discrimination, and ive never heard of a company wsnting sickness records so far back, my policy is not to divulge sickness info on a rdference and many companies adopt this approach now.

i cant be 100% on the discrimination, but usually if someone is having a policy applied to them differently due to pregnancy or maternity then it is. id question if id want to work for such an employer tbh. VERY odd to wsnt 3 years sickness, they must havd a problem with their rates which makes me suspicious of the culture there

flowery · 05/06/2016 15:44

How much of the previous three years were you in work as opposed to on garden leave/maternity leave? Do you feel they could form an accurate view of your sickness absence rate without going back further than the usual 3 years?

Whether they do or not, if you've passed fitness requirements now it is very unlikely they could justify withdrawing the offer based on an absence issue that took place 5 years ago.

isthegrassgreener16 · 05/06/2016 17:09

During my garden leave my usual conditions of employment still stood - in effect I was on 'standby' for when a suitable job became available. So, my manager was to be informed of any annual leave, sickness and pre-natal appointments to ensure availability.

So physically I was out of my job role for 19 months out of 36, but of that 19 - 8 months I was available to commence duties.

:)

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page