New "sickness managing policy" at work.........feels like the last straw! What are your views?

[needtobeanonymous]

Hello all

really need some calm sane opinions/advice on this issue as am too mad to think straight!

I work for a (v) large public body.....won't name it but am sure most people can hazard a guess.

Over the last few years we have seen out working conditions, pay etc eroded with much higher workload and constant 'negative' bulletins/e-mails etc etc. Morale is very low.

Then just after xmas, we got a new "sickness managing policy". Basically this wanted to make sure people were communicating about their sickness etc, fair enough.......

Now they have instigated 'interviews' for anyone that has had more than 3 episodes of sickness in the last six months. This is irrespective of the cause, whether you have a doctors certificate, whether you have had an op or have a serious illness like Cancer. The interview is held with you and two managers. They start off by saying they are 'assuming' the sickness is genuine but then go on to make statements like "are you aware of the impact YOUR sickness is having on your colleagues". "This organisation spent X million on sickness last year-we want to spend this on other things!!" The whole thrust of the interviews seems to be to harrass and intimidate you into agreeing to reduce your sickness, irrespective of the cause.

They are even interviewing people who have been involved in adverse/critical incidents and have been referred for PTS counselling by the organisation itself!! WTF!!!

Please don't get me wrong, I don't condone people having loads of sickies when they are well but sometimes people get ill!!

I am now say here dreading my interview as I have had three episodes of sickness,all with GP certs, all for totally genuine problems which meant I would not have been SAFE to do my job. Hopefully I will not have such a spate of bad luck again, but thats not the point.

I am fuming. Is this considered reasonable emloyer behaviour? Are they within their rights to act like this?

Sorry for rant

[needtobeanonymous]

VVVQV

My other half owns a small business so I do get to hear of things from the 'other side' too. They do bring sickness up at appraisals, IF it is impacting on the persons ability to undertake their duties, but as long as its covered by a medical certificate they dont instigate any further action.

Maybe if the organisation were being honest and upfront enough to say, we don't think you were genuinely sick, instead of pretending to be all caring and sharing!!

Next they will be interviewing people that have more than one baby or something, after all taking all that mat leave must really eat into their budgets.....

[VeniVidiVickiQV]

I think my ex-manager would have liked to have done that

I'm quite glad I took him to tribunal and put him in his place

[greedygecko]

They were like this at Tesco. I had a verbal warning for being off sick. They work it out by % of time of sick, and as I only worked 3 shifts a week, I only had to have 3 days off in 6mths to go above the 'allowance'. I can understand them doing it to cut out people throwing sickies, but I feel it backfires on the hardworking staff who are genuinely ill. There was one incident that happenend while I was there - a girl slipped on a wet patch in staff canteen (no wet floor sign), ambulance had to be called for her, she was off for about 3 wks, and still had disciplinary when she returned. Obviously went straihgt to Union to sort it, but that's what theyw ere like.

[flowerybeanbag]

needtobe as everyone has said this is common and fair enough. You sound more upset about it than I would consider to be proportionate, but having read subsequent posts it sounds clear that it is the way some of the interviews are being conducted which is actually the problem, and which is a legitimate concern.

If your sickness is genuine and you genuinely need to be off work, you have nothing to be concerned about. As others have said, in some firms you automatically get disciplined when you go over a threshold, regardless of why. As I understand it you don't hvae that in place?

It's a perfectly legitimate way of addressing a sickness absence problem. If a manager comes to me with an absence problem the first thing I advise implementing is a short return to work interview every single time the person is off sick. Time consuming for the manager but incredibly effective at wiping out unnecessary short-term absence straightaway. The ability to be off sick for a day or two here and there more or less unnoticed is suddenly gone so only genuine absences remain.

Your new policy is obviously different to that, a bit more dramatic but not every time. Not what I'd do personally but it's perfectly valid.

[micegg]

Sounds familiar. My work place interviews everyone even after one day off sick! They ask what was wrong and whether you think its a recocuuring problem. I find it weird but I can count on one hand how many days I have off sick whereas a friend of mine has taken 8 weeks in the last year so its probably aimed more at people like that. Doesnt seem to stop her though!

[OrmIrian]

Thinking about this a little more, we have a similar policy in place. But no-one I know has ever been interviewed because they haven't had recurrent or long-term sick leave. Our company (or our manager anyway) uses some common sense.

[Judy1234]

Sounds very sensible the amount of skiving there is in this country. An even better system is no pay when you're off sick except after day 3 SSP which soon gets the worst laggards back to work.

[belle74]

Bloody hell!

Really wasn't expecting some of the replies to this thread.

I think some people are genuinely lucky with their health and have high resistance to bugs and nothing chronic to contend with.
Hence they have little or no insight or empathy with others. being ill on occasion is in fact a normal part of being alive, otherwise why do we have an immune system!!
Either that or they are the ones coming in as martyrs and infecting the bloody rest of us!

I would have put myself into that category 18 months ago but since becoming a mum its been one thing after another. Got so low just before xmas with the constant round of illness noro virus, flu, tonsillitis, unexplained diarrhoea (for 4 weeks!) that gp tried to persuade me onto prozac

Worse thing is I don't smoke, drink about twice a year, dont take drugs and basically look after myself, so not much more i can do is there!!

Then to be given a damn good talking to on my return to work just about finishes it all off- must remember when they ask me what the problem is next time to diagnose a case of laggard-ness!!

[flowerybeanbag]

needtobe is that you?

If so, if you are being given a 'damn good talking to', that's the problem, that's obviously not a good or effective use of an absence management policy. The problem isn't having a strict policy in the first place, they are fairly common as you see, but if managers are not 'doing it right', then it can obviously be counter-productive.

If it's not you, then those comments are for belle74

[SlugsNSnails]

I hated these interviews - I remember being taken in for a discussion when I was about 6 months pregnant with DD. They were "concerned" about my absences.

I had HG - signed off work several times for it, antenatal depression - again signed off work because it was doing silly things to my blood pressue, the sickness continued and they told me to start later in the day when I was capable of working - but the late coming still got marked down as being sick.

Eventually I had the meeting, they showed me the list of absence, and I pointed on the paper at the very top of the dates explaining that I got pregnant then and all the rest is as a result of it, majority with doctor notes. They were very nice about it

I did always find return to work interviews very very stressful though. I worry a lot, seem to have a natural guilt complex and felt soooo guilty about having time off, even when I knew I genuinely couldn't work.

[Judy1234]

Yes, I know some people are just ill more often. it's not fair really but the system a lot fo companies operate of not paying (except SSP) when people are off sick means the genuinely ill aren't in trouble for being off and those who should be at work but are just nursing a hangover or fancied a duvet day are may be encouraged back

[OrmIrian]

Exactly flowery. A 'damned good talking to' isn't exactly constructive. But everyone on this thread has more or less agreed that in the OPs case it's the way it's being carried out that is the problem. Surely belle, you must accept that any employer has the right, if not the responsibility, to monitor sick leave?

[edam]

Companies that discipline people for being off sick for x no. of days EVEN when that sickness is genuine and accounted for by a doctor's note are shit, frankly. And no HR speak about managing sickness or absence policies can cover up for that.

Don't employ people if you don't want real human beings with real human complexity clogging up your beautifully designed system. Sheesh. It's like companies who act as if everything would work brilliantly if only it weren't for those troublesome customers getting in the way.

When I had a very real episode of serious illness - that has left me with a permanent condition - if someone had given me a hard time or disciplined me I would have been distraught. And would have contacted a solicitor PDQ.

I've been a manager and have had employees swinging the lead, btw. No need to be inhuman towards people who are genuinely ill.

[flowerybeanbag]

edam I don't think there's anyone above advocating those systems, where disciplinaries are triggered regardless of the situations. In my mind they are clearly not a productive or supportive way of addressing a sickness absence problem and I think most people would agree with me.

There are a couple of people on this thread who have experienced them, at Tescos and the like, but most people who have an active policy in place for managing absence don't have one which is so crude fortunately! The trouble with the OP's situation is that perfectly legitimate (and supportive and helpful, if done correctly) return to work interviews are being handled appallingly, creating resentment and upset particularly for genuinely sick employees.

[Judy1234]

I think legally you can sack people for being sick too much if you follow proper procedures but NOT if it is a disability and falls under the disability discrimination act. We need an employment lawyer to verify that. So if someone has a cold every other week and is always off sick for that I think lawfully if the contract says so the first 3 days she need not be paid and thereafter she gets SSP and after too long of all this you can legally sack her whereas if she has a "disability" (which can even include some mental conditions) then you could be sued under disability discrimination law. I think I took 2 days off sick in 10 years working for an employer and even used my annual leave to have babies in but I was very lucky with my health.

I do think employees can help themselves too by trying to eat healthy food and exercise and generally raise their immune system. Mind you with a small baby and being exhausted most of us catch every bug going.

[flowerybeanbag]

Xenia

Yes you are absolutely you can dismiss people because of sickness, the reason would be capability. In fact technically it wouldn't necessarily be discrimination to dismiss someone on that basis even if their illness comes under the DDA. Obviously in that case you'd have to be incredibly careful and absolutely certain there was no adjustment you could make to accommodate them and no other work they could do. But if that were the case, if there was literally no work the person could possibly do and no adjustment you could make, it would not be reasonable to expect the employer to keep employing the person doing nothing indefinitely. That would be rare though, obviously.

BERR on dismissal in connection with illness here if anyone is interested.

[Judy1234]

I wish local Government would take this on board more. I think private sector employers are more on the ball.