Argh - have offered job to man and have now discovered he has had cancer

[bademployeur]

... which would be fine, but it turns out that the job on his CV which 'got him' this job, he only attended for a few months of the 2 years he was employed for - the rest of the time he was off sick with cancer.

He has only worked for 2 years in the last 10, but because it was in a similar position, we offered him the job on the grounds of his experience - but now it turns out that he was mostly off sick for that period!

The employer offered a very VAGUE reference which said they would employed him again but "in a suitable role"

Can we rescind the job offer?

base it on his performance
Trial period
Assuming he is fully fit again this is a very important step for him and he will appreciate the opportunity
Anything else is unfair imvho

I'm afraid I can't give you free advice about what to do and how to manage this situation because you are an employer.

I will give you one important tip though, cancer is automatically considered as a disability under the DDA.

You know what, I could easily take your OP and replace the words 'had cancer' with 'was on maternity leave'.... which, as you know, would have the replies flooding in.

And maybe, if I was a journalist, I might fish about, posting stuff like this on sites, just to provoke a few stray comments that I can then sieze on for a nice juicy article on double standards or whatever.

I don't know which is worse, being either (a) a sleazy journo or (b) a nasty employer?

sorry but as an employer I would also be at this

having staff off on long term sick leave really cripples small businesses

am not journo - judge flounce, red rug, norwich cod scandal blah blah blah

Run a small charity

In the last couple of years have had two staff off on long-term sick which has crippled our reserves (20k cost in total). We only employ around 10 people.

I would like to minimise the risk of this happening again

But can see that as this falls under DDA we really have to just go for it and hope for the best

Guess you have just learnt the hard way of making sure you get answers to specific questions on reference requests from prrevious employers. We always ask total sick leave over the past couple of years.

That said he had the relevant experiance to obtain a similar role previously and his previous employer would re-employ him.

It's not compulsory to pay sick pay. SSP kicks in after 3 days I think? A huge number of employers don't pay sick pay.

Well we do pay proper sick pay, which I think is right, but the problem is that because we are a charity, we have funding which means we have to meet milestones i.e. get projects done - that part is non-negotiable. The problem with long-term sick is that we have to get the work done ANYWAY or else lose ALL the funding - this is what has crippled us previously. We have then had to finish the projects, and then pay off ALL staff including long-term sick with redundancy payments.

We offered him the job depending on references but this is clearly a 'minimal' reference which doesn't say much - and nothing overly positive - looks like the sort of basic reference you give. argh again.

I would be that he had not told me during the interview tbh

I would if I were him

Aren't job offers subject to satisfactory references?

You seemed unsatisfied with the references so could you just not take back the job offer?

Poor man

It must be really hard for him to get a job with his employment history. I was in a similar position several years ago (although not as bad) and I really struggled to find a job and ended up taking one I was hugely overqualified for because I was so desperate

I agree with Piffle - can't you give him a trial period? He may just need a chance to prove himself.

How did you find out about the real history?

If he applied in good faith and you offered him the job then I guess it depends on what happened in between:

• was the job subject to references? Was it the references that filled in the gaps? If so, I guess you have to base your decision on your business need and your conscience

• if the extra knowledge came from somewhere else (not the references) then you probably have to ask whether you should know about it? Was is private information? Are applicants asked to disclose health info in your application process? Are they legally required to? Can you invite him in to discuss his health needs as an interim (do you have an occupational health specialist you can consult?) - if he's in remission, it ought not to be an issue, and you would be being discriminatory, surely, to refuse him outright.

I agree with what others have said. As a new employee, he will not have straightforward unfair dismissal rights. He will only have the special rights in respect of discrimination (including disability discrimination).

Why not take him on and then asses his performance during the probationary period? If he really doesn't have the experience you need, you can then legitimately dismiss him during the first year of employment relatively easily. If he does, well your fears were unfounded.

Regarding the sick leave, I think that the difficult lesson here is that charities (and other small employers) cannot afford to be too generous with company sick pay, because in all honesty they can't really afford to pay it for a long period.

the reference provided the information regarding attendance/sick leave

yes - will have to see how it goes

I am surprised he didn't mention it, however he likely has faced a negative reaction in the past.
My brother has been very ill with cancer and found it extremely difficult in returning to his employer as they demonstrated a reluctance to welcome him back despite his return to health. I mention this to explain the remark they would employ this person if they found a "suitable role".
My brother's employer had no confidence in his abilities on his return based purely on his illness. Yet he had been the most highly qualified, and hence one of the most valued employees until his illness. He feels that the organisation he worked for did not want to waste their time on him in case he became ill again. Eight years on he is fit and well and his "valued status" has returned. It is unfortunate for those that have been seriously ill, that they face this hurdle on top of their recovery.
I am not trying to guilt trip you into employing this man, just trying to let you see the other side of the coin. I would be very surprised if he was applying for work and was not fit and well and ready to return. Also his employers remark may not be a reflection on his abilities.
A probationary period may determine this.
I also think you should heed Flowerybeanbag's advice re the DDA act.

Surely you must have interviewed him and determined from that whether he had the relevant skills and experience to do the job or not? Did he lie at the interview?

First lesson here. Do not ever offer a job subject to references. It puts the referee in a very difficult position, because if you come back and say actually no we don't want you they know exactly why, and it puts you in a very difficult position because you have to say why you are withdrawing your offer, and you could be subject to challenge. You can modify your offer, put in place probationary periods, and it might be wise to discuss flexible working or other ways to reduce potential stress. Was there only one reference? I think vague references should always be followed up with phone call, as they are alarm bells for me (as are overly fulsome ones).