[rant] Just been following up on things heard on the JV show yesterday that had me slack jawed in disbelief again!

In some jobs/sectors, if you are ill whilst on holiday, you are entitled to take replacement days holiday. I understand the principle that employees need a break, and that if the general custom and practice in an industry is to do this the employers will have provision in place to cover this. But how are small businesses supposed to cope with this one? It’s based upon a ECJ ruling, from the Govt website:

“In light of a recent European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling, the following is applicable if you become ill during your holiday or just before you were due to take it. You can ask to convert the period of holiday concerned to sick leave and ask to take the missed annual leave at a later date.

You should follow the usual procedure for telling your employer you are ill (eg letting them know as soon as you can or providing medical certificates). If you are not sure what your normal process is check your employment contract, staff handbook, or intranet.

You may be unable to take all of your holiday entitlement within your leave year because of illness. In this case, the ECJ judgment also means you may be entitled to carry forward the entitlement you would otherwise lose to the next year.”

If the tax system is open to abuse this promises to be a real headfook. We have a couple of part time employees, one who works the balance in another role elsewhere (her choice) and the other has child commitments, both great to have in the business. But this ruling has the possibilities of causing some issues for part time workers.

If they work 2 days per week, take two weeks holiday but are ill for 3 days, how do they prove it was for any of the four that they should have been working, how does an employer do otherwise. How do either prove they were ill at all as it’s all self certification for the first 7 days? And the sick pay issue for those who have paid holidays is another route to conflict.

If they damage themselves on a high risk sporting holiday (MTB/Skiing/Snowboarding etc) is that to be counted as an illness?

Most remarkable to me was that on the show was some author stating categorically that all business owners are making vast profits and exploiting their staff. Most of those in SMEs that I encounter are just getting by at the moment and trying to keep everyone they employ in a job. We lost a large US client because they contracted their marketing back into the US, I could make someone redundant but I’d rather see if we can share out the pain a bit and try and secure a new client in order to keep a good team together.

Another brilliantly thought through one size fits all ruling by the ECJ

Anyone encountered this?

This was done earlier – http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/ill-during-your-hols-no-problemget-back-from-your-employer

I thought this comment from Gonefishin summed it up nicely:

It doesn’t mean that your employer takes a hit, it means that your employer doesn’t benefit. If this weren’t in place and you were sick when on holiday your employer wouldn’t have to bear the cost of your sick leave whereas if you fell ill whilst working they would. It moves the situation from a employer gain/employee loss position to a employer neutral/employee neutral position.

Perfect summary by gonefishin.

Jeremy Vine on Radio 2 = Daily Mail journalism

I am a union rep I meet it all the time, employers moaning about the fact legislation means their workers have rights and they as an employer have responsibilities.

To be fair i also experience it when some workers seem to be unaware of what therr responsibilities are to an employer.

There was a time when employers provided housing for employees, now the state subsidies the employers by allowing employees to work for such low wages that tax credits are needed to subsidise wages.

Another brilliantly thought through one size fits all ruling by the ECJ

Heard of the Rule of Law?

Jeremy Vine on Radio 2 = Daily Mail journalism

Yup, he really annoys me.

Had an email spat with him about the cutty sark fire, he was blaming “yobs” at the time. I pointed out to him that without a proper Fire investigation you cant make accusations like that. He claimed it was obvious as to the cause, roll forward to the FI the cause was a portable heater.

Another brilliantly thought through one size fits all ruling by the ECJ

Eh? Have you even read it? Do you understand the underlying issues? Do you know whose responsibility it is to fix things if the law, correctly interpreted, produces undesirable results?

Or have just listened to some call-in nonsense on the wireless and read a three sentence summary?

Sorry if it has been done before – missed it as I was out most of Friday!!

@konabunny – clearly, as I asked if anyone could clarify what I had heard and the small amount I have read so far, I am not fully up to speed with the consequences of the ruling. The radio programme was the first time I had come across this. My main concern was how it applied to part time/job share workers. I understand that I now need to get a better understanding, thanks for your help!!

@ spooky_b329 – Must be missing something, read Gonefishin’s post a few times – how exactly would the employer benefit if the employee is sick whilst on vacation? If they are not at work, they are not at work. The employer is still paying them if they are entitled to paid holidays and at a higher rate than SSP.

@junkyard – I really hope that we do man up to our responsibilities – all personnel have had pensions since before it was obligatory, they have profit share, flexible working and a bunch of other things I believe we should provide as a responsible employer. For the most part this is met with a very positive reaction and 99% of the time it works really well for both parties.

roger – as I said in the other thread – the solution is simple: don’t pay your staff sick pay other than SSP (or at least pay less than full pay). That way there is an incentive for the employee to bear the burden of being ill by simply taking it as holiday.

@Poly- that seems equally unjust and a little punitive on good employees. As I said in the OP – a real brainfook for SMEs. Off to speak to our trade assoc’s HR specialist first thing Monday.

If they work 2 days per week, take two weeks holiday but are ill for 3 days, how do they prove it was for any of the four that they should have been working, how does an employer do otherwise. How do either prove they were ill at all as it’s all self certification for the first 7 days?

You take them on trust, just as you would if they take a sick day during normal working times. I dont see how that part is any different.

If they damage themselves on a high risk sporting holiday (MTB/Skiing/Snowboarding etc) is that to be counted as an illness?

Now this is more difficult. Do you have a policy for ‘high risk activity’ that staff might do in the evenings or at weekends? I hear some companies do? otherwise i suppose its not much different again.

Must be missing something, read Gonefishin’s post a few times – how exactly would the employer benefit if the employee is sick whilst on vacation? If they are not at work, they are not at work. The employer is still paying them if they are entitled to paid holidays and at a higher rate than SSP.

If employee is ill and ‘chooses’ to take that as one of their allowed holiday days that means at the end of the year the employer gets 1 extra days work out of them, wont they? otherwise its classed as a sick day and then they also get the day for holiday. (not sure how it works out with pay, SSP etc.)

Been like that for as long as I’ve been working (30 years now) – what else don’t you know and rely upon the JV show for?

For the most part this is met with a very positive reaction and 99% of the time it works really well for both parties.

How it should be and hopefully they reciprocate by not taking the piss.

@STATO – re trust – happy to take that as read with the team we have but it was the general principle I was questioning. Not everyone is a honest and reliable.

Re high risk sports – we do not have a clause in employment contracts but it is worth considering asking what is possible.

Mrs Cat has just pointed out that as the employee of a trust – she has a number of sick days per annum if she goes over this number she is reviewed an monitored by the HR Dept. They seem to be very sharp on this.

@b r – you mean it’s not the replacement for Business Link?

Mrs Cat has just pointed out that as the employee of a trust – she has a number of sick days per annum if she goes over this number she is reviewed an monitored by the HR Dept. They seem to be very sharp on this.

The problem with that (if your employees cant be trusted) is they will be used just like holidays. You would hope with a sensible company the HR person/group would be monitoring/reviewing a persons sick leave to the same sort of level. I suppose thats more difficult with bigger companies or very small companies.