[Closed] Disciplinary for being sick

There are a number of HR experts on here with greater knowledge than me, but I'd be very very surprised if that is possible!

Our place (bae systems) has this policy. 3 periods of sick in one year and you get a disciplinary.

i had to go and see ocupational health several times following 3 seperate sick days is 6 months. was rediculous cause they were all for diferent things. the ocupational health people milked it for all it was worth telling me i had to go back every few weeks for about 4 months. would have escalated to disciplinary if id have had any more sick days i think.

3 absences in a 12 month period gets us a stage one warning so if you have 3 days off or 3x7 days off it is the same sentance stinks but does stop people taking the piss!

Tell her to speak to her union rep 😉

you can't be disciplined for being sick per se.

Presumably they don't believe she was? any reason? does she have any doctor's notes?

Shocking that it is written into some contracts...

Where I used to work we were allowed 25 days a year sick - my colleague used to use them all as extra holiday.

The company I work for does the same, there are automatic triggers for the frequency of sickness and also a maximum continuous period without a valid doctors note. Taking 4 days off in one stretch is ok but 3 individual days over 3 months triggers a disciplinary. Maybe unfair for legitimate illness but it makes people think before taking a day because of a hangover.

It will not be a disciplinary unless she has failed to follow procedures I bet as that would not be on. It will be under a sickness and absence policy designed to deal with shirkers but in order to do so everyone has to go thru it. its usually triggered by 3 non certificated sick periods in any one year which is what she has.

She will be called into an investigative meeting and I will bet (unless there are other issues) that will be the end of it once the management have heard her side of the story.

done loads of these from both sides

Thats life, you agree to the conditions of employment when you agree to take the wages.

But saying that a lot of companies will use that to downsize the workforce and its quite legal.

A bit extreme, but quite normal these days.

Stops the "Monday Morning Syndrome" a lot of people get after a hard weekend... Though of course not suggesting that at all mate of your missus!

If you're gonna be off sick, might as well take the week off, they'll view it in the same light!

What is her company policy on this?
It doesn't automatically lead to a disciplinary case where I work but it does raise alarms when anyone has more than 3 periods of sickness in a year, the company has a duty of care to endure that the work environment is not affecting the employees health.

TJ +1

it will be a contract thing and you can get disciplined but it is hughly unlikely ti lead to sacking

it all depends what is in here contract

I had the same thing at mine despite having had no days off work in the previous 6 yeas and then 3 in 3 months.

What I learnt was if you are going to have a day off you may as well have a week as it is incidents not days they count. No one seemed to actually care it was just the rules

Should not really be considered a disciplinary [ though they probably can] though ours is an enhanced return to work procedure

A lot of companies will have limits for occasions of sickness rather than actual days off. Though 3 days on 3 occasions so far apart seems a bit much for a disaplinary. Make sure she takes someone senior in with her union rep ideally.
Is it actually the start of disaplinary proceedings or is it more of a "discussion" to see what the issues have been?

not a HR expert but test of a policy would be firstly is it legal and secondly is it consistently applied - i've never worked for a co that described interviews relating to sickness absence as disciplinary usually a review - a big issue on absence from employer perspective is just after / just before public holidays
If it is a disciplinary interview then your wife has right to a third party (eg union rep)to be present

Bet they use the bradford factor. Some longwinded formula made up to allow companys H R to wield the stick

TJ's spot on.

Sounds like her line manager is a bit of a tube. Most employers have a "return to work interview" process now on the grounds it is harder to lie when you have to look somebody in the eyes.

She will have hit a trigger point, so there will be a meeting with a discussion, but it is unlikely to prompt disciplinary at this stage. That would be daft...

Back in the good old Bank of ****s, I was always on a "stage 2" attendance management thing, due to ongoing health issues, and it was quite interesting the logic of the thing. Stuff like a single day's absence being considered worse than a 3-day absence- so you haul yourself back to work as fast as possible, then find it causes you problems.

Every so often it escalated, and I'd have a conversation with a HR bod or manager that went like this:
"You're off quite a lot aren't you"
"Yes, I'm basically human wreckage"
"We'd prefer if you weren't"
"So would I!"
Highlight was being off for 10 weeks, returning to work for 2 days, basically collapsing then being off for another 2 weeks- did they say "Thanks for trying?" No they said "That's 2 seperate absences, much worse than one longer one" I'd have been better not bothering.

Eventually they would ask to speak to my doctor, and my doctor would get furious, call them names for a bit then charge them for the privilege. Then that'd reset it but next time I was off ill, off we went again.

Attendance management and disciplinary are usually very different, but 3 days in a year is trivial- it's reasonable for them to ask if there's something going on but not to treat her like she's done anything wrong.

She's just phoned me on the way back so I don't know the full details of if she has just got one or if there are going to be some meetings.

The company is having loads of issues and seem awful to work for from what I can see (its a Pharma company)

I'll see if there is a union she can join to get some support.

The strange thing is she works from home and works hard, if she wanted to skive she'd just skive rather than call in sick.

I think she may be being slowly shoved out by making her life very difficult. They seem to be on her back about everything at the moment, but a lot seems unjustified.

Ours is 3% of time off over 6 months that equates to 4 days if your full time, starts with a review, and often its just next steps, ie what can you do to improve your absence etc..

If you don't complete the next steps, or absence gets worse then it can escalate and i did send one ga once to a sacking through sickness and it was the can't be bothered on a monday morning routine.

Is she actually being disciplined or are they just investigating?

A lot of places have 'trigger points' where if you're sick, say, three times in 12 months, they look into why. It can be fairly innocuous; part of it is obviously "are you taking the proverbial" but it's also to cover their own back. Is she off sick due to work-related stress, is there something they can do to help, are you fit to be in work or should you take more time off, that sort of thing. I've seen it referred to as "capability" - are you capable of doing your job - which sounds scary, but in that case it was a trip to Occupational Health to make sure you were ok and weren't going to sue them.

Ie, it's probably not a disciplinary, it just sounds like one.

Our company has some kind of policy whereby if its 3 days off over a year you get a warning but if they are longer than 3 days each then you're fine. Think its something like that. Sorry i'm vague, I've been lucky with sickness so far!

I doubt your wife is getting shoved out, a lot of people have had warnings in my company and every time someone does we all say how silly a policy it is.

Bushwacked - Member
Shocking that it is written into some contracts...

Where I used to work we were allowed 25 days a year sick - my colleague used to use them all as extra holiday.

Bradford score take number of days off sick squared by periods of absence, if we hit 150 then disciplinary! good luck but it all depends what is in the contract I guess.

Same "3 occasions" system at my work.

It didn't take long for people to cotton on.

Everyone just makes sure that they take between 2 and 3 days sick even if they only "need" one day.

Stupid system in my opinion.

My place must be pretty good then, there's a group of about 10 people that seem to have more time off 'sick' than I have time off for 'weekends'.

I've not had a sick day for 5 years, reckon I should get a day or 2 in leiu...

I forgot to add we don't get paid for the first 3 days ethier, only get from the 4th day, which makes it worse, its better to tke a week or 2 just to get paid, we get 4 weeks sick pay at the moment and it goes up with every year of service, yet can still have a disciplinary if your off for 4 days or more, see its linked, if we pay you for not being here, your going to get hammered when you return.

But one thing to check is that proceedure has been followed all the way through, i had to do a disciplinary last week for one of the bakers at work, going through his file, one piece of paperwork from a previous investigation was missing so he got off, all i could do was give him next steps.

if there are rules on sickness then everyone has to be seen to be treated the same so that nets those that are genuine with those that toss it off. It's how the company interprets the rules and deals with people on an indiviual bases during the back to work meeting that lets you know if you work at the wrong place.

What does "diciplinary" mean in this context? Chat with line-manager (reasonable) or written warning (ridiculous)?

Munqe-chick - Member
Bradford score take number of days off sick squared by periods of absence, if we hit 150 then disciplinary!
150 its 89 where i work.

Rule of thumb regarding sickness is to investigate, get all the facts, if everything is ok, then no more action.

Pretty much as TJ says.

In my years as a line manager I figured a good technique for RTW interviews. State the verifiable facts then stop speaking. A person who isn't taking the proverbial doesn't say much, the guilty can't take the silence and come up with all kinds of flannel and excuses and justifications.

Best response I ever had was a person with a fairly legendary sickness record who looked straight at me at every meeting and calmly promised with a twinkle in their eye "I will absolutely never be off sick ever again ever, I promise, oh no siree, never, not me". Not much you can say to that...

That's the best approach I reckon !

I think she should book sick with stress.......................

I've worked lots of places that have trigger points for sickness where you get an additional interview if certain triggers are hit. These interviews consisted of nothing more than a chat to see if there were any reasons for repeated absences that could be reduced/resolved. The majority of employees used to refer to these trigger interviews as 'disciplinaries' even though they were nothing of the sort.

We have a similar scheme where I work. Two periods of sickness in any 3 month period, more than 10 days in any 12 month period etc.

It seems reasonable but it can put undue pressure on good people to come to work when they are ill, which I do not believe is in anyone's interests. And there are those people who think it is their god given right to come to work and infect everyone with their germs so they can have a 100% attendance record.

I had to laugh the other day when I met one of the staff from the occupational health team on the bus who gave me a hard time when I wanted to come back to work after one of my manic/depressive phases. I said I hadn't seen her for a while, and she replied "oh I have been off sick for the last 8 months".

I know I should take satisfaction at other people's health issues, but it certainly put a wee smirk in on face. I just hope it wasn't too obvious. 😆

EDIT I think that last sentence should have said shouldn't

lets be clear you can be disciplined and you can be sacked for being legitimately off work sick.

I managed a business where we sacked 26 employees from one branch in one year for been absent from work.

absence was recorded as the number of absence periods and as a percentage of your annual contracted hours.
everyone returning to work had an interview with thier line manager that day to clarify and record the reason for absence. if that period of absence caused the person to exceed either of the set limits the next step was an automatic disciplinary hearing..the outcome of that meeting depended on thier position in the discplinary process.

I can honestly say that although seeming draconian it was extremley fair and absences fell from circa 9% to about 4% over the two year period I managed it.

certainly all the shirkers and folk who wanted duvet mondays or fridays were soon caught out. on the positive some people with serious issues were offered private health treatment by my employer rather than wait 16 weeks for the NHS to sort them out. I'm proud of some of the things we were able to do to help some seriously ill and disadvantaged staff

at the end of a day we sign a contract with our employer they agree to pay you etc you agree to turn up. If either party fails to keep up thier end of the bargain its only right they are held accountable.

Only 2 occurences of sick time allowed in a rolling year permitted for us with return to work interviews etc etc.

Any more than 2 occasions and you enter into a disciplinary process where you can be taken of the sick pay sceme.

at the end of a day we sign a contract with our employer they agree to pay you etc you agree to turn up. If either party fails to keep up thier end of the bargain its only right they are held accountable.

My old workplace had a similar "3 periods of sickness" rule. When it was brought in it made a noticeable difference to the attendance of my deputy team leader who up until then used to take 1 day a week off sick, regular as clockwork. Funnily enough, his health picked up remarkably under this new regime.

I had a return to work interview after an accident and my boss told me to promise that I'd never be off sick again. 😯 🙄 I said of course I couldn't promise that, no-one could. He didn't seem to think it was unreasonable. Muppet.

She's in sales - what sort of union could she join to get their support?

anyone with young kids suffers under this type of policy as they catch loads and share the wealth with the rest of the family

for coughs and colds I go in until they send me home (for some reason they don't want to work next to someone with a streaming cold sneezing constantly)

today I'm off with tonsillitis, first question at the Doc's I got asked is whether I worked in an office with air conditioning/ recirculated air....

now on a course of antibiotics

I wonder if they want me back in the office tomorrow?

totalshell - Member

lets be clear you can be disciplined and you can be sacked for being legitimately off work sick.

Oh I would have had fun with that when I was a union steward.

yes yo can have robust policies but to sack someone for being off sick is automatically unfair dismissal. Perhaps you have just missed out some step in the process or perhpas a non unionised workplace. You can remove people who are unfit to do the job but that is not the same as sacking people for being legitimately off sick.

The last place I worked had a very similar policy to stop people taking sickies when they weren't really ill. Apparently 40% of "illness" occurred on a Monday or Friday!

Apparently 40% of "illness" occurred on a Monday or Friday!

Given a 5 day week, and even distribution of illness then every day would be 20%, so Monday and Friday should naturally equate to 40% of the time taken off ill.
Unless I'm missing something?

We also talk about setting "improvement plans" which make me giggle. What can I do personally to improve my "sickness levels" as it is beyond my own direct control. Also, the whole verbiage of plans, I feel like strangling them and saying ok then where is the plan, all you are doing is setting is a target, plans are there to help you achieve targets.

Try running a small business with staff taking the piss - at times I daren't fart for doing the wrong thing and some of the excuses I've had to stomach for sickness and lateness would have been laughable if they weren't so detrimental to our business - then we get shafted hard by solicitors when trying to buy advice... 🙁

Unless I'm missing something?

Possibly just the fact that the above 'statistic' is often used as a bit of a joke statistic. Unless I'm missing something also? 8)

edit: I only knew it was a joke because I saw it here first

[img] [/img]

Wish this would happen at my company, got two slackers who take days of as they please

I'd quite like to get my lunch hours back to take a break/do some exercise, and not be expected to work evenings and weekends.
Agree companies should not have to put up with skivers but I'd like to see employers keep to their end of the bargain too. E.g. if I work a weekend, time in lieu please. Or pay me for it...

TJ.. your wrong.. sorry...
you can be sacked even if genuinely ill, and people with long term illness or long term sporadic ilness are dismissed.

if a company has followed the appropriate disciplinary process and due care and consideration has been taken at every stage then an employer is perfectly entitled to terminate employment.
with a work force of over 150,000 in the UK and recognising one of the largest trade unions i suspect that if the process was illegal you d have heard about it by now.
the wording of discplinary action was clear.. failure to fulfill a contract of employment.

Totalshell - sorry - I am right.

There is a difference between sacking people who are legitimately off sick which is what you claim and dismissing someone for being unable to fufill their contract of employment.

The former is illegal, the latter can be done. Hence what I posted above

You do not use disciplinary process for people of sick -it needs a different process

Perhaps you have [b]just missed out some step[/b] in the process or perhpas a non unionised workplace. You[b] can remove people who are unfit to do the job[/b] but that is not the same as [b]sacking people for being legitimately off sick.[/b]

So, TJ, what is the difference between 'removing' and 'sacking'?

TJ is right, you can't sack people for being off sick. Well you could, but you would likely lose the tribunal case. What is legal is to stop paying them sick pay after a certain amount of time, which can vary. I think it is 6 months in a 3 year period in the public sector, possibly a lot lower in private.

These RTW interviews and the like are the first step in the due process of what is (not very euphemistically) called "managing them out of the organisation".

They are always entitled so statutory sick pay, but the government pays that.

There is a difference between sacking people who are legitimately off sick which is what you claim and dismissing someone for being unable to fufill their contract of employment.

only in the wording, the result remains the same

You'd be hard pushed to suggest that 3 days off in 12-months constitutes an inability to fulfill their contract unless someone was dumb enough to agree that as part of their contract.

My (public sector) employer uses the 3 instances in 3 rolling months and 10 days total in a rolling year system.

This will trigger a "cause for concern" interview and any subsequent sickness (whether related or not) will trigger an "improvement warning" which lasts for 6 months, sickness during this period triggers a "first written warning" which lasts for 12 months.
Any further sickness during the 12 months will trigger a "second written warning" which lasts for 6 months, sickness during this period results in a "hearing" which may result in dismissal.

At any time after 28 days long term sickness the employee may be summoned to a workplace meeting, if too ill to attend, then line manager plus HR person have the right to initiate a home/hospital visit, this is irrespective of any medical advice or certification.

There is a review at 3,6,8 & 12 months (which the employee does not attend and to which they and their medical care team have has no input) at any of these reviews there is a decision on "can continued absence be supported" purely on the basis of a "business case" rather than a "disciplinary issue" if the decision is "No" then it usually results in termination of employment.

This convoluted and slightly intimidating procedure (for both staff member and line manager - I mean who wants to force a home visit onto a person with severe illness !!) was negotiated and agreed by a large public sector employees Trades Union

Not to mention any stress related absence as being recorded on your HR records as "mental illness", also TU sanctioned 🙄

Tesco used to stop overtime if you were off too much. I got attacked and needed a week off (week = three 5hr shifts as i was part time) went back for a week, then needed another week after an operation on my broken nose. I was banned from overtime for three months. However, i discovered that if i'd taken three weeks off straight i'd not have been banned as that is long term sick. But because i went back and did my work i was punished.

COme and work in the Social Care sector - we have terrible sickness issues and our impotent policies and senior management mean people just get away with it. And we pay them for it!

I have often used a thing called the Bradford Factor to manage absenteeism, its simply the square of the number of occasions multiplied by the number of days, and works on the basis that single days may well be avoidable absences, whereas longer periods probably aren’t.

So for example 10 single days = a factor of 10 x 10 x 10 = 1000
As opposed to 1 period of 10days = a factor of 1 x 1 x 10 = 10

Two ways of doing it, one being to reward those whose attendance is deemed to be good or better. Personally I view showing up for work as being a minimum requirement and therefore don’t go with bonuses or whatever for merely doing what is expected.

Generally I’ve interviewed all staff below the average of the group, along with all of their absence returns over the period. Usually, the process of interview alone has been sufficient to achieve a modification in behaviour. However on one occasion there was an individual who I highlighted as having consistent time off with a “stomach problem”, and therefore recommended she took the data to her GP and got a check up. It transpired she had bowel cancer and because of these actions it was identified early enough to be treatable.

Last time I did it I was managing a business that initially had absenteeism in the order of 10% and in this way we reduced that to about 1%, with a total of one dismissal, the diagnosis mentioned above, and no other negative outcomes.

I very much doubt if any company would institute a disciplinary hearing without the right of reply or defence, unless of course they want to be paying your Mrs out at a tribunal sometime later. Best bet for her is to keep a contemporaneous diary of events, it can be used as evidence later, but to listen to what is being said before passing judgement.

Where I work, 3 separate occasions of sickness within a 12 month period would trigger a meeting with line manager and HR - not disciplinary, just a "you've had 3 absences due to sickness, is there anything going on we need to know". An absence management plan may be put in place if deemed appropriate. If that was then breached, then disciplinary process could be initiated.

I agree the short self certified absences tend to be regarded as more suspicious than a block of time signed off by a doctor - it becomes very difficult to discipline someone under those conditions, as it also does with someone who has a long term health condition which is known to the company when they employ that person.

I worked in the healthcare sector too bigdaddy - the level of absence was quite shocking, and p1sstaking was fairly widespread and blatant.

I worked in the healthcare sector too bigdaddy - the level of absence was quite shocking, and p1sstaking was fairly widespread and blatant

Totally agree (unfortunately) 😕
When I was working in public healthcare sector staff would openly joke about taking their "statuatory sick days" and work schedules would be planned to take "Friday Flu" and "Monday Migraine" into account

my practical experience i'm afraid begs me to differ to TJ's response. I know of people with chronic health conditions who have been dismissed as they can no longer fulfill or be likely to fulfill any part of thier contract. I have to say that the company went to extraordinary lengths to provide support medical and financial support and thier local HR managers played the system to extraordianry lengths to maintain thier employment status.. but the end result was always the same they became ex employees.
and frankly if you ve been off work for longer than a year with no medical optomism of a return within 12 months what would you expect your employer to do? I have seen a lad who was very badly injured in a car accident have surgery paid for as his condition was worsening whilst wating for the nhs he came back to work after about three years and i,m aware of a lady with a proper bad back who was absent for over two years who had physio from the company. and ive personnally arranged for private counselling for alcholics. it works both ways.

Totalshel - the points you have missed

1) its not disciplinary
2) its not dismissal.

Yes people who are not able to fufill their contracts can have their contracts terminated as I said right from the beginning. This is very different from sacking / disciplining someone for being off sick. Its a different process. You have to jump thru differnt hoops

You also need to be aware of disability discrimination act

Really, TJ is right on this (well he has to be occassionally 😀 )

I was given a disciplinary hearing in the NHS, due to going to my grandmothers funeral and not giving them 7 days notice. I suggested to them that next time a member of the family is in the process of passing away I would ask them to hold off for 7 days so I could inform the trust.