Re: Sickness from work : Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:56 pm  

rover49 wrote:

Anyone help on this.

My wife had an accident at work and ended up with a fracture and a pot on, she has been on sick with it for 4 weeks and does not get the pot off for another 4 weeks. Her boss (local authority) rang her today to tell her that he is giving her a formal warning for her sick record (last sick was 3 years ago), which has really upset her.

Can they do this, especially as she did it working for them.

Her work mates had told her to claim, but she refused saying it was an accident and no-one was to blame. Loyalty eh!!

As a Rovers fan im sure you should know who you need to be talking to !

As said above, make sure its all documented, get the union rep in (she pays her dues, shes entitled to representation regardless)

And also go direct to HR, they will probably not know a thing about this and its some jobsworth typical council type trying to lay the heavy hand down and keep his own booty clean.

Dig out her contract, get grievance and discilinary guidleines sent to you etc etc

Re: Sickness from work : Tue Feb 26, 2013 7:05 pm  

rover49 wrote:

He phoned her to tell her of the formal warning, nothing in writing yet. Hopefully Unison will provide the representation, if not I will PM you, thanks for the offer. Your assumption on employer is correct.

I would ask her to get the request in writing for sure, in fact any half decent company would.

It might be a formal interview, not a formal warning but make sure you are fully aware of what it is.

Would think she had hit a trigger point of either a 10 day or 4 week absense, but it may just be to see what the emplyers can do to help, over 4 weeks they usually refer to occ health

Re: Sickness from work : Wed Feb 27, 2013 10:50 am  

A friend of mine who works for the Home Office has told me on a few occasions that, for whatever reason, any employee who takes more than a certain number of days off sick has to recieve some kind of warning, and have their absence reviewed. This has come about because of union pressure, apparently, as the union felt that 'taking a view' on someone's sickness could effectively equal an imbalance of treatment.

In other words, you could get situations where an employee could be disciplined for taking 'excessive' sickness, whereas another employee with comparable or greater levels of sickness wouldn't be.

It would appear then, that your wife is a victim of a policy created to weed out those who take the Mick, and I'm sure that if there is any common sense to be had, she will be all right, as long as she defends this in the right way, and doesnt get on her high horse about it.

Purely from a 'Devils Advocate' point of view though, could it be that they're suggesting she COULD be at work, if she has - say - a desk job? That said, if she has been signed off sick by her doctor and ordered to stay away from work, then they really can't dispute it.

Re: Sickness from work : Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:02 am  

ROBINSON wrote:

A friend of mine who works for the Home Office has told me on a few occasions that, for whatever reason, any employee who takes more than a certain number of days off sick has to recieve some kind of warning, and have their absence reviewed. This has come about because of union pressure, apparently, as the union felt that 'taking a view' on someone's sickness could effectively equal an imbalance of treatment.

In other words, you could get situations where an employee could be disciplined for taking 'excessive' sickness, whereas another employee with comparable or greater levels of sickness wouldn't be.

It would appear then, that your wife is a victim of a policy created to weed out those who take the Mick, and I'm sure that if there is any common sense to be had, she will be all right, as long as she defends this in the right way, and doesnt get on her high horse about it.

Purely from a 'Devils Advocate' point of view though, could it be that they're suggesting she COULD be at work, if she has - say - a desk job? That said, if she has been signed off sick by her doctor and ordered to stay away from work, then they really can't dispute it.

You might be right, it could be similar to ours at work. She did ring her boss and offer to do something 'lighter' in the office, but she was told that she couldn't, so she is sat at home climbing the walls. Of course, its all 'my fault' when I get home

Re: Sickness from work : Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:03 am  

rover49 wrote:

... Of course, its all 'my fault' when I get home

You sound surprised.

Re: Sickness from work : Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:36 am  

Unless there is more to it, your wife's boss must be a clown. He or she actually took the time to ring her with news of a formal warning whilst she is absent due to a work related injury?? Worlds gone mad.
She didn't by any chance break her leg kicking the said boss did she?

Re: Sickness from work : Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:41 am  

Ovavoo wrote:

Unless there is more to it, your wife's boss must be a clown. He or she actually took the time to ring her with news of a formal warning whilst she is absent due to a work related injury?? Worlds gone mad.
She didn't by any chance break her leg kicking the said boss did she?

Or it could be that his wife's boss is acting under orders from his boss, who is taking orders from his boss, who is taking orders from his boss, who is taking orders from a committee set up to appease the union. In other words, his hands are tied and that he is compelled to follow procedure.

He probably didn't like making the call any more than she liked to receive it.

Re: Sickness from work : Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:29 pm  

ROBINSON wrote:

Ovavoo wrote:

Unless there is more to it, your wife's boss must be a clown. He or she actually took the time to ring her with news of a formal warning whilst she is absent due to a work related injury?? Worlds gone mad.
She didn't by any chance break her leg kicking the said boss did she?

Or it could be that his wife's boss is acting under orders from his boss, who is taking orders from his boss, who is taking orders from his boss, who is taking orders from a committee set up to appease the union. In other words, his hands are tied and that he is compelled to follow procedure.

He probably didn't like making the call any more than she liked to receive it.

Poor boss. Doomed forever to blindly follow the commy unions as much as his/her heart yearns for freedom. He or she could have refused and then at the disciplinary meeting sought help from his/her union.

Re: Sickness from work : Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:57 pm  

Ovavoo wrote:

Poor boss. Doomed forever to blindly follow the commy unions as much as his/her heart yearns for freedom. He or she could have refused and then at the disciplinary meeting sought help from his/her union.

SO basically, he's damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't, in your opinion.

That's a bit silly, isn't it?

Re: Sickness from work : Wed Feb 27, 2013 1:20 pm  

ROBINSON wrote:

SO basically, he's damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't, in your opinion.

That's a bit silly, isn't it?

If this is correct: "Her boss (local authority) rang her today to tell her that he is giving her a formal warning for her sick record"

Then what he did is beyond "silly", whether he was "following orders" or not is completely immaterial. The bloke's an imbecile