Contract says sick pay, employer says no

jbrst

Asking on behalf of a friend (really ).

He's employed on a temp fixed term contract of about 4 months duration. The terms of the contract state that after 3 months service employees are eligible for full pay whilst off sick, up to a maximum number of weeks per year. Just after he hit the 3 month mark he was off for a week - all certified by a GP with notes submitted on time etc - all by the book. His employer is now saying he is not entitled to contractual sick pay but he can submit his cert to Social Welfare to see can he get the illness benefit (not familiar with the exact terminology but it's the sick pay from the social welfare).

I know company sick pay is a privilege and not a right, but if his contract states he is entitled to it, can his employer refuse to honour it?

Cheers.

tenchi-fan

Your friend has a brass neck by the sounds of it.

jbrst

The virtue of him or his employer isn't really relevant to the issue that I asked for help with tenchi-fan.

gerrycollins

Sick pay is usually at the discretion of the manager. It usually says so on the contract also the fact that the sick issues just happened post the 3 months I can see how any argument would favour the manager

Mr. Presentable

I thought all sick pay beyond a discretionary two days is paid by Social Welfare in any event

Mr. Presentable

jbrst wrote: »

Asking on behalf of a friend (really ).

He's employed on a temp fixed term contract of about 4 months duration. The terms of the contract state that after 3 months service employees are eligible for full pay whilst off sick, up to a maximum number of weeks per year. Just after he hit the 3 month mark he was off for a week - all certified by a GP with notes submitted on time etc - all by the book. His employer is now saying he is not entitled to contractual sick pay but he can submit his cert to Social Welfare to see can he get the illness benefit (not familiar with the exact terminology but it's the sick pay from the social welfare).

I know company sick pay is a privilege and not a right, but if his contract states he is entitled to it, can his employer refuse to honour it?

Cheers.

The four month contract versus a number of weeks per year. Sounds like the contract doesn't apply to him

Mrs OBumble

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

I thought all sick pay beyond a discretionary two days is paid by Social Welfare in any event

Nope, it totally depends on the employment contract. Some employers will let people be on paid sick leave for weeks, or even months. Others don't offer any paid S/L at all.

Technically, I think the employer might be breaching the contract. So the employee could approach NERA or a lawyer ... but is it really worth it for one days pay?

tricky D

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

I thought all sick pay beyond a discretionary two days is paid by Social Welfare in any event

Yes by default, unless a contract specifies a different agreement.

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

The four month contract versus a number of weeks per year. Sounds like the contract doesn't apply to him

That sure seems a bit strange. To me, it sounds like they've taken a previously used contract for a longer term and changed the term without thinking properly of the consequences.

D.McC

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

I thought all sick pay beyond a discretionary two days is paid by Social Welfare in any event

The first THREE days of sickness or illness is not covered by the Social Welfare.

JustMary wrote: »

Nope, it totally depends on the employment contract. Some employers will let people be on paid sick leave for weeks, or even months. Others don't offer any paid S/L at all.

Technically, I think the employer might be breaching the contract. So the employee could approach NERA or a lawyer ... but is it really worth it for one days pay?

It does seem to be the case alright. But I wonder if the employer is thinking 'this guy is taking the pish'.

Eoin

Illness benefit is capped and you also need to have worked up a certain amount of credits; so even if you do qualify for it, it's not going to cover your actual lost pay if the company don't offer sick pay.

Denerick

tenchi-fan wrote: »

Your friend has a brass neck by the sounds of it.

Not helpful and certainly not fair. If you are ill, you are ill (presuming this person wasn't pulling a sickie) Your illness benefits and entitlements are built into your overall salary, you are not only entitled to them you deserve them - you literally worked for them. Some people take a slavish view of their rights; like they are peasants content to eat the scrapings off their master's plates. The gap between CEOs and average workers grows wider every year. Employee's need to stand up for what is rightfully theirs. I have no intention of living the rest of my life a slave to my company, and neither should anyone else.