Is a period reason to take sick leave?

lazygal

I overheard someone saying they take sick leave every month because they have bad periods. Which got me wondering, is it a reason for sick leave? I've not taken any sick leave during my pregnancy, even when I had serious morning sickness. How do employers feel if a woman takes sick leave for reasons associated with periods? Is it a legitimate reason?

Tigger99

Well if they are really bad I don't see the problem

My baby sis is often crippled with back and period pain that no painkillers or the pill can change. She can hardly walk.

Eviledna

lazygal wrote: »

I overheard someone saying they take sick leave every month because they have bad periods.

You sort of answered your own question there. Some women suffer far worse than others during their period, people with endometriosis or pcos etc can be bent over, vomiting, and basically far worse than a bad cold or other equivilent "valid" reason for sick leave.

And tbh, valid is a particularly iffy word here, sick leave is not to be taken lightly, but employers have to be very very careful about the way they deal with sick leave. At the end of it it's down to the employment contract and Irish law, but a rule of thumb if you can get a doctor to issue a cert for it, it's valid.

As someone who used to have severe difficulties with the TOM through school and college, and now I don't thanks to the POP pill, I can't stress how diffent one person's experience with bad periods is to another. It's not something to be flippant about, because if you've never really suffered you might find it hard to imagine how it's worth taking a day off. But at the end of the day one person's justification for taking a sick day is between them and their employer, only.:)

Storminateacup

I used to have to take the 1st day of my period off school and college. All the other days of my cycle were fine, but that 1st day, I would be running a tempreture, I'd have diahoreia, I'd feel freezing, and I would actually vomit. I was sent home a lot from school because of it.

2nd day, I'd be crampy but I wouldn't be ill.

I guess it's different for everyone but don't underestimate how awful one can feel during their period. I used to even take motilium which didn't help jot.

Posy

Well I can't really judge from an employers view, and I've always sailed through that time of the month. But one of my friends has polysystic(?) ovaries and has always suffered from really painful periods, to the extent where she'd be curled up in bed for two days every month popping prescription painkillers and crying with the pain.
It's like backpain or something- you can't medically prove that you have really painful periods, but if they're so bad that she needs time off work every month I would think she'd need that checked out by a medical professional.
If her period always came on a Friday the boss might be a bit suspicious!
Legally, though, I don't think there's anything you can do if someone takes one uncertified sickday every month. I'd feel sorry for her if they're really that bad.

nicechick!

It properly more common then we think for all of us its so different, for me I suffer terrible luckily for me I work in Retail and know my cycle so well at this stage that I try to take my days off around it though there are times I get it wrong and am forced to take the occasional day

If someone is taking 1/2 days per calender month in sick leave due to the same illness it properly may potentially become a performance related issue purely as its so ''regular'' or persons may be forced to back it up with a sick cert or broach the subject with there manager

Kooli

If you're sick, you're sick I would have thought.

I don't see it as any different to asking 'is a stomach ache a good enough reason to take sick leave?'

What's your own opinion Lazygal? Do you think that if a sickness is caused by the womb it's not a 'real' sickness?

Tigger99

lazygal wrote: »

I overheard someone saying they take sick leave every month because they have bad periods. Which got me wondering, is it a reason for sick leave? I've not taken any sick leave during my pregnancy, even when I had serious morning sickness. How do employers feel if a woman takes sick leave for reasons associated with periods? Is it a legitimate reason?

Umm if they have bad enough period pain to take the day off sick then its a reason for them, its not really anybody else's business.

Now I could be completely off but Im getting the impression from your post that because you didn't take sick leave with serious morning sickness that you are going to make a judgement on those that do for period pain. Sorry but it just comes across wrong:(.

Its curious that you didn't take time off for serious morning sickness, did you feel that you couldn't justify it because it (and period pain) are only the domain of women? I know women that ended up in hopsital on an iv drip for dehydration because of morning sickness, it can be dreadful from what I hear.

The reason im wondering this is Im genuinely interested if some women (even having experienced it) wont take time off for bad sickness just becuase its female related?

lazygal

I didn't have hypermesis-that's the morning sickness that would land you in hospital, I just had some vomiting and a lot of nausea which comes and goes. I guess I've always been a 'just get on with it' person, unless I had a temperature or communicable illness I would always have been sent to school and I am the same with my working life, I've only taken time off for a back injury. I had very painful periods myself and was on the pill for them, but I still went to work. I know some women can't though, physically its not possible, so it is an illness. I just thought it was an interesting debate for the Ladies' Lounge more than anything else!

wes31

a bunch of victor meldrews

Paddy Bateman

Kooli wrote: »

If you're sick, you're sick I would have thought.

I don't see it as any different to asking 'is a stomach ache a good enough reason to take sick leave?'

What's your own opinion Lazygal? Do you think that if a sickness is caused by the womb it's not a 'real' sickness?

But surely this advocates sexism at work as men won't have the same issue

Maple

wes31 wrote: »

a bunch of victor meldrews

This is the Ladies Lounge. I suggest you read the charter and find yourself a good dose of cop on before you post here again.

Maple

angel01

The odd time would be acceptable but if you were to do this every month, that would be 12 days and if I was calling in for that many sick days over the course of a year, I think they would be giving me a disclipinary! :eek:

KittyeeTrix

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

But surely this advocates sexism at work as men won't have the same issue

I don't think it would constitute sexism.....
As a female you can be through no fault of your own be unfortunate to suffer painful periods which may require time off.....

Paddy Bateman

KittyeeTrix wrote: »

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

But surely this advocates sexism at work as men won't have the same issue

I don't think it would constitute sexism.....
As a female you can be through no fault of your own be unfortunate to suffer painful periods which may require time off.....

But if a male and a female of equal ability were going for promotion then the one less likely to take sickies should get the job?

Neyite

I think it really depends, to be honest. I used to have a very upset stomach and faint with the pain, but as I got older they seemed to get a little better to cope with, but every third one would floor me. I still just went into work despite it being the last thing I wanted to do. Lets face it, who does want to go into work when your period comes?

I worked with a girl who would take 2 days off every month without fail. All her workload for those days landed on me, and after a year or so I was privately getting kinda annoyed, especially since she freely admitted that she never went to a doctor to see if there was anything more serious at play (and had no intention of doing so), and never took anything, not even a paracetamol for the pain. When work started asking her for certs she refused to go to a doctor, or get certified, and walked out soon after.


I do think that she was putting it on a bit, especially since she always seemed to get her period on a monday and tuesday, and one wednesday she came in, having gotten engaged while out sick with her period.

I have worked with a girl who had endometriosis and would be in utter agony every month, but she had a great work ethic who never took a single day off due to that reason. I worked with her for 3 years before she happened to mention it. They were just very different people I guess.

So for me, if they were diagnosed with severe period pains then grand, I dont have a problem with them calling in sick.

KittyeeTrix

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

But if a male and a female of equal ability were going for promotion then the one less likely to take sickies should get the job?

That would be sexism to deny a female the job I would think on the basis she gets periods...

cee_jay

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

But if a male and a female of equal ability were going for promotion then the one less likely to take sickies should get the job?

No, but the person with the least amount of sick leave would get the job, all other things being equal.

Novella

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

But if a male and a female of equal ability were going for promotion then the one less likely to take sickies should get the job?

In the same way that a woman may suffer from extremely painful periods, a man could suffer from frequently occurring migraines though. Just because a man isn't going to be taking time off due to a period doesn't mean he won't ever be sick.

Princess Peach

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

But if a male and a female of equal ability were going for promotion then the one less likely to take sickies should get the job?

I don't think it would be based on the likeliness that a woman will in the future take sick leave because of this. But if she had a monthly habit of it it probably would affect her advancement in the job. Is it fair? Probably not but that is not how most businesses operate in the real world sadly.

I think if I was an employer I would be a little skeptical about this excuse. I would probably insist it is accompanied my doctors notes saying no treatment works. I'm not accusing any woman in particular of exaggerating, but it could be an easy excuse to use to get a couple of days off work every month.

mood

It would obviously depend on how bad symptoms are. I have a few years of serious pains. i would wake at 3am crying the pain was so bad. Strong perscription pain killers didn't help at all. I also passed out a few times. Now there is no way I could have worked or even got to work in that condition. Some how my period always arrived at weekends so it never really effected my job.

iguana

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

But surely this advocates sexism at work as men won't have the same issue

No more than allowing men with prostate or testicular cancer time off work.:rolleyes: Men and women have different bodies, there are many illnesses that are exclusive to one sex or the other. People taking time off for for an illness that only one sex can get is not sexism. In fact the opposite would be true, not allowing people time off due to illness that only affects their sex would be sexism.

Paddy Bateman

iguana wrote: »

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

But surely this advocates sexism at work as men won't have the same issue

No more than allowing men with prostate or testicular cancer time off work.:rolleyes: Men and women have different bodies, there are many illnesses that are exclusive to one sex or the other. People taking time off for for an illness that only one sex can get is not sexism. In fact the opposite would be true, not allowing people time off due to illness that only affects their sex would be sexism.

I see so period pain = cancer ? Interesting point of view

Stheno

iguana wrote: »

No more than allowing men with prostate or testicular cancer time off work.:rolleyes: Men and women have different bodies, there are many illnesses that are exclusive to one sex or the other. People taking time off for for an illness that only one sex can get is not sexism. In fact the opposite would be true, not allowing people time off due to illness that only affects their sex would be sexism.

I'm sorry but having suffered through horrendous periods as a teenager that caused me at worst to faint and .at best to feel like a zombie, I would never ever equate period pain to cancer, particularly having had very close relatives die as a result of cancer.

I actually can't think of many illnesses that may cause you to take time off work that are gender specific apart from cancer of gender specific organs and the likes of severe period pain, the difference is that with cancer you've no real choice, with period pain one can investigate several different ways of preventing or limiting the impact.

I worked in one organisation and with one department we actually planned for the female members of the team to be off due to period pain as they would ring in and claim that was their reason not to be in. One member of staff rang in so often with this excuse they were sent to the company doctor.

opinion guy

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

But if a male and a female of equal ability were going for promotion then the one less likely to take sickies should get the job?

For all you know as a potential employer the man could suffer from chronic back pains that for one week a month becomes debilitating and the woman might be a career woman who had a hysterectomy so as to never have kids.

There is no way to know who is more likely to take sickies.

Paddy Bateman

opinion guy wrote: »

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

But if a male and a female of equal ability were going for promotion then the one less likely to take sickies should get the job?

For all you know as a potential employer the man could suffer from chronic back pains that for one week a month becomes debilitating and the woman might be a career woman who had a hysterectomy so as to never have kids.

There is no way to know who is more likely to take sickies.

Way to go with the unusual examples...

A friend of mine suffered really really badly with period pain but just "got on with it" as lazygal put it, but it only meant she was physically in work but sure she was no use to anyone. Then one day she collapsed in the office and ended up having to have an op to have fibroids and huge cysts removed. So while I've never had to consider taking a day off at that time of the month, I would never think twice about someone else doing it. Everyone is different and what makes one person sick, may not make another person sick.

opinion guy

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

Way to go with the unusual examples...

The back pain is NOT an unusual example.

Whilst hysterectomy in younger women is unusual, using the pill isn't, and that in and of itself can prevent, or greatly reduce the severity of periods.

The point stands. You can't predict by virtue of gender who will be taking more sick leave.

Paddy Bateman

opinion guy wrote: »

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

Way to go with the unusual examples...

The back pain is NOT an unusual example.

Whilst hysterectomy in younger women is unusual, using the pill isn't, and that in and of itself can prevent, or greatly reduce the severity of periods.

The point stands. You can't predict by virtue of gender who will be taking more sick leave.

What has back pain got to do with anything? Men and women suffer from it equally

opinion guy

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

What has back pain got to do with anything? Men and women suffer from it equally

What actually is your point or are you just trolling ?

Micky Dolenz

If a person is sick they are sick. I would have sympathy with the worker and employer if it was a monthly occurrence, far from ideal for either party.

Paddy Bateman

opinion guy wrote: »

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

What has back pain got to do with anything? Men and women suffer from it equally

What actually is your point or are you just trolling ?

I have made points already you have comments on those points with irrelevancies. I know not why

Kooli

opinion guy wrote: »

What actually is your point or are you just trolling ?

I'm wondering the same thing?

Can't tell if you're saying that men are victims of sexism because they don't 'get to' take sick leave that women get.

Or that women are victims of sexism because they shouldn't be hired in case they are one of the women (small minority) whose periods are so bad that they can't work.

Neither makes sense, to be honest

opinion guy

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

I have made points already you have comments on those points with irrelevancies. I know not why

You've made statements left open to interpretation. You haven't actually made any points excepting that you seem to be implying women will be sick more often because they have periods. My point is you can't tell based on gender who will be more likely to be sick. I'll take it then that you concede my point. Good day to you, Sir.

Kooli

Neyite wrote: »

I worked with a girl who would take 2 days off every month without fail. All her workload for those days landed on me, and after a year or so I was privately getting kinda annoyed, especially since she freely admitted that she never went to a doctor to see if there was anything more serious at play (and had no intention of doing so), and never took anything, not even a paracetamol for the pain. When work started asking her for certs she refused to go to a doctor, or get certified, and walked out soon after.

Do you mean she was asked to provide a cert for each absence, or to provide a cert once? If it was once, then fair enough she should have obliged. But if they wanted it to be certified, I'd be pretty annoyed to have to pay 60 quid every month to go to the doctor to tell me what I already know.

Paddy Bateman

opinion guy wrote: »

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

I have made points already you have comments on those points with irrelevancies. I know not why

You've made statements left open to interpretation. You haven't actually made any points excepting that you seem to be implying women will be sick more often because they have periods. My point is you can't tell based on gender who will be more likely to be sick. I'll take it then that you concede my point. Good day to you, Sir.

Have you read the thread (or even thread title) at all?

Stheno

opinion guy wrote: »

The back pain is NOT an unusual example.

Whilst hysterectomy in younger women is unusual, using the pill isn't, and that in and of itself can prevent, or greatly reduce the severity of periods.

The point stands. You can't predict by virtue of gender who will be taking more sick leave.

No, nor can you predict the side effects, one organisation I worked in lost a very valued staff member who suffered one of the rarest side effects of the pill, a severe stroke at the age of 27

I think it's a balance issue tbh

saa

If I was an employer I would be doubtful because periods are not that bad but if your doctor has specified that in your case they are causing a huge amount of pain and are much more sever than they should be then that would be acceptable.

Now there is a minority of women who experience very intense symptoms during their period, I may be wrong but if your periods are that bad can't some women go on certain pills that can reduce the symptoms? Of course that might not work for everyone, but at least if there is a pattern to their cycle they can take on extra work before and after and put in the effort with pain management.
Fatigue can also be a big issue but its not something employers can be very sympathetic to, "Ah sure we're all tired and run down" etc.
Its not a matter of women should or shouldn't take time off, if its genuinely that bad and their working on managing and they need a day or two off that is understandable but I know a lot of people who go into work in a bad way because they are afraid of getting sacked so from this hypothetical employers view point at the end of the day if I have to get rid of a staff member, the person who is taking regular sick days off every month might become an easy target.

iguana

Stheno wrote: »

I'm sorry but having suffered through horrendous periods as a teenager that caused me at worst to faint and .at best to feel like a zombie, I would never ever equate period pain to cancer, particularly having had very close relatives die as a result of cancer.

I wasn't comparing period pain to cancer, which I would have thought was obvious. I was making the point that there are gender specific illnesses and it is not sexism to need to take time off if you are suffering from one of them. I used the two examples I used because I wanted to show up exactly how utterly ludicrous the sexism claim was.

There are numerous illnesses that either affect only men or affect men significantly worse. Alport Syndrome, Peyronie's Disease, Paraphimosis or Phimosis, Epididymitis and various testicular disorders such as ectopic testes, torsion of testes and undescended testes.

I'm surprised someone would let it go on regularly though, I think if it were me i'd be going to get checked out and going on the pill or whatever to try and mitigate it, especially if i were missing work regularly
i'm not saying it's not bad but if it's long term would they not be happier trying to get rid of it instead of being in that much pain all the time

still if nothing can be done then it can't be done

iguana

bluewolf wrote: »

I'm surprised someone would let it go on regularly though, I think if it were me i'd be going to get checked out and going on the pill or whatever to try and mitigate it, especially if i were missing work regularly
i'm not saying it's not bad but if it's long term would they not be happier trying to get rid of it instead of being in that much pain all the time

still if nothing can be done then it can't be done

With something like endometriosis it can take a long time to diagnose and (if you go private) can cost thousands of euros just for that diagnosis as it can only be diagnosed through surgery. Treating it requires what is classified as major surgery. If you are lucky your doctor will do the removal in the same surgery as the diagnosis but that depends on the way their schedule is as they may not have time to continue with the surgery on that day. After the surgery you aren't guaranteed any improvement in pain, although it is likely, and then it's basically a case of experimenting with different medications to see what will work, if anything.

The treatment can also vary depending on what life-stage you are at. Most treatments are also contraceptives which is no good if you actually want to get pregnant. Other medications will improve your fertility which is really not what you want if the last thing you want is a baby but do enjoy a sex life. Some treatments are still off-license and not everyone is ok with feeling like a guinea pig when it comes to medication.

It's worth bearing in mind that an awful lot of modern medicine really is still very much in it's infancy and a lot of problems are difficult to diagnose and treat successfully.

Thoie

I think if I was having periods so bad every month that I had to take a day off work, I'd be going to the doctor to see if there was some problem that could be treated. While it seems to be compartively normal for teenagers to get bad periods during the first few years, if it went on past the age of about 16 (depending on when your periods started) it sounds like something that should be checked out.

As an employer, I'd be a bit put out if the same person was out regularly like that without going to the doctor.

Neyite

Kooli wrote: »

Do you mean she was asked to provide a cert for each absence, or to provide a cert once? If it was once, then fair enough she should have obliged. But if they wanted it to be certified, I'd be pretty annoyed to have to pay 60 quid every month to go to the doctor to tell me what I already know.

No. She had been absent 2 days per cycle over a 16 month time frame, pretty much since she started, and these sick days were always paid and never questioned or a cert requested. Between these and the occasional ordinary (eg cold) sick days she had missed and been paid for 20 days.

When a pattern was noticed by management and she was asked to provide a letter from her doctor or otherwise she would not get paid for future sick days, and she refused to comply. She freely admitted that she hadnt consulted a doctor about it and didnt intend to. She also didnt believe in taking pain meds.

Actually the company really gave her the benefit of the doubt for a long time and were willing to pay her future sick days on reciept of a letter. She chose to quit instead.

I do understand that investigation into chronic period pain can take some time and be hard and lenghtly to resolve, but the first step is the GP. If the Employer sees that you dont take your health seriously enough to even begin to investigate issues that cause your absence, I dont see how they can they take your absence as genuine.

LegacyUser

Paddy Bateman wrote: »

But if a male and a female of equal ability were going for promotion then the one less likely to take sickies should get the job?

If they have a medical condition thats been certified by a medical professional then the employer cannot discrimate....it's nothing to do with sexism but disability discrimination. Its would be same if a man suffered from something like Priapism (an erectile dysfunction where they get painful erections lasting several hours) or no different to them not being allowed to discriminate on the basis of weight or existing medical conditions like say asthma or IBS

liliq

I used to die a death each month for the first day of my period- temperature, vomitting, I wouldn't be able to walk, eat, talk, and would be almost guaranteed to pass out at least two or three times over the course of the day. No pill helped, all it did was regulate my cycle a bit more so I'd have an idea when to expect the pain.
I'd miss a day of school, college or work on a regular basis. I used to get lucky and get a few months where the first day would be a weekend day, but there'd still be at least 4 or 5 days a year where I just had to stay home.
Went to docs, got tests done etc., and they found nothing... just one of those things! Didn't start to get better til mid 20's, and even then I'd still get the odd month very bad.

Contessa Raven

I used to be really bad on day 1, bearable on day 2 and then grand after that. I regularly missed a day of school with it when I was younger.
I would be crippled with pain in my back and legs and I would regularly faint and throw up. I tried the Pill, medication and herbal remedies but nothing worked for me.
Luckily, it has calmed down a lot as I've gotten older. I rarely have bad days like I used to but every now and again I get one. Doesn't affect my work life that much at all anymore.

seanybiker

Can't really make an educated opinion what with me having a penis etc but a few of the girls I know get awful cramps because of their periods and sometimes take a few sick days.
As I said I don't know what its like but I don't see anything wrong with a lady taking time off to "get over" the pains etc.
Then I know a few other girls who have male bosses and the odd time want a day or two off sick and when they mention to male boss its their period that's the problem, he goes scarlet and sends them home. :pac:

Storminateacup

I do definately agree some girls will probably use it as an excuse, extra Monday and Tuesday off, or whatever... But unless you've suffered with severe sickness then you're not really in a position to judge. The whole "oh well i get cramps too but go to work" attitude in this thread is a little frustrating.

I've had colds, chest infections, ear infections, no voice ect and still went to school/college/work. When you physically cannot move for fear of puking, then I'd imagine work would become a problem, especially if you're working in a fast paced envirnoment and aren't just sitting at a desk all day.

I don't understand why going to the doctor would be an issue though, like in Neyites case. She does sound like a complete chancer, just quitting??

Ickle Magoo

Can posters please refrain from directly accusing other posters of trolling. If you have an issue with a post or poster then use the report function and let the moderators deal with it.

For anyone unaware, this is The Ladies Lounge, a discussion forum aimed at and for women. Anyone who hasn't already done so, please take the time to read The Forum Charter - and respect the ethos and purpose of this forum.

Many thanks.

atila

If someone is taking 12+ sickdays (and thats if they encounter no other illness all year) then the employer has the right to at least some sort of a review of the situation and the putting in place of an arrangement that is fair to both parties. The cause of the sickday does not matter to the employer , once the employer is assured that there is no misrepresentation or fraudulent taking off of days - whatever the cause of ailment is not really the employers concern once its not something related to the work.

In fairness an employer/employee contract is for a certain degree of compensation relating to a certain degree of productivity. If through no fault of the employee he or she cannot maintain that productivity then i do believe there has got to be a reassessment of pay or or other working parameters that had been agreed upon employment commencing.

Its very unfortunate when your health is preventing you fulfilling your potential output, but the issue is where should the burden fall for that lost output and in my opinion once the employer has absorbed the reasonable amount of absensce then it falls on the employee. 12 + sickdays cannot be reeasonably aborbed by an employer. This may not be truly fair or how it would look in utopia, but in 2012 Ireland thats got to be the norm.

LittleBook

I thanked this ...

bluewolf wrote: »

I'm surprised someone would let it go on regularly though, I think if it were me i'd be going to get checked out and going on the pill or whatever to try and mitigate it, especially if i were missing work regularly
i'm not saying it's not bad but if it's long term would they not be happier trying to get rid of it instead of being in that much pain all the time

still if nothing can be done then it can't be done

... because, in spite of this (which I totally appreciate) ...

iguana wrote: »

With something like endometriosis it can take a long time to diagnose and (if you go private) can cost thousands of euros just for that diagnosis as it can only be diagnosed through surgery. Treating it requires what is classified as major surgery.

It's worth bearing in mind that an awful lot of modern medicine really is still very much in it's infancy and a lot of problems are difficult to diagnose and treat successfully.

... it never ceases to amaze me how many women are like this:

Neyite wrote: »

She freely admitted that she hadnt consulted a doctor about it and didnt intend to.

Period pain seems to be something that we expect we have to put up with, and I freely admit that when I was younger I had the same attitude ... it was painful but I assumed I was the same as everyone else so I just got on with it, I just thought it was normal.

Until one day I was unable to stand up straight with the pain, I saw my grey face in the mirror and finally clicked that this wasn't "normal", went to the doctor and was diagnosed with polycystic ovaries and never looked back.