Long term illness. What company nee to know

The Witches Cat · 01-03-2020 09:27AM #1

Hi. Have been with the same company for past 6 years. Well known airline. For the first time ever I have had to go longterm sick. My question is do I have to tell my company the exact nature of my illness?? My doctor has just been putting medical illness on work certs. An initial info much appreciated. Thanks

Stheno · 01-03-2020 09:36AM

You don't have to tell them the nature of your illness

Canis Lupus · 01-03-2020 11:44AM

One assumes your job isn't safety critical in any way and your illness doesn't affect this? Cos if you're trying to hide something important from your employer I imagine that would be different.

Mrs OBumble · 01-03-2020 02:19PM

Stheno wrote: »

You don't have to tell them the nature of your illness

Not always true: if you want to go back to work, then in some jobs they need to know about any safety related conditions

Check your employment contract and HR handbook or policies.

Augme · 01-03-2020 08:15PM

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Not always true: if you want to go back to work, then in some jobs they need to know about any safety related conditions

Check your employment contract and HR handbook or policies.

Afaik in that case the company can have the employee sent to a doctor to confirm they are fit to return to work but that's all the information they are entitled to.

Vologda69 · 01-03-2020 08:25PM

Our HR dept recently contacted all staff to remind employees that sick pay was at their discretion. They also reminded staff that it would not be paid unless the nature of the illness was stated. 'Medical illness' would not suffice. Which seems to go against Data Protection Commission guidelines.

skallywag · 02-03-2020 12:18PM

I do not believe that you are obliged to do so, but it is probably better to do so from your own perspective if you are going to be paid for the sick leave. As correctly pointed out above there is no obligation to pay for sick leave in Ireland, and you may run the risk of jeopardizing that if someone in HR etc. thinks that you are being awkward, or trying to pull a fast one.

The Witches Cat · 02-03-2020 12:58PM

Hi i have been out of work for the past month due to illness. I expect to be out for another 2 months. I have provided weekly certs to my job stating i have a medical illness but they want to know exactly what the illness is but i dont feel comfortable telling them.
do i have to tell them??
thanks

pinkypinky · 02-03-2020 03:25PM

You don't have to tell them but it's better to give some vague detail.

skallywag · 02-03-2020 04:04PM

OP, are you getting paid while out on sick leave?

If someone in my team went out for three months on sick leave, while being paid fully, then I would consider it quite odd to be honest if they were not willing to at least fill me in on the nature of the issue.

However, no, you do not have to tell them. Just be aware that being open with them will increase the likelihood of paid sick leave being continued. If a team member was not willing to be open with me (and again, just with me, meaning that nobody else in the team will find out etc.) then I will be starting to question the payment of more leave sick leave in the future.

Strumms · 02-03-2020 11:58PM

I’d probably want to tell them. I can’t see what the benefit to not telling them is. By telling them you are putting the onus onto them to at least provide support while you are out and indeed when you return to work. I just think there is more to be gained by telling them.

Best of luck whichever way you go though, and with your health too, I don’t think there is a ‘wrong’ answer here either way....

OMM 0000 · 03-03-2020 11:57AM

If you're going to be out sick long term, and you refuse to tell them what's going on, that would increase the chance of them firing you.

Management need to plan work and resources, so you should consider at least telling them ballpark what's going on so they can make arrangements.

A member of my team has been depressed about a family issue (death). He explained it to me. As a result, I give him whatever space he needs as I understand what's going on.

Another member told me about a family issue (sexual abuse) so I let her take whatever time she needs.

Another member has a bunch of physical issues which are causing pain, so I let him take whatever time he needs.

It's much easier for me to give them the time they need if I know what's going on.

But if they're just calling in sick and refusing to say why, I'd probably eventually let them go.

03-03-2020 02:08PM

OMM 0000 wrote: »

If you're going to be out sick long term, and you refuse to tell them what's going on, that would increase the chance of them firing you.

Management need to plan work and resources, so you should consider at least telling them ballpark what's going on so they can make arrangements.

A member of my team has been depressed about a family issue (death). He explained it to me. As a result, I give him whatever space he needs as I understand what's going on.

Another member told me about a family issue (sexual abuse) so I let her take whatever time she needs.

Another member has a bunch of physical issues which are causing pain, so I let him take whatever time he needs.

It's much easier for me to give them the time they need if I know what's going on.

But if they're just calling in sick and refusing to say why, I'd probably eventually let them go.

Do you not trust them?

If your question is 'what is the likely timescale for return', then you can ask that question without the prurient 'what's wrong with ya' stuff.

OMM 0000 · 03-03-2020 02:21PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do you not trust them?

If your question is 'what is the likely timescale for return', then you can ask that question without the prurient 'what's wrong with ya' stuff.

It depends on the staff member, their previous history of lying or bad behaviour, whether or not we want to get rid of them, etc.

It's actually kind of a complex issue, so I think the best thing is for the staff member to be straightforward. I don't care if you're getting arse surgery. We're not teenagers anymore. But if you're being vague and you've a history of being dishonest, it's not a great situation.

03-03-2020 03:10PM

OMM 0000 wrote: »

It depends on the staff member, their previous history of lying or bad behaviour, whether or not we want to get rid of them, etc.

It's actually kind of a complex issue, so I think the best thing is for the staff member to be straightforward. I don't care if you're getting arse surgery. We're not teenagers anymore. But if you're being vague and you've a history of being dishonest, it's not a great situation.

I understand that these situations are complex. The problem is that as a line manager, you have no professional knowledge or understanding as to what is involved in depression or physical pain issues or whatever the employee is experiencing.

Most of us love to stick a name or a label on a condition, but unless you are a medical occupational health expert, the label itself is meaningless and the impact on the person's ability to do the job is completely unknown.

OMM 0000 · 03-03-2020 03:20PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I understand that these situations are complex. The problem is that as a line manager, you have no professional knowledge or understanding as to what is involved in depression or physical pain issues or whatever the employee is experiencing.

Most of us love to stick a name or a label on a condition, but unless you are a medical occupational health expert, the label itself is meaningless and the impact on the person's ability to do the job is completely unknown.

Yes but I'm not a moron.

There's a huge difference between this:

Long term sick leave based on a note saying "medical illness". (This is the OPs situation).

And this:

Long term sick leave based on a conversation with the employee (and sick note) where she explains roughly what's going on and what sort of support she needs.

I understand boards likes to think managers are evil, but we're humans, so if you talk to us about the issue we will have some compassion and help figure out the best situation for you.

It's like if you're trying to get a sale. Meeting face to face is much better than sending a brochure.

Like, imagine Obama got a new job at Microsoft, got ill, and needed to go off on long term illness. Do you think he'd just give a note saying "medical illness", or would he do the smart thing and get his employer on board?

_Brian · 03-03-2020 04:00PM

It may be beneficial as you may need a phased return to work after your illness.

But ultimately you need to balance your desire for privacy with any benifet to them knowing, or fallout if it’s something they absolutely should know.

04-03-2020 01:11PM

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Yes but I'm not a moron.

There's a huge difference between this:

Long term sick leave based on a note saying "medical illness". (This is the OPs situation).

And this:

Long term sick leave based on a conversation with the employee (and sick note) where she explains roughly what's going on and what sort of support she needs.

I understand boards likes to think managers are evil, but we're humans, so if you talk to us about the issue we will have some compassion and help figure out the best situation for you.

It's like if you're trying to get a sale. Meeting face to face is much better than sending a brochure.

Like, imagine Obama got a new job at Microsoft, got ill, and needed to go off on long term illness. Do you think he'd just give a note saying "medical illness", or would he do the smart thing and get his employer on board?

I'm sure you're the best boss in the world, but not every line manager meets your high standard. It's great to have a trusting relationship with your employees, but it is not reasonable to expect every employee in every situation to disclose intensely personal medical details about issues that often attract huge stigma to their line manager. These could be mental health issues, fertility issues, long term illness around conditions like MS or MND. The average line manager has close to zero competence or understanding around the complexities of these issues. Naming a medical condition does absolutely nothing to improve the line manager's understanding. All it does is satisfy the line manager's human curiosity.

That's why companies need occupational health medics to review such situations, and advise the company (without disclosing medical details) on the prognosis for the employee's return to work.

OMM 0000 · 04-03-2020 01:50PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm sure you're the best boss in the world, but not every line manager meets your high standard. It's great to have a trusting relationship with your employees, but it is not reasonable to expect every employee in every situation to disclose intensely personal medical details about issues that often attract huge stigma to their line manager. These could be mental health issues, fertility issues, long term illness around conditions like MS or MND. The average line manager has close to zero competence or understanding around the complexities of these issues. Naming a medical condition does absolutely nothing to improve the line manager's understanding. All it does is satisfy the line manager's human curiosity.

That's why companies need occupational health medics to review such situations, and advise the company (without disclosing medical details) on the prognosis for the employee's return to work.

Just so I'm clear, do you think going out on long term sick leave with a note saying "Medical issue" is a smart strategy?

skallywag · 04-03-2020 01:56PM

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Just so I'm clear, do you think going out on long term sick leave with a note saying "Medical issue" is a smart strategy?

You are completely correct, it is a very ill advisable thing to do, if you want to keep your job mid to long term.

OMM 0000 · 04-03-2020 01:57PM

skallywag wrote: »

You are completely correct, it is a very ill advisable thing to do, if you want to keep your job mid to long term.

Yes, that's my entire angle: keeping your job mid to long term.

04-03-2020 03:22PM

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Just so I'm clear, do you think going out on long term sick leave with a note saying "Medical issue" is a smart strategy?

Like all these situations, the individual involved is going to have to make their own decisions, depending on their own employment, the employer policies, the culture and the people involved.

However, any employer should certainly be putting policies in place that don't require an employee to disclose medical details to a line manager. That's definitely a smart strategy for an employer that doesn't want to end up facing unfair dismissals claims.

OMM 0000 · 04-03-2020 03:34PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Like all these situations, the individual involved is going to have to make their own decisions, depending on their own employment, the employer policies, the culture and the people involved.

However, any employer should certainly be putting policies in place that don't require an employee to disclose medical details to a line manager. That's definitely a smart strategy for an employer that doesn't want to end up facing unfair dismissals claims.

The problem with your solution is 99% of companies won't or can't do this. Also, it's legal to fire people who are sick, so unfair dismissals claims aren't really an issue here.

I'm really only interested in what is real and what can work, so I can't get behind this "Medical Issues" note idea.

Something I continuously see on boards is people complaining that companies and managers are evil. Yet these are the same people who also say they refuse to do any work outside of their contract, leave the office exactly when their shift ends, refuses to answer emails or take a phone call outside office hours, etc. With this attitude, it's no wonder every manager has a problem with them. And it has nothing to do with the manager wanting "free work" out of the employee - it's the manager having an issue with a person who has a clearly cynical attitude to work.

These people then apply this faulty logic when they're sick, thinking their manager is going to enjoy or gossip about their illness, when in fact the manager is just trying to meet deadlines, avoid trouble, keep things ticking along. So the manager than gets a note in the post which says "medical issues" and the person plans to not return to the office for three months.

Try to imagine the conversation the manager has with HR and senior management. They will all be thinking this person (the sick person) is acting odd and something weird must be going on. It will definitely cross their mind to just let the person go.

But if you're a person who has "normal" social skills and a "normal" attitude towards work, if you need to be off sick for three months you'd understand you should get the company onto your side, so the conversation of letting you go won't get brought up.

This is just about normal human relations.

This is my last post as I know you won't change your mind.

04-03-2020 05:33PM

OMM 0000 wrote: »

The problem with your solution is 99% of companies won't or can't do this. Also, it's legal to fire people who are sick, so unfair dismissals claims aren't really an issue here.

This is exactly the kind of thinking that ends up with employers making big payouts.

Yes, it is legal to fire someone who is unable to do their job, provided the employer has gone through the correct procedures in reaching that decision.

Failure to go through correct procedures can result in unfair dismissals payments, even when the actual dismissal decision is sound and fairly obvious.

OMM 0000 wrote: »

These people then apply this faulty logic when they're sick, thinking their manager is going to enjoy or gossip about their illness, when in fact the manager is just trying to meet deadlines, avoid trouble, keep things ticking along. So the manager than gets a note in the post which says "medical issues" and the person plans to not return to the office for three months.

It's not just about malicious gossip. It is also about inappropriate release of information.

For an employer to even tell colleagues that an employee is out sick is a breach of confidentiality. How often do we hear managers saying 'Oh Mary's got food poisoning so she won't be in till Monday'? It is no-one's business what Mary has or why she is out. The only thing that colleagues need to know is when will the person be returning.

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Try to imagine the conversation the manager has with HR and senior management. They will all be thinking this person (the sick person) is acting odd and something weird must be going on. It will definitely cross their mind to just let the person go.

If the HR person has even a half-assed clue about HR, they won't be surprised at all about an employee wanting to maintain confidentiality of their intimate medical details.

OMM 0000 wrote: »

But if you're a person who has "normal" social skills and a "normal" attitude towards work, if you need to be off sick for three months you'd understand you should get the company onto your side, so the conversation of letting you go won't get brought up.

This is just about normal human relations.

I don't disagree with you on most of this. Obviously it depends case by case on the employer, the culture, the procedures.

It absolutely shouldn't require a disclosure of intimate medical details to get anyone one side.

Strumms · 04-03-2020 08:26PM

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Just so I'm clear, do you think going out on long term sick leave with a note saying "Medical issue" is a smart strategy?

I would think it’s appropriate to inform the employer of the nature of the issue. No I think you owe them more than ‘medial issue’ correct...

For example, someone suffering from a ‘nerve issue’ affecting their mobility, they use a stick now and cannot do the warehouse work they are employed to do, the term ‘nerve issue’ would suffice. There are ‘multiple’ medical issues that can be the cause of such symptoms. Let your employer know that you are undergoing intensive physiotherapy, 3 days a week and going to the gym twice and that in time a full recovery is expected.

Most medical conditions have varying prognosis, depending on your age, general health and wellbeing before the medical mishap and indeed your access to medical help subsequently. Personally I’m in a situation where I recovered completely from a condition that according to the doctors only about 15% of patients can recover from completely,

Having an employer googling everything related to it and forming their own opinions on what they read on Wikipedia is both irresponsible and dangerous....

NewClareman · 07-03-2020 01:00PM

The Witches Cat wrote: »

Hi. Have been with the same company for past 6 years. Well known airline. For the first time ever I have had to go longterm sick. My question is do I have to tell my company the exact nature of my illness?? My doctor has just been putting medical illness on work certs. An initial info much appreciated. Thanks

Just read this, sorry if it is to late too be of help.

First, this area is a legal minefield. Many (most?) companies have a written policy, covering absences from work. If your company has this, it should be your first source of information.

Having said that, this is my general understanding:

1. The management chain (i.e your manager, their managers, and HR) have a right to know

The general nature of the illness and

The expected return to work date.

Any issue that may impact your role, on your return.

2. It is regarded as good practice for an employee to maintain regular contact.

They are entitled to ask general questions about your illness.

They are not entitled to be overly intrusive, or press you to return to work.

3. The company can request that you attend an appointment with the company doctor or other medical professional of their choosing.

This must be at company cost.

You cannot unreasonably refuse.

The doctor can request any medical records, relevant to this absence.

You cannot unreasonably refuse, information, or to attend.

While that's the formal position, I strongly suggest avoiding any element of confrontation. It is much better when everyone is being reasonable. With extended, or repeated, absences, planning can be a real issue. This is worse where the employee is an expert in a particular discipline, with limited cover. Of course the company will want as much information as possible, so that they can work/plan around it.

(As a side note: I never asked staff the nature of their illness, they either chose to tell me, or not. I encouraged people to give me certs in a sealed envelope, addressed to HR, marked confidential, medical cert.)

Hotblack Desiato · 07-03-2020 01:12PM

I once had the opposite problem (short term illness though). Locum doctor didn't want to put nature of illness on sick note, said it was a breach of confidentiality. I had to insist, as sick pay scheme (public sector) won't pay otherwise. There is the option to send the note to HR if you don't want your boss to see it, but medical confidentiality doesn't exist in that employment.

OP if you are claiming illness benefit and the SW certs just say medical illness, they will rapidly refer you to their medical examiner.

07-03-2020 04:21PM

Strumms wrote: »

I would think it’s appropriate to inform the employer of the nature of the issue. No I think you owe them more than ‘medial issue’ correct...

For example, someone suffering from a ‘nerve issue’ affecting their mobility, they use a stick now and cannot do the warehouse work they are employed to do, the term ‘nerve issue’ would suffice. There are ‘multiple’ medical issues that can be the cause of such symptoms. Let your employer know that you are undergoing intensive physiotherapy, 3 days a week and going to the gym twice and that in time a full recovery is expected.

You don't need to tell your employer anything about the nature of your medical issue to allow them to assess your return to work. You need to tell the about your abilities, and how your illness has affected them - what you can do and what you can't do.

They need to know your functional abilities, not your medical condition.

NewClareman · 07-03-2020 06:42PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You don't need to tell your employer anything about the nature of your medical issue to allow them to assess your return to work. You need to tell the about your abilities, and how your illness has affected them - what you can do and what you can't do.

They need to know your functional abilities, not your medical condition.

That is very poor advise.

Prudent companies have written policies covering sick leave. A typical policy would be along the lines in my last post. Failure to comply with such a policy could end up with the employee being legitimately dismissed.

Mrs OBumble · 07-03-2020 07:25PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You don't need to tell your employer anything about the nature of your medical issue to allow them to assess your return to work. You need to tell the about your abilities, and how your illness has affected them - what you can do and what you can't do.

They need to know your functional abilities, not your medical condition.

That's not always true.

In come jobs, a diagnosis of certain diseases is totally relevant.

For example, a diagnosis of epilepsy following a single seizure doesn't make you functionally unable to drive. But it does make you not-allowed to drive for a certain time period.

08-03-2020 01:53PM

NewClareman wrote: »

That is very poor advise.

Prudent companies have written policies covering sick leave. A typical policy would be along the lines in my last post. Failure to comply with such a policy could end up with the employee being legitimately dismissed.

I'd bet a fiver that you can't produce an example of a company sick leave policy that says that line managers "are entitled to ask general questions about your illness".

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

That's not always true.

In come jobs, a diagnosis of certain diseases is totally relevant.

For example, a diagnosis of epilepsy following a single seizure doesn't make you functionally unable to drive. But it does make you not-allowed to drive for a certain time period.

You can't drive safely if you are liable to seizures. Your employer needs to know that you are liable for seizures. They don't need to know whether the causes of those seizures are epilepsy or some other condition.

Long term illness. What company nee to know

Comments