Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Applying for internal vacancies while on long term sickness

  • 12-05-2024 6:10pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 260 ✭✭


    ive retired recently but I was out sick for quite a few years prior.
    during that time there were lots of internal vacancies that I was qualified to apply for.
    if I had applied for these vacancies I’m sure they couldn’t have not hired in the basis of not being available due to illness. Wouldn’t that be discrimination I would take up the position when I notionally returned.

    It would have increased my final salary and pension contributions



«1

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,165 ✭✭✭El Gato De Negocios


    So you think that while being unable to work due to illness you should have been able to get a different job, paying more and presumably remaining unable to work?

    Is this a piss take?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,471 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    I have to be reading this wrong. You retired after years on sick leave and wonder why you might not have been successful in internal competitions while you were absent? They would never have shown your sick leave as the reason for your failure.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,341 ✭✭✭herbalplants


    Of course you shouldn't be considered for those internal roles. The reason they are advertised was for getting someone to do the work!! Yet you feel you would be discrimanted. Strange mentality

    Remember the shills only get paid when you react to them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 277 ✭✭Avatar in the Post


    Excluding the Public Sector, which I’m not very familiar with you can be let go if out for sick reasons (as part of a process). I imagine the PS is different, but I cannot believe they cannot take into account when promotions are available.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 277 ✭✭Avatar in the Post


    Also, being sick is not a protected category re discrimination. A pregnant women is probably closest, but that’s not an illness.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 893 ✭✭✭doc22


    Excessive sick leave does limit promotions , 56 days over 4 years would limit promotions due to the percieved lack of ability to provide effective service……………….



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 260 ✭✭LimerickGray


    Are there laws in place that state that? As illogical as it seems,

    If someone it still employed then they should be allowed to apply and get promotions The employer would not know when the employee might return to work and shouldn’t be an issue in an interview anyway

    I



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 259 ✭✭maneno


    if you are out sick you are not available for work so definitely should be an issue if going for a promotion



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,229 ✭✭✭893bet


    I have no doubt the OP is in public service.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 277 ✭✭Avatar in the Post


    Correct, nothing stopping you applying for the job. But I’d have a hard time thinking even the PS would consider you a serious candidate.

    You seem to think you’d have the promotions in the bag, why?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 782 ✭✭✭RonanG86


    It'd be absolutely possible for someone on sick leave to top a panel for promotion if they put the prep in. (Whether someone could be too sick to work but could still be able to put the prep in is another matter that I'm sure everyone will have opinions on.)

    That being said, if the OP didn't even apply, I'm not sure why they're asking this question.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,236 ✭✭✭nachouser


    ...

    Post edited by nachouser on


  • Registered Users Posts: 181 ✭✭Will0483


    Wow, this kind of post just shows you how absolutely batshit crazy things are normal in the Irish public service. Anyone on several years sick leave,shouldn't be getting any salary let alone worrying about promotions.

    Time for massive tax cuts as the Government is just setting billions on fire for no return.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 396 ✭✭StormForce13


    I know exactly what you mean. I feel exactly the same way about the National Lottery. It's very unfair that I can't win simply because I couldn't afford to buy a ticket. In fact it's definitely discrimination - it's time for me to phone Joe Duffy and complain.

    Post edited by StormForce13 on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 782 ✭✭✭RonanG86


    Public Sector workers get 3 months full pay and 3 months half pay (subject to a max of 6 months paid sick leave in a rolling 4 year period) when sick. Thereafter they have to claim illness benefit like any other employed person if still out.

    I assume the OP did this.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 277 ✭✭Avatar in the Post


    Teachers may be different. It’s 6 months full pay, 6 months half pay, and I think a further period on 1/4 pay. But they need to prove serious illness.


    Illness benefit deducted.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,562 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    Is it discrimination that I might not have gotten a job I didn't apply for anyway back in the day?

    When can I sue the ba$tards?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,237 ✭✭✭witchgirl26


    You would have been able to apply for the job but likely that you would have had the application rejected because you weren't available to work. It's not discrimination as being sick isn't a protected category. I know a few people who applied for more senior positions while on maternity leave & because the role was expected to commence after their return date (or very close to it that movement was possible), they were interviewed & some were successful.

    While you're on sick leave there is a level of protection for your job without your organisation however it doesn't follow that you can apply for roles you can't fulfil and expect to be able to get them. Ultimately someone else with similar experience/qualification would always beat you to the role as they would be available. No manager is going to hire someone that may never be able to take up the position.



  • Registered Users Posts: 198 ✭✭AnnieinDundrum


    so did you apply?


    if you did and didn’t get the job did you appeal?


    if you were out of the loop regarding information, eg because you didn’t read your work emails or the job notices in the paper I can’t see how that was the employer’s fault.


    maybe you didn’t have access to work emails and they should have written to you about the vacancies.

    Can the company contact you while you are out sick? Thin ice there I think.



  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,486 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    You are the one coming up with this nonsense so go research it and waste your own time.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 69 ✭✭watersleticia


    wow shows you don’t actually now anything about the Irish public service.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 260 ✭✭LimerickGray


    I’m not in public servic. Well I wasn’t



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 260 ✭✭LimerickGray


    no



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 260 ✭✭LimerickGray




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 260 ✭✭LimerickGray


    I’m not saying that. I’m just wondering if I could/ should have applied for vacancies that I was qualified for. Thus increasing my pension and retirement income.
    I worked in a large IT company and had a brain injury that precluded from doing certain aspects of my job. There was an income protection scheme in place that paid out if I could do my job.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,435 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    'congratulations! the job is yours, when can you start?'

    'uhhh…'



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 260 ✭✭LimerickGray


    this wasn’t meant to upset anybody here. Perhaps I have too much time on my hands these days to ponder the what if scenarios of the past but it is hard to be forced into retirement in your 40s.
    this was a post with genuine intent and only seeking information. Sorry again if it upset you.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,837 ✭✭✭tea and coffee


    If you didn't apply, you'll never know. Who's to say whether you would have been considered or not, and even if you were whether you would have been successful at interview. It's a whole lot of What Ifs.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 396 ✭✭StormForce13


    Presumably the "information" that you were seeking was as to whether or not you could take a case against your former employer for discrimination not considering you for promotion to positions that you didn't apply for!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,754 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    IF you had applied, and they ruled that you being on sick leave was a barrier to promotion, you might have been able to take a case, but since you never appled, there is no case to take. The sole reason you were not promoted in that you did not apply.

    You said you were out sick "for quite a few years". Would you have gotten any annual salary reviews in this period ?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,754 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    You never mention in your origional post that you had taken early retirement.

    Without prying into the nature of the disability, If the new role would have make it easier for you to return to work then certainly you would/should have been able to apply. One might even argue, if a more suitable role existing that would accomidate the disability, then some might argue that they should have activily engaged with you to aid your return to work, but unless they activily prevented/discouraged you from seeking a new role, then then is no case for anyone to answer.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 260 ✭✭LimerickGray


    part of the their long term illness scheme included a 3% increment yearly.
    I suspect they would allow me aren’t an interview as they knew it would be difficult for them to refuse promotion as it might look like discrimination on disability.

    the have a yearly review and I requested to participate even though I was not in work. I believe this was an en entitlement. They requested proof of captivity to participate and I couldn’t provide it easily - cost would be prohibitive to me to have reports written etc so I gave up. Odds are stacked in theirvfsvour.
    Salary increases are not based on individual performance but rather I. Company. Most in my dept for average 25% increase yearly.

    I guess attrnding an interview would be that same. Huge hoops to hop through to prove competence. I had brand damage and can’t speak well and balance issues. I’m an impressment to them I suppose. Sorry for starting this.
    One vacancy I should have applied for went to someone with 18months experience and the bare minimum of qualifications. I had +++ on this would have done well. Regardless.



  • Registered Users Posts: 198 ✭✭AnnieinDundrum


    I think I’d be hacked of if I applied for a job and watched a colleague who was on disability leave get it. Especially if they didn’t show up for the actual job later, not sure that could actually work. How can you appoint someone who has already sent proof of their inability to work?

    Maybe they should have sent you a notice of all the vacancies, I know we do that for anyone on say maternity leave, but we had someone on long term leave and while there was an annual letter to him which may or may not have included details of vacancies. But expecting him to come in and attend an interview would I think have been extremely unfair.

    As for you being better qualified, to prove that, you would also have to prove that you were able for work, thus ending your leave and then you’d have been the same as the other candidate I guess.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 260 ✭✭LimerickGray


    i think that might be correct but laws don’t quite see it like that They don’t have to change my position to allow me return and that is why I had to leave

    Medically unfit to attend and interview or a department performance review is the tactic



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,237 ✭✭✭witchgirl26


    The problem is you would have had to show you were medically able to return to work in the new role in order to get those increases. They won't just give them to you because you're qualified enough. You would have had to attend interviews and also be in a position to take up the job itself. They wouldn't just give you the promotion & then have you off again on medical leave. That would leave them back where they started without someone to do the role they were hiring for.

    Put yourself in the hiring managers position. 2 candidates. Both similar qualifications. 1 maybe has more experience but they're currently on long term medical leave and there's a question mark over their ability to return to work. The other has a little less experience but is available to work. Which would you choose?

    Also 3% increment on salary is actually pretty ok. I know people not on medical leave who are getting less in yearly increments.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,435 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    as per the above, i assume it would raise the question of 'what makes you medically fit for this job, when you were medically unfit for the last?'



  • Registered Users Posts: 198 ✭✭AnnieinDundrum


    actually did the OP ever apply?

    Were the jobs advertised outside the organisation? Or if it was internal did they check their emails?


    im not sure how the practicalities would work. We aren’t allowed attend the office if we are on a sick cert. So how could you even attend an interview? I guess it could be offsite.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 277 ✭✭Avatar in the Post


    check out your OP. Try and keep your story consistent next time.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 277 ✭✭Avatar in the Post


    You’re not in the Public Sector?

    Okay, this is simple. No, you definitely would not be entitled to promotion while out long term sick. In fact they could have legally managed you out.


    Instead, they were decent and had Income Protection so that you would be taken care of for the rest of your life. Employers don’t need to provide social services, but you’re not alone. I’ve come across more employees than I care to think about that are institutionalised into thinking a company is there to take care of them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 277 ✭✭Avatar in the Post


    Reading further, companies have a defence of ‘dignity in the work place’. This can be used as a defence for not putting someone with a disability/brain damage, out sick for years on sick leave through an arduous interview process.


    Also, BEFORE they could allow you back to a work setting their insurance company policy would demand you prove you can come back to work. THAT would have meant you losing out on your income Protection money… and you still might not have got a job. Since you were out on long term Income Protection the company had no obligation to hold your job.

    TL/DR they did you a favour



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 260 ✭✭LimerickGray


    someone friendly in the HR department told me off the record that if I was ever to attempt to return to work, then they would make me redundant for inability to perform duties. Regardless

    Thanks all



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,493 ✭✭✭tohaltuwi


    A long time ago in the general public services there might have been actually some truth in OP’s question, which I presume to be a p1$$take in present times. I have known of more than one case of somebody getting promoted in something of these circumstances, to beef up the pension. A very long time ago the Civil Service, people were commonly promoted to a job they simply could not have done, just before retirement, in order to get the increased pension.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 277 ✭✭Avatar in the Post


    Until the person in HR was told to do their job and exit you.

    But, if you were guaranteed redundancy why didn’t you take it. Or, was your ICP worth more to you over the years?

    You were also of the opinion you were guaranteed promotions if you wanted it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 277 ✭✭Avatar in the Post


    As you say it’s now average and not final and the OP said they were not in the CS.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 260 ✭✭LimerickGray


    no. The illness that I was on long term sick leave, was not the same illness I had to retire. Different scenarios sadly.
    I would have gone back to do the job but I could speak coherently or “normally”and that was a requirement for the role. I would have applied for roles that didn’t require speaking and were not as taxing. It wasn’t just about money.
    i might have gone on forever on the income protection as I’m getting less income now.



  • Registered Users Posts: 198 ✭✭AnnieinDundrum


    some older pension schemes included income protection for long term sickness.

    Finding a new role, one more suited to your abilities now would have been a nice thing to do, maybe a recruiter can help. Employers aren’t obliged to do that but some do.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 277 ✭✭Avatar in the Post



    You didn’t apply when you could, so pointless speculating. If it’s any consolation it may not have been as clear cut as you consider.

    Basically, WHY didn’t you apply if you felt up to it?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 244 ✭✭Immaculata


    I'm sorry you were ill or otherwise medically unable to work but without wishing to be uncharitable, one could wonder how one could expect you to be simultaneously too unwell to work but well enough to do an interview?



  • Registered Users Posts: 198 ✭✭AnnieinDundrum


    I can see how someone can be medically unfit for their job, and there’s another one that will work for them. Eg maybe the current one involves standing and the new one doesn’t. And a caring employer with an interest in employee welfare, and perhaps a desire to retain experienced staff, might look at moving them.

    but that’s at a point in time and is more likely to come from an individual member of staff with this motivation rather than a company policy in my experience.


    if you are absent and out of sight for a period you get forgotten simple as that. And if you want to return to work you have to manage it yourself and bang on doors and keep visible. Let people know that you are keen to return, they’d be accused of harassment if they chased you to show up for interviews etc.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,237 ✭✭✭witchgirl26


    Ok you can't make a person redundant, you can only make a role redundant. And that would take a while and they would not be able to hire anyone into that role again because the role is what is made redundant. You would have possibly been let go if unable to perform your duties. And they can't predetermine that before you go back because there is a whole back to work process when someone has been off on long term medical leave. But as a private business they don't owe you a promotion while you're off and can decide that if you are unable to fulfill the role that you can be let go. You wouldn't have gotten a redundancy package.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement