Afraid to call in sick. :(

tatli_lokma · 27-12-2012 02:57PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

No, the interview is there to drop a huge hint not to go out sick again in the future and its designed to humiliate the employee. Companies can hardly have it both ways can they- allow a lot of sick leave but punish people who use it??

I take offence at this TBH - I conduct BTWI and I would never ever use it to scare, intimidate or humiliate an employee. It is a useful tool if used correctly. It can even be a really positive thing if done correctly as it can leave the employee who was sick, knowing that they were missed and that their contribution is valued. I know that if I was off sick for a week, and no one asked me upon my return how I was, how I was feeling now, gave me an update of what had been going on when I was off etc - I would be left feeling like no one noticed or cared that I was off.

If you are having BTWI's that humiliate or bully you then your manager is at fault, not the BTWI.

Then again, if I was the sort of person who took sick days without good cause and was pulled up on it, then I might feel a bit defensive about the whole thing. If you are genuinely sick and have a good work ethic at other times then you have nothing to fear in the BTWI.

Wanderer2010 · 27-12-2012 02:57PM

Procrastastudy wrote: »

Explained above - people feel that a week, if genuine, is fine. It's not.

This isn't a great argument. Sick days are there for an emergency not an entitlement to be used. The old blame the system argument is indicative of people who lack personal responibility. If the employee is being worked so hard they are forced to take duvet days they need to address their own perosnl wekaness or the work they are being given.

Wow, your first point, just wow...if you were off sick with a severe flu or kidney infection (for example) I wouldnt dream of expecting you to come in when you are sick and not only be a danger to yourself but possibly spread sickness to other employees, and yet you think its a personal issue to be "addressed", how on earth does it reflect badly on you if you get sick, it happens all the time to practically everyone. Just because you may not have gotten sick for ages it doesnt mean you should expect the same for everyone. Your cavalier attitude towards sickness is shocking.

A duvet day is a treat for workers, calling a spade a spade, its not like many employees are doing this week in week out (well, a few might but thats the minority) but it allows you to recharge the batteries and be better the following week, There arent many people who wouldnt take them if the opportunity was there, despite the false outcry of shock from some posters on this thread...

smcgiff · 27-12-2012 03:00PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

No, the interview is there to drop a huge hint not to go out sick again in the future and its designed to humiliate the employee. Companies can hardly have it both ways can they- allow a lot of sick leave but punish people who use it??

Companies HAVE to allow people sick leave if they produce a doctor's cert. This is for insurance reasons.

They are not designed to humiliate the employee - they are designed for a number of reasons, but this may be above your pay grade to understand (yes I know this is condescending, but some key reasons has been mentioned in this thread already).

The companies that allow a certain number of paid sick days (good companies that you think should be taken advantage of) are the ones likely to have back to work interview's built into their employee contracts. This is to protect against people of the same opinion as you.

You've already mentioned it's okay to abuse the sick pay system companies allow employees to use. They trust it will not be abused. This may be their fault as you suggest, but abusing it is still stealing.

Wanderer2010 · 27-12-2012 03:04PM

Little Ted wrote: »

I take offence at this TBH - I conduct BTWI and I would never ever use it to scare, intimidate or humiliate an employee. It is a useful tool if used correctly. It can even be a really positive thing if done correctly as it can leave the employee who was sick, knowing that they were missed and that their contribution is valued. I know that if I was off sick for a week, and no one asked me upon my return how I was, how I was feeling now, gave me an update of what had been going on when I was off etc - I would be left feeling like no one noticed or cared that I was off.

If you are having BTWI's that humiliate or bully you then your manager is at fault, not the BTWI.

I completely disagree with that. What exactly is the point of them, other than to send a message to the employee that yes, you were sick and yes, we have policies that allow you to be paid, but oh look at that 7 days sick thats quite a lot tut tut, please dont do that again. That may not be how you say it to them but it remains a fact that BTWI are nothing more than a HR exercise to put pressure on employees to not go out sick, I know what Im talking about here, its not just me either, several workmates and a few mates of mine in the private sector have had the same heavy handed message delivered to them. To repeat, you may not have used it to intimidate (even if you did you would be up for bullying) but the purpose of the BTWI is very flawed in my opinion and doesnt allow any leeway for genuinely sick people.

smcgiff · 27-12-2012 03:09PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

A duvet day is a treat for workers, calling a spade a spade, its not like many employees are doing this week in week out (well, a few might but thats the minority) but it allows you to recharge the batteries and be better the following week, There arent many people who wouldnt take them if the opportunity was there, despite the false outcry of shock from some posters on this thread...

20 days statutory leave and 9 bank holidays. Your employer is giving you a living wage and for that he expects (in general) for you to work 64% of the days in a year. There's 134 days for you to "recharge".

Procrastastudy · 27-12-2012 03:13PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Wow, your first point, just wow...if you were off sick with a severe flu or kidney infection (for example) I wouldnt dream of expecting you to come in when you are sick and not only be a danger to yourself but possibly spread sickness to other employees, and yet you think its a personal issue to be "addressed", how on earth does it reflect badly on you if you get sick, it happens all the time to practically everyone. Just because you may not have gotten sick for ages it doesnt mean you should expect the same for everyone. Your cavalier attitude towards sickness is shocking.

I dont have a cavalier attitude to sickness you do. If I had an employee out sick I want to find out why - I conduct a BTWI. Are we doing something that is causing the sickness? Is there some change we can make togeather that stops it happening again? You're the one saying it should be a note slapped on a desk and no further discussion.

If you're getting serve flu every year then it's time for a jab. Perhaps you cant afford it - perhaps I pay for it as the employer as its worth more to me that you're there. Kidney infection - perhaps you see the company GP for free and we find that there is an underlying cause we can resolve.

As humans we get sick - fact of the matter and what this comes down to is putting a figure on it. A week a year is taking the mickey if its every year. Six weeks one year due to a bad break is perfectly fine. You don't think a BTWI should be conducted in either scenario? You're simply wrong.

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

A duvet day is a treat for workers, calling a spade a spade, its not like many employees are doing this week in week out (well, a few might but thats the minority) but it allows you to recharge the batteries and be better the following week, There arent many people who wouldnt take them if the opportunity was there, despite the false outcry of shock from some posters on this thread...

I;m not going to continue to address this, frankly, daft point.

tatli_lokma · 27-12-2012 03:13PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Wow, your first point, just wow...if you were off sick with a severe flu or kidney infection (for example) I wouldnt dream of expecting you to come in when you are sick and not only be a danger to yourself but possibly spread sickness to other employees, and yet you think its a personal issue to be "addressed", how on earth does it reflect badly on you if you get sick, it happens all the time to practically everyone. Just because you may not have gotten sick for ages it doesnt mean you should expect the same for everyone. Your cavalier attitude towards sickness is shocking.

A duvet day is a treat for workers, calling a spade a spade, its not like many employees are doing this week in week out (well, a few might but thats the minority) but it allows you to recharge the batteries and be better the following week, There arent many people who wouldnt take them if the opportunity was there, despite the false outcry of shock from some posters on this thread...

I think you miss the point procrastastudy makes - occasional sickness is expected. However, taking a week off regularly is not as it indicates that you may not be fit to carry out the duties for which you were employed. Procrastastudy (if I understand correctly) is merely pointing out that whilst of course people genuinely get sick and need time off, there is nothing in law which means you are entitled to take time off for illness. And often, staff are too blase about taking time off under the false impression that you can't get sacked for being sick. You can.

Ok, so if you are a decent employer, and have a good staff member who makes a worthwhile contribution you are not going to sack them for taking a week off sick. And you are not likely to question this person's sincerity. But if you have someone who once a month takes a duvet day, or once a quarter is off for 3-5 days then of course you are going to ask questions. If that person is brilliant when they are in work, you might have a chat with them and find out that they are just unfortunate and have a weak immune system. So eventhough it is a pain that they get sick a lot, you might make allowances given their work when they are there.

But even that can cause problems - if Mary is off sick regularly, and see it that nothing is done about it, then other team members might see that as permission for them to pull sickies, sure Mary gets away with it. As a manager, you need to try to be as fair as possible for everyone, so sometimes whilst you might like to turn a blind eye, for the sake of fairness and equity you can't.

And as already explained, if someone is so overworked and undermotivated that they need the 'treat' of a duvet day every few months, then there is somethng wrong with their work environment and management needs to be aware of this and step in. Either the work load needs to be distributed differently, or training given, or more staff taken on or whatever.

Let me ask you, if you were so worn out at work that sometimes you needed a breather, so took a duvet day, would you prefer that management address the problem and illiminate it? or would you prefer to play the martyr, work yourself to exhaustion and then treat yourself with a duvet day?

BTW - annual leave is for rest and recuperation, so if you need a break and are not sick then take AL.

smcgiff · 27-12-2012 03:19PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

I completely disagree with that. What exactly is the point of them, other than to send a message to the employee that yes, you were sick and yes, we have policies that allow you to be paid, but oh look at that 7 days sick thats quite a lot tut tut, please dont do that again. That may not be how you say it to them but it remains a fact that BTWI are nothing more than a HR exercise to put pressure on employees to not go out sick, I know what Im talking about here, its not just me either, several workmates and a few mates of mine in the private sector have had the same heavy handed message delivered to them. To repeat, you may not have used it to intimidate (even if you did you would be up for bullying) but the purpose of the BTWI is very flawed in my opinion and doesnt allow any leeway for genuinely sick people.

You've already admitted it's okay to abuse the system so you can come down off your high horse for starters.

I'll give you an example, I'm sure others can supply more scenarios if required.

A food company employs Johnnie, who's out sick with an infectious disease.

Johnnie gets a doctor's cert from his local GP (you know, the one that's wiped his nose since he was knee high) to say he's okay to come back to work in a week's time. Johnnie does, and goes back to work in, let's say, infant formula. Johnnie is still infectious and contaminates the baby food.

Babies get sick and their parents sue Johnnie's company.

Do you think the owners of Johnnie's company are going to say, ah shucks, sure he had a doctor's cert, you can't win them all.

I mention the above scenario as this is the type of company that needs to do BTWI most of all, but there are other reasons (such as the bully scenario, which if not dealt with a company could be sued for as well).

tatli_lokma · 27-12-2012 03:30PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

I completely disagree with that. What exactly is the point of them, other than to send a message to the employee that yes, you were sick and yes, we have policies that allow you to be paid, but oh look at that 7 days sick thats quite a lot tut tut, please dont do that again. That may not be how you say it to them but it remains a fact that BTWI are nothing more than a HR exercise to put pressure on employees to not go out sick, I know what Im talking about here, its not just me either, several workmates and a few mates of mine in the private sector have had the same heavy handed message delivered to them. To repeat, you may not have used it to intimidate (even if you did you would be up for bullying) but the purpose of the BTWI is very flawed in my opinion and doesnt allow any leeway for genuinely sick people.

With all due respect you are talking out your bum. You say you know what you are talking about, but I have seen no evidence that this is the case from your posts.

Furthermore, you do not know how I conduct my BTWI, so you have no right to say that it is a tactic to humiliate and intimidate. I don't need to use a BTWI to intimidate or scare my staff - I would like to think that I am a good manager and as such management of staff is an ongoing thing. I don't wait til someone is so overworked that they get sick and then pull the rug from under them by intimating that they are faking it. I have good relationships with my staff and so I know them pretty well and their work ethic and attitude to work. If I had someone who I felt was like you and thought the odd sickie was ok, I would be dealing with that LONG before they ever got to take advantage of it.

If you and your workmates are getting a heavy handed message perhaps it is warranted? if you take duvet days then I would say you deserve the heavy handed approach. Not straight off the bat the first or second time you are out sick, but if a pattern is occurring then by all means. I also find it hard to believe that your view that pulling a sickie is a 'treat' is one that you hide when in work. So given your comments on here, your employer/manager probably knows full well your opinions regarding sick leave and this is probably why you get a 'heavy handed' BTWI.

Procrastastudy · 27-12-2012 03:36PM

I think it's also being missed that the outcome of a BTWI may be to send someone home because it's clear they shouldn't be back yet. Sometimes over the objection of that employee. People always harp on about colds effecting the whole work place. Well firstly we all get colds, get over it. You're more likely to get one on the bus than from work but however, where it does appear to be particually bad is where you send someone home. Not conducting a BTWI interview results in that employee making other people sick.

tatli_lokma · 27-12-2012 03:44PM

+1

I have had a staff member return to work on the Wednesday and their cert covered them til the Friday. I conducted a BTWI and discovered that they really weren't feeling better yet, but were worried that their workload was increasing so would rather be in work sick than home worrying -also they were only on a 1 yr contract and were worried that their contract would not be renewed if they were out sick for too long. So by having a BTWI it gave me the opporunity to get these worries out in the open, we discussed how the work load would be managed while he was off, what the plan would be when he got back so he could catch up. It gave me a chance to reassure him that this bout of sickness would not be held against him and to stop worrying. He then went off home and returned the following monday, right as rain and ready to go. TBH he wasn't much use to me on the Wednesday cos he was so sick. Presentee-ism is just as much an issue as absenteeism, and the BTWI is a good forum to address this.

Not all managers are unreasonable SOB's who use the BTWI as an instrument of intimidation. Some of us are even human!

Having said that, my manager never conducts BTWI and wish he would - it would give me a chance to catch up on what went on when I was off, clarify things, etc. Thankfully I have only been out sick very seldom, but I wish he would give me the time and effort of a BTWI that I give my team.

Eoin · 27-12-2012 04:08PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

although this might not be a popular view, I do think employees should take a few duvet days during the year-for the ones that work hard, they are entitled to enjoy a few days off. And if the system allows such a breach, then of course people are going to take advantage of it. I say blame the system not the employee..

And there we have it. All you've done is prove the point of the people disagreeing with you. It's your attitude that means employers need to crack down on sick leave, not the employers'.

Incidentally, you don't have to be an employer to think that abusing sick leave is wrong.

Wanderer2010 · 27-12-2012 06:54PM

I find it amazing that its the managers in this thread who are so against the idea of people going out sick, I actually had to read a few comments several times to make sure I was reading right. People often get flu so get a flu jab? Kidney infection? Go to the company doctor? Sickness is not that black and white! Someone could get injured playing soccer and need a few weeks off- should that person just never play soccer in case his dictator boss might hold it against him? Honestly, I hope none of the people here who view sickness as a weakness never gets something like a twisted knee, pneumonia (like the OP), injury etc. It would cost a company MORE if a sick employee was working and caused damage because their bully boss insisted they work even when sick..

The BTWI is a HR exercise, its implied with the process that you have cause hassle and they dont actually care what happened to you, they just want you to sign a form that effectively says "I wont do it again", bang out of order. And to the poster who says they would be surprised if they came back after a week sick to find nobody giving him updates etc, its a workplace not a creche! People dont really care about that kind of stuff, you get your appreciation in your wage. Certainly I have returned from sick leave and nothing has been said or updated, I just get back into it, the world doesnt stop when you go out and if you are that dependent on one person then thats a reflection of poor management..

Eoin · 27-12-2012 07:13PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

I find it amazing that its the managers in this thread who are so against the idea of people going out sick, I actually had to read a few comments several times to make sure I was reading right. People often get flu so get a flu jab? Kidney infection? Go to the company doctor? Sickness is not that black and white! Someone could get injured playing soccer and need a few weeks off- should that person just never play soccer in case his dictator boss might hold it against him? Honestly, I hope none of the people here who view sickness as a weakness never gets something like a twisted knee, pneumonia (like the OP), injury etc. It would cost a company MORE if a sick employee was working and caused damage because their bully boss insisted they work even when sick..

Are you going to just gloss over where you said you don't see a problem with taking duvet days as sick days? I quoted it a few posts ago in case you're forgotten.

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

The BTWI is a HR exercise, its implied with the process that you have cause hassle and they dont actually care what happened to you, they just want you to sign a form that effectively says "I wont do it again", bang out of order. And to the poster who says they would be surprised if they came back after a week sick to find nobody giving him updates etc, its a workplace not a creche! People dont really care about that kind of stuff, you get your appreciation in your wage. Certainly I have returned from sick leave and nothing has been said or updated, I just get back into it, the world doesnt stop when you go out and if you are that dependent on one person then thats a reflection of poor management..

I think you should stop digging. You're really just showing your ignorance on what goes on in jobs other than your own. Stuff can change in a week, and some people need to know (or even just want to know - imagine that!) what's gone on while they were away. It can be a casual 5 minute conversation over coffee. Just because it has an official sounding title doesn't mean that it has to be as formal process as you seem to think it is in every single company.

Wanderer2010 · 27-12-2012 07:22PM

Well as i said if the system allows it then thats not really the fault of the employee. If you saw 500quid in the ditch would you take it or hand it in to the cops, very few people would do the latter. Also, the fake outrage here really is very surprising- most people would choose to have a duvet day if the chance was there and the people who splutter at me and say otherwise are either in a very strict and unfair employment or else just pride themselves on never being sick. Ok fair enonugh the BTWI can include an update its just personally, anytime i returned from sickness I never got the whole nine yards and just waited until I was informed, different workplaces have different practices. I still think BTWI is a subtle form of bullying though for reasons well explained

Eoin · 27-12-2012 07:41PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Well as i said if the system allows it then thats not really the fault of the employee.

Yet you think that trying to get the system to not allow it is bullying. If people didn't do it, then there'd be no need to clamp down on bogus sick leave. Your attitude creates that environment, not "the man".

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

most people would choose to have a duvet day if the chance was there and the people who splutter at me and say otherwise are either in a very strict and unfair employment or else just pride themselves on never being sick.

Of course they would, and some companies allow the occasional duvet day - but out of the employee's leave. Because the employee is not sick. I'd also choose to work 10 hours a week and get the same salary if I could, but that's just not part of the agreement.

For what it's worth, my company is not a strict work place and gives lots of perks (VHI, pension, extra annual leave etc), but because both parties act like adults for the most part, we don't have an absenteeism problem.

At least now you've admitted that you think there's nothing wrong with faking sick leave, so we know where you really stand. I'm not "outraged", I just think you're dead wrong. Acting professionally is a two way thing.

smcgiff · 27-12-2012 07:44PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

I find it amazing that its the managers in this thread who are so against the idea of people going out sick, I actually had to read a few comments several times to make sure I was reading right. People often get flu so get a flu jab? Kidney infection? Go to the company doctor? Sickness is not that black and white! Someone could get injured playing soccer and need a few weeks off- should that person just never play soccer in case his dictator boss might hold it against him? Honestly, I hope none of the people here who view sickness as a weakness never gets something like a twisted knee, pneumonia (like the OP), injury etc. It would cost a company MORE if a sick employee was working and caused damage because their bully boss insisted they work even when sick..

The BTWI is a HR exercise, its implied with the process that you have cause hassle and they dont actually care what happened to you, they just want you to sign a form that effectively says "I wont do it again", bang out of order. And to the poster who says they would be surprised if they came back after a week sick to find nobody giving him updates etc, its a workplace not a creche! People dont really care about that kind of stuff, you get your appreciation in your wage. Certainly I have returned from sick leave and nothing has been said or updated, I just get back into it, the world doesnt stop when you go out and if you are that dependent on one person then thats a reflection of poor management..

I think you'll have to read the posts a few more times yet, where has anyone said genuinely sick people should be in work? You seemed to have settled on your opinion and are ignoring all the posts contrary to your opinion.

I imagine there are a lot of employees reading that are cringing at your comments.

Wanderer2010 · 27-12-2012 08:11PM

Procrastastudy wrote: »

- people feel that a week, if genuine, is fine. It's not.

Thats a pretty outrageous quote right there, people having the nerve to stay off a week from genuine sickness, and that quote from a manager, see the pattern?

Anyway, the OP even supports this point as even they have been told to "watch the sick days" as if its something they can control. Pneumonia is a very serious thing and should be treated as such. Its just a shame so many managers see sickness as a thing to be wiped out and people named and shamed. As i said before, God help you if ye get a long term injury that requires you a few weeks off, it could happen to anyone.

smcgiff · 27-12-2012 08:34PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Thats a pretty outrageous quote right there, people having the nerve to stay off a week from genuine sickness, and that quote from a manager, see the pattern?

Anyway, the OP even supports this point as even they have been told to "watch the sick days" as if its something they can control. Pneumonia is a very serious thing and should be treated as such. Its just a shame so many managers see sickness as a thing to be wiped out and people named and shamed. As i said before, God help you if ye get a long term injury that requires you a few weeks off, it could happen to anyone.

I could be wrong, but i thought he meant that if it were a regular occurence. Of course anyone one could be off for a week. If it were a regular occurrence it would be a different matter. The business has a duty to a lot of stakeholders including the other employees. If someone is continuously ill it may not be sustainable.

Re the op, he is a particular position - he's on probation. He was given good advice considering he foolishly already took two days off (even though he wasn't sick).

hattoncracker · 27-12-2012 08:45PM

smcgiff wrote: »

I could be wrong, but i thought he meant that if it were a regular occurence. Of course anyone one could be off for a week. If it were a regular occurrence it would be a different matter. The business has a duty to a lot of stakeholders including the other employees. If someone is continuously ill it may not be sustainable.

Re the op, he is a particular position - he's on probation. He was given good advice considering he foolishly already took two days off (even though he wasn't sick).

My mother has been very ill the last three months and almost died. I live on the other side of the country. I had to go.

smcgiff · 27-12-2012 08:56PM

hattoncracker wrote: »

My mother has been very ill the last three months and almost died. I live on the other side of the country. I had to go.

Was there nobody in your extended family, not on probation, that could have looked after your mum.

Hope she's feeling better.

hattoncracker · 27-12-2012 09:06PM

smcgiff wrote: »

Was there nobody in your extended family, not on probation, that could have looked after your mum.

Hope she's feeling better.

I wasn't there to look after her, but I had to be there as she was on the critical list and those 48 hours were crucial

smcgiff · 27-12-2012 09:08PM

hattoncracker wrote: »

I wasn't there to look after her, but I had to be there as she was on the critical list and those 48 hours were crucial

Very understandable.

However, what employer would not understand that you'd need time off for that? Surely you didn't have to claim to be sick?

hattoncracker · 27-12-2012 09:14PM

smcgiff wrote: »

Very understandable.

However, what employer would not understand that you'd need time off for that? Surely you didn't have to claim to be sick?

I told them the truth about that, but at the same time I'm really conscious of it. it's unauthorized absence on my sheet.

worded · 27-12-2012 09:23PM

Pneumonia - I had it once and it can be life threatening.
If you are not on inhalers (blue and brown) pls consider going to your doctor to get some, I found them helpful to shift it.

More info ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pneumonia

smcgiff · 27-12-2012 09:36PM

hattoncracker wrote: »

I told them the truth about that, but at the same time I'm really conscious of it. it's unauthorized absence on my sheet.

How long are you there? What kind of feedback are you getting from your Direct line manager. Are you getting good feedback?

Taking two days off to attend a potentially dying mother and time off for pneumonia is something that should not go against a good employee on probation.

I would be proactive with your line manager to explain exactly what's going on. It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to see a person with pneumonia is sick.

Tell them you are worried that it will affect your probation - ask them for feedback on this. The fact your first two days are down as unauthorised is probably just a technicality.

You really shouldn't be at work with pneumonia, and the company should be the one insisting you don't turn up.

It's unfortunate that it's a time when chancers (they do exist) will want to take this time off - it is party season after all. That's why you'll need to be proactive.

Best of luck

Procrastastudy · 27-12-2012 09:59PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Thats a pretty outrageous quote right there, people having the nerve to stay off a week from genuine sickness, and that quote from a manager, see the pattern?

Outrageous in the sense you've taken it out of context, you didn't even remove the hyphen. It's pretty clear you are not going to be swayed by logic. You, if indeed you are a member of any union, are the worst type of person to be on one. I find a great number of people who work in unions champion employee rights and a generally reaosnable people with informed opinions. There is the odd contrary idiot (they're in management as well to be fair) who just rejects things becuase the otherside is saying it.

When a union goes out on strike becuase of a genuine reason, or sits there in a disciplinary meeting making sure an employee is properly represented and supported - ensuring that rights are not idgnored they are making a tangible difference and making the work place better. When people like you stand there trying to defend people taking duvet days you make everyone whos supports employee rights job more difficult.

You have no idea the amount of times I've sat in mettings and told more senior managers to get knotted over various issues they wanted to bring in that was unfair to my guys. You've no idea how many times I told area managers I was making a decision in a disciplinary meeting and no I wasn't going to fire X. You've no idea how many times I told people what their rights where going into D.Ms.

In all the crap I've seen pulled by front line staff and managers alike have I every seen a BTWI used for anything other than making sure the person was fit for work and whether there was something that needed to be done for them. If a manger is warning someone on probation they are at risk re sick days in a BTWI they are simply doing their job - in fact in could be argued they are under a legal obligation to do so under the rules of fair procedures.

Why would any company waste its time haveing a meeting with someone to bully them when they could just fire them at anytime within the first 12 months with no comeback? It's not as if the training spend for call centre employees is huge - or not ongoing anyway.

TL;DR - Please don't make out you're championing employee rights. With friends like you we don't need enemies.

Wanderer2010 · 27-12-2012 10:17PM

Procrastastudy wrote: »

If you need a week of sick per year or there abouts you need to address your own ill health and not inflict that on the place you work. There is a difference between somone being bullied anf the being rightly concerned that an employer may call them on not being able to fullfil they're contractual obligations.

Explained above - people feel that a week, if genuine, is fine. It's not.

The above is exactly what you quoted. "If you need a week of sick per year you need to address your own ill health". Ok, so maybe you are super healthy and have never needed to take sick leave but your point is very unreasonable when it comes to the average employee. Just look at the OP, they got pneumoia at a really sensitive stage in employment, the same thing could happen to you or I at any stage and I for one would hate to work for someone who thinks that more than a week sick in 365 days of life is unreasonable, honestly I dont know where you are coming from with such an old fashioned approach to illness.

As for the union, yes I am in one and Im proud to be in one, no they are not perfect but it has been proven time and time again that managers take advantage of and bully employees when they know they havent got back up, happens all the time, at least the unions can act as a buffer in disciplinary matters. And please dont quote HR as a reply, everyone with an ounce of common sense knows that HR are on the side of management, every single time, its one of the unwritten rules of life.

Its great that you get on with all your workers and see yourself as a great manager (a lot of bad managers "see themselves" as good managers) but you are describing your own situation, every workplace is different, you have to appreciate that.

tatli_lokma · 27-12-2012 10:29PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

you are describing your own situation, every workplace is different, you have to appreciate that.

You might want to take your own advice! Can you not see that you are doing exactly what you accuse others of? Just because you feel that your company use BTWI's as an intimidation tactic and way to warn off staff does not mean all managers use it in that way, nor does it mean all abuse the process.

Can I ask how many companies you have experience working for? And on average how many times a year you would take sick leave and as a follow on from that how many BTWI's you have each year?

Procrastastudy · 27-12-2012 10:42PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

The above is exactly what you quoted. "If you need a week of sick per year you need to address your own ill health". Ok, so maybe you are super healthy and have never needed to take sick leave but your point is very unreasonable when it comes to the average employee.

During my probation period my boss didn't bother with a BTWI interview and I ended up coming back early - getting a really bad chest infection and having to take two weeks off. He later told me he got into some serous hot water with HR for not adering to HR policies in place to ensure people didn't do stupid things.

A week every year is what's unreasonable - you are still quoting me out of context - you are missing the part where I said six weeks in a single year would br reasonable.

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Just look at the OP, they got pneumoia at a really sensitive stage in employment, the same thing could happen to you or I at any stage...

Yes what a shame not all sickness can be taken as genuine as people take duvet days.

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

...and I for one would hate to work for someone who thinks that more than a week sick in 365 days of life is unreasonable, honestly I dont know where you are coming from with such an old fashioned approach to illness.

Over the last 100 years or so public health has got better not worse. A week in a year on a repeated basis is whats unreasonable. A sniffle is not the flu. Indigestion is not food poisoning.

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

As for the union, yes I am in one and Im proud to be in one, no they are not perfect but it has been proven time and time again that managers take advantage of and bully employees when they know they havent got back up, happens all the time, at least the unions can act as a buffer in disciplinary matters. And please dont quote HR as a reply, everyone with an ounce of common sense knows that HR are on the side of management, every single time, its one of the unwritten rules of life.

I've absolutely no love for HR. I've less love for employees who take the mickey and abuse the sytem making it more difficult for good managers to fight their corner. This black and white them and us attitude is what causes both managers and unions to feel they need to engage in an adversarial process.

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Its great that you get on with all your workers and see yourself as a great manager (a lot of bad managers "see themselves" as good managers) but you are describing your own situation, every workplace is different, you have to appreciate that.

I do - and every person is also different. Hence its a good idea to meet with them when they come back to make sure that they are doing okay and what caused them to go out sick.

Afraid to call in sick. :(

Comments