Yes, that also made me swear!

I've just read that she's been missing for a few weeks, which is a shame.

Trying to get my 5th post in order to reply to a PM!

Morrissey - My Love Life

Does SarEl still post here? I've been lurking for a while and was hoping she might chip in.

Obviously, I don't want to give too much detail as I don't want to be identified nor the company I work for (although it looks like it does feature a lot on these boards!). Each stage has different standards but the first stage is 14 days. In relation to my disability I have had (by financial year): 2010-2011 19 days 2009-2010 67 days This was my "bad winter" 2008-2009 15 days 2007-2008 3 days 2006-2007 4 days 2005-2006 14 days 2004-2005 3 days 2003-2004 5 days 2002-2003 5 days 2001-2002 1 day I do receive company sick pay. In terms of the Occupational Health report, the Dr has stated: ... he will continue to have significant problems in future and I would expect a continued high sickness absence level. His condition should, in my opinion, meet the criteria for a "disability" in accordance with the Equality Act and there is an expectation that you make some adjustments to the attendance procedure. It is for management to determine what adjustments are reasonable in the circumstances. So, to me, it is clear that some reasonable adjustments should be made but this hasn't happened. Should the reasonable adjustments be made now or should we "cross that bridge when we come to it" (my manager's words), ie wait until I'm ill again? I'm thinking that I should write to my manager and ask a few questions to clarify the situation. I have asked questions in the past but it has always been communicated to me verbally so I don't have any proof.

Thanks for your reply. The OH is Atos. The Dr's suggestion was that the company should expect a higher than normal level of sick absence to continue (which in effect is the reasonable adjustment), but it was the business' decision as to what level of absence they could accommodate. As it is a rare case and I don't need any adjustments whilst I'm at work, it is an adjustment to the terms of my employment, I think everyone is too scared to put a figure on it. IMO management don't want to say I can have X no of days off in case I play the system and always have just less than that. My immediate managers know that I don't play the system but I think they are being pressured from higher up the chain.

I'll try and keep this short: I work for one of the UK's largest employers, with 10 years service and a good record. However, I have relatively serious genetic disease similar to Cystic Fibrosis and have a lot of time off work because of it. I have always been upfront about it and following occupational health advice my employer accepts that it would be classed as a disability under the EA. We have a 3 stage attendance procedure process with the 3rd stage being dismissal. In the past my manager has discounted absences relating to my disability and not given me warnings, which was fine as that seemed like a reasonable adjustment to me. I had a bad winter and all of sudden I was given a warning, even though I was still ill and struggling to come into work. They then told me that they wouldn't be discounting any absences again but they would make an adjustment giving me 5 extra days a year above the normal standards and that if I didn't accept it I would be ill health retired. Before long I was at the dismissal stage. In my dismissal interview I argued that they should have informed me before the first warning that the absences would no longer be discounted, that 5 days was an unachievable target and that other procedural errors were made. The result was that I was removed form the procedure and start from scratch again. The company Dr also stated that I wasn't eligible for Ill Health Retirement. Now, in my decision letter there are a couple of paragraphs that are concerning me: You should be advised that should these levels and frequency of absence relating to your disability continue and/or you do not follow the advice provided by the Occupational Health Service in order to reduce the levels and frequency of these absences, we may take into consideration all future disability related absences you may incur and subsequently these may be included in any future Attendance Procedure triggers. The Dr has not given any advice to reduce the levels of absence (as there is nothing that can be done) and he also confirmed that they should expect the same level of absence as the condition cannot "get better". So it seems like I'm on to a loser straight away. This next paragraph concerns me more: In relation to the reasonable adjustments previously agreed, I have removed the adjusted standards. rather than increasing the standards, as previously suggested, I suggest that by not issuing previous warnings, this by association of not being issued has increased the attendance standard and is in itself considered to be a reasonable adjustment. To clarify your future attendance will be managed in accordance with the required standards of attendance It doesn't make a lot of sense to me and looks like it's been re-written many times! Verbally I was told that there are no reasonable adjustments in place now and we will "cross that bridge when we come to it". So next time I'm ill I won't know where I stand and they will then decide what reasonable adjustment to make. I was told this decision was made after consultation with the company's lawyers and advisors, but this doesn't seem right to me. Surely reasonable adjustments should be made to make life easier in your employment not to cause stress. Should I also have an involvement in what is decided as a reasonable adjustment? I have always been told what adjustment they are giving me without asking me what I need. My attendance is the only adjustment I need and there are lots of ways to tackle it. Just to confirm my question: Is this a reasonable adjustment? Thanks