Strange sick pay policy

[gkmotorsport]

Hi all,

 

Today, my girlfriend and I were called into separate meetings to explain that we have effectively 'run out' of contractual sick pay, and that any further periods of sickness would only be covered by SSP. Our contracts say:

 

You will be paid any SSP to which you may be entitled. Payment of your salary or any part of salary during any period of illness will be at the absolute discretion of the Company and will include any entitlement to SSP and will normally be given at a rate of one day for each completed month of service subject to a contractual maximum of 8 working weeks.

 

The 40-day tipping point has been calculated against the total amount of time that we have worked there, which is nudging four years. Is this normal? I have a mental illness which has caused time off recently, and at no point was this mentioned. It seems odd to have a clause which increasingly detriments the employee over time - my manager even admitted that they are looking into it as people who have been there for up to 10 years might be negatively affected.

 

The timing is also odd - my gf's manager gave her a dressing-down this week over her sickness record, but actually the majority of the time off he blamed was actually dependant leave to look after me, or parental leave for her children. These meetings only happened after she pointed it out.

 

This is causing me to panic a bit, as we are already fully dependent on both of our salaries, and if I have time off and lose wages - which is likely in the future - we can't afford to pay all of our bills, or actually get to work in the worst case.

 

Any advice greatly appreciated.

[becky2585]

From the literal wording of the contract, the company is correct - and yes, this would have an adverse effect the longer you work there - a bit of a disincentive to stay!

 

As they're adhering to the contract there isn't much you can do - but my contract certainly rolls sick pay by the year!

 

Another point is that if your partner is taking dependent leave, that should be unpaid leave and not used as part of the sick pay calculation.

[raydetinu]

Suggest you speak to ACAS for advice, does not sound fair.

they give very good advice over the phone.

[Emmzzi]

I'm struggling a little to understand where the detriment is - isn't it more just tat it is capped? Or do you mean "versus now"?

 

The part of your post which concerns me is your partner taking time off work to look after you. Emergency dependents leave is to organise someone to look after you, not to do the looking after.

 

It may be wise for one of you to seek a job in another company as I can't see this washing for long.

 

Have you had an occ health referral to discuss reasonable adjustments, and can you show you are doing everything possible to stay healthy? This won't make you bulletproof but it may help.

[raydetinu]

ssp is only claimable after the first three days off sick, what do they pay in this period??

[becky2585]

ssp is only claimable after the first three days off sick, what do they pay in this period??

 

Nothing at all - it would be unpaid.

[gkmotorsport]

From the literal wording of the contract, the company is correct - and yes, this would have an adverse effect the longer you work there - a bit of a disincentive to stay!

 

As they're adhering to the contract there isn't much you can do - but my contract certainly rolls sick pay by the year!

 

Another point is that if your partner is taking dependent leave, that should be unpaid leave and not used as part of the sick pay calculation.

 

Yes, I was a little concerned about this. For my gf, some of these days have been taken as leave, and some as sick. However, the majority have actually involved her working from home with permission from the company.

 

If they decide that they incorrectly classified these days, would they have a right to reclaim wages paid for them?

 

I'm struggling a little to understand where the detriment is - isn't it more just tat it is capped? Or do you mean "versus now"?

 

I'm sorry, I don't understand this question. To clarify what I was getting at, it means that the longer you work here, the less company sick pay you are entitled to. Someone who started at the same time as me but doesn't have a health condition will obviously be more likely to have some reserve of company sick pay, but I am effectively out of this for good.

 

A couple of people have left the company for short period and returned, so I believe their entitlement has been reset. However, I'm not aware of anyone else in the company being warned that they are near or over their limit.

 

The part of your post which concerns me is your partner taking time off work to look after you. Emergency dependents leave is to organise someone to look after you, not to do the looking after.

 

My gf is my carer, as far as the NHS and our employer are concerned. My condition can result in short-lived and acute problems which require a day or so to recover from, and I need to be supervised when this happens. The company itself approves of this leave being taken; it is only the (relatively new) manager who has decided it is an issue.

 

It may be wise for one of you to seek a job in another company as I can't see this washing for long.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by it 'washing'. Can you explain?

 

Have you had an occ health referral to discuss reasonable adjustments, and can you show you are doing everything possible to stay healthy? This won't make you bulletproof but it may help.

 

Yes - the company's occ health doctor visited me a couple of weeks ago. He informed the company that I should be moved into a slightly different role, and that management should provide adequate support to ensure that stress (as a known trigger for my illness) is kept to a reasonable minimum. He was satisfied that I am taking all reasonable steps to manage my illness.

[Emmzzi]

My gf is my carer, as far as the NHS and our employer are concerned. My condition can result in short-lived and acute problems which require a day or so to recover from, and I need to be supervised when this happens. The company itself approves of this leave being taken; it is only the (relatively new) manager who has decided it is an issue.

 

I would agree with the new manager as this is far in excess of the legal requirement. Caring and work and not always compatible. I think it would be wise to think about alternative arrangements. In effect they lose 2 people for one period of illness; that isn't really fair or practical for them.

[ericsbrother]

As your GF isnt ill I would sort out alternative care arrangements. If you need care then apply for the relevant support via your council/DWP etc

[CrappoMan]

I'm sorry, I don't understand this question. To clarify what I was getting at, it means that the longer you work here, the less company sick pay you are entitled to. Someone who started at the same time as me but doesn't have a health condition will obviously be more likely to have some reserve of company sick pay, but I am effectively out of this for good.

The contractual sick pay arrangements will be per year.

 

You accrue 1 day sick pay for each month of service, for the first 40 months of service, then your sick pay is capped at 5 weeks (40 days) per year.

[Batfink]

The contractual sick pay arrangements will be per year.

 

You accrue 1 day sick pay for each month of service, for the first 40 months of service, then your sick pay is capped at 5 weeks (40 days) per year.

 

40 days is a smidge under seven "physical" weeks or eight "standard working" weeks.

 

You're lucky you get this long. I get 10 days paid sick pay.

[gkmotorsport]

Thanks for all of the replies, guys.

 

The contractual sick pay arrangements will be per year.

 

You accrue 1 day sick pay for each month of service, for the first 40 months of service, then your sick pay is capped at 5 weeks (40 days) per year.

 

They've confirmed to me that it is definitely not per year, and that you can therefore permanently run out of company sick days. However, they are going to 'look at something' for people who have worked there for 'several years'. It's frustrating, but they are at least looking into it.

[raydetinu]

That does not sound legal to me, check with ACAS.

[Emmzzi]

The ACAS call centre won't have a clue. I'd check with a lawyer on the topic of indirect age discrimination. The time served staff may be likely to be older.

[raydetinu]

Emmzzi, why do you dis ACAS?

[Emmzzi]

Mainly because they are under funded and the first line of answering is a contact centre who can only deal with simple problems; this is not a simple problem.

 

They're fine for minimum wage and all the basics.

[Emmzzi]

PS I am too old to "dis" anyone also. I am however crticial of them!

[Sidewinder]

Emmzzi, why do you dis ACAS?

 

Have to agree with Emmzzi - I am a long time advocate of the ACAS helpline as a resource, but over the last five years or so, the nature of advice given is very much read from a script rather than being delivered by experienced specialists. Most recently some of the advice has been extremely woolly and in some circumstances just plain wrong.