Yet when take over viva el prezedendti you will both be shot.
Poll: How much do you think sick pay should be?
- Thread starter Pawnless Endgame
- Start date
Yet when take over viva el prezedendti you will both be shot.
The issue in general isn't so much about seeing a GP but that GPs won't (at least not on the NHS) do a "fit note" (apparently that's what they're called these days) for less than 7 days anyway.
Why do people have such badly managed GP practices anyway? That issue is down to the practice - they ought to have some same day appointments available in the morning or bookable online the night before for acute stuff in addition to the regular ones fro non-urgent or planned general stuff.
Man of Honour
I've only had jobs that have been full pay but I've never taken the pee eg between 1988 and 2017 I never had one day off.
Then its down to the company to apply discretion, no one is denying people take the piddle, yet these are often found out and are the first to go when people need to go, get looked over for promotion etc.
I am 100% on the full pay for 5days then after that it should be back up with Dr`s note. You can generally get over a bug on on 4-5 days and a couple in recovery. If its more then you should really be seeing a Dr anyway. Of course we have mental illness which a great deal more difficult to pin down and may or not be due to work, adding no sick pay to this is going to make it worse.
Still Tory forum i guess, if your down on your luck or poor... TOUGH, please die quietly.
I am 100% on the full pay for 5days then after that it should be back up with Dr`s note. You can generally get over a bug on on 4-5 days and a couple in recovery. If its more then you should really be seeing a Dr anyway. Of course we have mental illness which a great deal more difficult to pin down and may or not be due to work, adding no sick pay to this is going to make it worse.
Still Tory forum i guess, if your down on your luck or poor... TOUGH, please die quietly.
Soldato
The amount of pay should really tie into the type of sickness, got a headache, reduced pay. Work related injury full pay.
Which is actually what I am going through now, slipped and fell while working, injured my back been unable to work since then, right before Christmas I'll be lucky to get paid 1/4 or 1/3rd of what I normally get, so thats xmas ruined basically.
Which is actually what I am going through now, slipped and fell while working, injured my back been unable to work since then, right before Christmas I'll be lucky to get paid 1/4 or 1/3rd of what I normally get, so thats xmas ruined basically.
We’ve just had to manage someone out of our team. We’re a really nice firm with excellent benefits but this person took advantage of it. Recurring paid sickness for a multitude of issues but mostly stress related. The role was purely admin with no pressures at all (9-5 data entry with no targets) but they had a number of days off for stress after running out of the usual excuses. HR carried out a workplace assessment with daily meetings and the person eventually quit.
Having seen this for the first time from a management point of view (therefore seeing the harm this was causing to the firm + other employees) whilst I found it difficult, I think they did the right thing.
Having seen this for the first time from a management point of view (therefore seeing the harm this was causing to the firm + other employees) whilst I found it difficult, I think they did the right thing.
Soldato
So you are okay with your company managing people out?
Pretty sure this is not legal no matter how justifiable it seems proper process still needs to be followed.
Sounds like pretty pathetic management to be honest.
How can you trust that they don't do this to people for other reasons? You can't.
(someone please correct me if i am wrong btw).
Soldato
The people suggesting no/statutory sick pay, would you be happy with your bus driver, pilot, surgeon etc. being at 10% ability because realistically they're too ill to be working, but can't afford to lose a couple of days pay?
Don't forget that most of the long term injuries are those working at minimum wage, exposed to harsh environment.
I don't see how someone doing a 9-17 job face the same odds as a postman carrying bags or a builder for back problems, for example.
Most of the unskilled workers will face long term injuries due to their duties.
Commissario
Or the people preparing and serving food in a restaurant or retail environment going in after being sick or having diarrhoea a few hours earlier?
The whole idea of going in to work whilst probably infectious because the company won't pay for time off, or because management get annoyed at you taking tome off is stupid, at best you're going to be working at a highly reduced capacity, you're likely to be passing it on (thus reducing the efficiency of the entire team), at worst you're potentially actively dangerous.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2019
- Posts
- 747
No problem with sick pay, have more issues with sick policy.
My wife works in the NHS and abuse of the sick policy is rife with dealing with constant sickies in the too hard to deal with pile. She has multiple examples of employees taking months at a time flaunting the system as each time is a new condition.
However I think if all companies were forced to offer a period of full pay sick leave then it may force several to start investing more in employer welfare.
My wife works in the NHS and abuse of the sick policy is rife with dealing with constant sickies in the too hard to deal with pile. She has multiple examples of employees taking months at a time flaunting the system as each time is a new condition.
However I think if all companies were forced to offer a period of full pay sick leave then it may force several to start investing more in employer welfare.
Last edited:
Caporegime
At some point there has to be a point an employee who cant do the job can be cut loose isn't there?
Small businesses cant soak up endless absences can they?
I work in the NHS and it's just mad how much its abused. Massive difference between different roles too.
Soldato
at my last job sickness was outsourced and any call if medical was taken by a nurse ,followed by a return to work interview ,this puts of the monday morning cant be bothered going in instances
i would say full pay with close monitoring of instances
i would say full pay with close monitoring of instances
Exactly. Remember employers have a duty of care to their employees (the sick ones and those around them).
the colleague who left was given every possible opportunity to improve, change roles within the firm, work for different people. Nothing worked and (realistically in this instance) they were actually taking the **** and milking the system. It would be completely wrong for the firm to allow this employee to constantly rotate through stress related sickness absence.
I think we should have a statutory and fair amount of sick pay for every employee - say 5 days a year at full pay. Anything more should be covered by enhanced benefits where the employer chooses or SSP. Generous sick pay has created an environment where people take the **** and do not take responsibility for their actions.
Legally I don't think any sick pay should be obligatory. Contractually I'd say that it completely depends on the situation, like how long a person has worked there and the circumstances of the sickness, is it a couple of days off due to a cold, or is it 3 months off for cancer treatment where a person would suffer financial hardship for example.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Aug 2017
- Posts
- 2,209
I wouldnt work for a company/organisation that had such a 1970s view of employee relations.
Then again i also want to see tighter controls over those who do go on the sick repeatedly for spurious reasons.
Then again i also want to see tighter controls over those who do go on the sick repeatedly for spurious reasons.
You get people like that everywhere. But usually when people are pulling sickies on that scale there is something wrong with the work environment and staff don't like working there.
Hammering people for taking liberties isn't fixing the problem. They will quit, get replaced and after a few months the next guy does it. So there is a constant staff turn-over and it's always chaos. The root problem is usually **** management.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 7,740
I've been in places where its full as well as statutory (where I'm at at the moment) and its derisory frankly. On the other hand full simply encourages people to pull sickies "just because" and it doesn't come out of holiday entitlement (it doesn't need booking in advance either). So its widely open to abuse.
A compromise in between, half pay probably.
A compromise in between, half pay probably.
Associate
This.
I'm currently dying from manflu caught from macho types who won't go sick - instead they come in to work to prove a point, do absolutely F all constructive because they are too busy coughing over everybody else, and spread their contagious ebola aids to the rest of the workforce. Well done.
If your ill, shove your lemsip and **** off home so the rest of us don't have to suffer.
If somebody is taking the mickey (and I had to endure a member of my team who routinely took 3 months off sick a year) there are appropriate ways to manage this and ultimately deal with it, legally and responsibly.
But genuine sickness ought not to be penalised - that is social responsibility and part of the benefit of not living in a third world s**thole (yet).
Small businesses and self employed may have to temper this with an element of pragmatism, of course.