Bradford Factor

[DRZ]

In my experience, those with genuine illnesses never really get past the late 30s/early 40s, especially as the score is over a rolling period. You probably find that the lower score limits are also combined with a lower rolling period.

There is a very very close link between high Bradford Factor scores and employees with a reputation for taking unnecessary (ie not genuine) sick leave.

 

[a1ex2001]

I have a Bradford factor of 1 for the 3 years I've been with my current employer or 4 if you extend it to the last 7 years, what annoys me the most is that there is no reward for being honest and seemingly no punishment for taking the mick so why do I carry on comming in and not take a few duvet days?

 

[sammo62]

It's a bit random they assume that 5 unplanned single days off is more disruptive than one 5 day stint off work.

For my company it's not really an issue if I miss a day every now and then, but if I weren't there for a week it'd be a real pain.

 

[krooton]

It's a bit random they assume that 5 unplanned single days off is more disruptive than one 5 day stint off work.

For my company it's not really an issue if I miss a day every now and then, but if I weren't there for a week it'd be a real pain.

Same.

I can understand planned vs unplanned, but 2 days unplanned twice (16 points) is less disruptive than a single 5 day unplanned (5 points).

 

[weringo]

So it's better to take a 6 weeks off straight than 6 random days?

This theory seems a bit silly.

 

[Gilly]

I have a Bradford factor of 1 for the 3 years I've been with my current employer or 4 if you extend it to the last 7 years, what annoys me the most is that there is no reward for being honest and seemingly no punishment for taking the mick so why do I carry on comming in and not take a few duvet days?

I have had a Bradford score of nil for a decade.

I'm struggling with the same thoughts.

 

[krooton]

So it's better to take a 6 weeks off straight than 6 random days?

This theory seems a bit silly.

1 instance of 6 weeks:

1 x 1 x 30 = 30

That said, I'm not sure if each week would be seen as an occurrence, which would be:

6 x 6 x 30 = 1080

 

[Gilly]

I think it depends on the employer, but if you are off on a Friday and a Monday your days aren't accrued over the weekend but it is counted as 4 sickness days in our RTWs.

 

[scorza]

So it's better to take a 6 weeks off straight than 6 random days?

This theory seems a bit silly.

Not really - people don't take 6 weeks off sick unless they really are sick (broken leg or something). They will normally have to get a doctor's note to prove they were unfit to work as well. For an absence of this type, the business will be able to re-plan and re-schedule e.g. arrange temporary cover. What really kills businesses is people taking "duvet days" - usually a Friday or a Monday when the work just doesn't get done. Across the whole business absences like this have a very real impact. So while it might appear illogical, to the business 6 duvet days are far more damaging than one person being off sick for 6 weeks.

 

[agnes]

1 instance of 6 weeks:

1 x 1 x 30 = 30

That said, I'm not sure if each week would be seen as an occurrence, which would be:

6 x 6 x 30 = 1080

I think it depends on the employer, but if you are off on a Friday and a Monday your days aren't accrued over the weekend but it is counted as 4 sickness days in our RTWs.

Not really - people don't take 6 weeks off sick unless they really are sick (broken leg or something). They will normally have to get a doctor's note to prove they were unfit to work as well. For an absence of this type, the business will be able to re-plan and re-schedule e.g. arrange temporary cover. What really kills businesses is people taking "duvet days" - usually a Friday or a Monday when the work just doesn't get done. Across the whole business absences like this have a very real impact. So while it might appear illogical, to the business 6 duvet days are far more damaging than one person being off sick for 6 weeks.

When you put the it like that, it does work...

 

[matthewhotdude]

So it's better to take a 6 weeks off straight than 6 random days?

This theory seems a bit silly.

No, the six week straight would more likely be genuine with doctors note, the random 6 days are more likely to be "oh I can't be arsed to go in days" which is what this is targeting

 

[krooton]

When you put the it like that, it does work...

Not always though. As an example, if I am away for a whole week, there isn't anyone who can cover my roles, it just gets backlogged until I return (which happens after every holiday, doh!).

As such, 5 separate occurrences of 1 day absent has a lesser impact than a whole week off, as I only have to deal with a day's backlog.

 

[GreenMint]

tbh, its nice having a factor named after me

 

[~Divine~Wind~]

I think it depends on the employer, but if you are off on a Friday and a Monday your days aren't accrued over the weekend but it is counted as 4 sickness days in our RTWs.

We actually get points added to the bradford thingy meaning we get penalised for being off sick on a day we werent actually meant to be there.

 

[Gilly]

We actually get points added to the bradford thingy meaning we get penalised for being off sick on a day we werent actually meant to be there.

Yeah, that's what I was saying. They're counted in Return to Work interviews (and therefore also on the Bradford Score) but are not listed as an actual sickness day.

For the bradford score it isn't a bad thing them being counted, as it means it is still one absence rather than multiples.