Sick leave definition

noxibox said:
It's really none of the employer's business how or why someone is sick. If they're legitimately booked off work and within the parameters specified by labour law then the company has no recourse. Do they really want the labour department going over their company policies with a fine-toothed comb, because if their sick policy is anything to go by they're probably breaking the law elsewhere too.


It's totally unreasonable and it sounds like someone needs to bring down the labour hammer on them. There's absolutely no reason any employee should use their annual leave unless they've run out of sick leave.
Click to expand...

Ummmm.... wrong. I was about to post what DJ... posted regarding the allocation of sick leave in the first 6 months of employment. It would appear that the company was gently reminding her of her sick leave days still available to her. They have not started any incapacity-type proceddings...
 
DJ... said:
In the first 6 months 1 day accrues for each 26 days worked.



So the rest of her allotted sick days are now due after 6 months worked. But that's still not to say that taking them will not reflect badly on you. Especially if it starts to happen in a pattern...
Click to expand...

thats what I meant, you just say it better :p
 
noxibox said:
It's really none of the employer's business how or why someone is sick. If they're legitimately booked off work and within the parameters specified by labour law then the company has no recourse. Do they really want the labour department going over their company policies with a fine-toothed comb, because if their sick policy is anything to go by they're probably breaking the law elsewhere too.


It's totally unreasonable and it sounds like someone needs to bring down the labour hammer on them. There's absolutely no reason any employee should use their annual leave unless they've run out of sick leave.
Click to expand...

Thank my lucky stars my boss is cool and its based on more of a performance thing and personal understanding,rather than pages of policies.
 
techead said:
I happened to bump into my HR lady downstairs. She is more clued up with this kind of thing. She said that clause is specifically there for voluntary sports and recreation activities and in no way whatsoever covers transport. Whether its by Taxi, Bus, Train, Car, Motorbike or Scooter.

In her opinion, the employer is taking a fat chance.
Click to expand...

Now ask her if time taken for sick leave within the first 6 months of employment is reasonable when the employee had every opportunity to prevent said sick leave, and especially where said sick leave is taken as a pattern or is a recurring issue. Especially in light of the fact that the employee did not engage the employer with regards to the only sticking point that she had - a parking allocation. The clause relating to transport in her contract is also relevant and we don't know the status of that.

Legalities aside for a second. This is clearly impacting on her relationship with her employer. Many employers, ethics aside, are happy to get rid of someone who in their first few months of employment does not engage properly with them; takes all sick leave due; and challenges them on policies. That's the reality of the situation...
 
She is not longer on probation
she is currently driving with a learners license
sick leave appears to be in-line with the labor law

I have not spoken to her yet as she works for one of those (no personal call/no cellphone on desk) type employers so I will discuss with her during her lunch time or tonight.

I am of the impression of being reasonable as neither of us are one to take advantage of law when it comes down to morality vs legality.

I know she loves her scooter and is very frugal which made the scooter an ever better idea as she only has to commute 7km a day.

The sick leave is not negatively affecting her performance as she is currently their top performer with the person in 2nd place having 65% of her turn around, so I don't think they are trying to get her out the company nor would she want to cause conflict causing her a future in the company.

My only concern is that she does not currently have a car license, it would take at least a month for her to get a learners and another few months to get her drivers license. If something were to happen in the mean time they would try and deny her the leave.

The fact that they approached this with a "get rid of the scooter or forfeit your sick leave" attitude as apposed to a "your scooter is causing unnecessary strain" is what annoys me, and personally I would want to hit back on those grounds alone but that is not how it works.
 
M3mPh1z said:
She is not longer on probation
she is currently driving with a learners license
sick leave appears to be in-line with the labor law

I have not spoken to her yet as she works for one of those (no personal call/no cellphone on desk) type employers so I will discuss with her during her lunch time or tonight.

I am of the impression of being reasonable as neither of us are one to take advantage of law when it comes down to morality vs legality.

I know she loves her scooter and is very frugal which made the scooter an ever better idea as she only has to commute 7km a day.

The sick leave is not negatively affecting her performance as she is currently their top performer with the person in 2nd place having 65% of her turn around, so I don't think they are trying to get her out the company nor would she want to cause conflict causing her a future in the company.

My only concern is that she does not currently have a car license, it would take at least a month for her to get a learners and another few months to get her drivers license. If something were to happen in the mean time they would try and deny her the leave.

The fact that they approached this with a "get rid of the scooter or forfeit your sick leave" attitude as apposed to a "your scooter is causing unnecessary strain" is what annoys me, and personally I would want to hit back on those grounds alone but that is not how it works.
Click to expand...

How can one have a learners scooter license, how does this work?
 
DJ... said:
Now ask her if time taken for sick leave within the first 6 months of employment is reasonable when the employee had every opportunity to prevent said sick leave, and especially where said sick leave is taken as a pattern or is a recurring issue. Especially in light of the fact that the employee did not engage the employer with regards to the only sticking point that she had - a parking allocation. The clause relating to transport in her contract is also relevant and we don't know the status of that.
Click to expand...

Why is it that if it could have been prevented sick leave is not allowed? That is a poor argument (especially regarding accidents on the road). Actual sickness can also be prevented 99% of the time by eating healthy, exercising, going for flu vaccinations etc. Therefore, all my sick leave should null and void, because I have a pattern of getting sick at the change of the seasons when my hay fever acts up and I inevitably get an upper respiratory tract infection of some kind (all, and I do mean all my sick leave accompanied by a doctors note has been for URTI). But this I can easily avoid by not going outside during the change of seasons, or wearing a mask all the time, so therefore...
 
Batista said:
How can one have a learners scooter license, how does this work?
Click to expand...

You are allowed to drive a motorcycle of any engine size if you are over 18 (might be 17) and have a learners, for a period of (iirc) two years after the learners was issued. If you are between 16 and 18, you may only ride up to a 125cc motorcycle. Its in the law
 
M3mPh1z said:
The fact that they approached this with a "get rid of the scooter or forfeit your sick leave" attitude as apposed to a "your scooter is causing unnecessary strain" is what annoys me, and personally I would want to hit back on those grounds alone but that is not how it works.
Click to expand...

Actually that's exactly what they said, however they would have to cite the relevant clauses from her contract to cover their own arses or justify their position. I doubt that there is a clause in her contract relating to "strain". There certainly is one relating to sick leave and its constraints. Them citing this clause does not mean that they're being unreasonable. Being unreasonable would have involved an actual investigation, a possible suspension until it was complete, and a hearing.

She really needs to engage with them though. It seems to me that she's been silent on the parking allocation and is being silently peeved about this too. That's not the way to handle this...
 
Archer said:
You are allowed to drive a motorcycle of any engine size if you are over 18 (might be 17) and have a learners, for a period of (iirc) two years after the learners was issued. If you are between 16 and 18, you may only ride up to a 125cc motorcycle. Its in the law
Click to expand...

Thanks, pictured fully licensed person permanently on the back of the scooter lmao
 
Archer said:
Why is it that if it could have been prevented sick leave is not allowed? That is a poor argument (especially regarding accidents on the road). Actual sickness can also be prevented 99% of the time by eating healthy, exercising, going for flu vaccinations etc. Therefore, all my sick leave should null and void, because I have a pattern of getting sick at the change of the seasons when my hay fever acts up and I inevitably get an upper respiratory tract infection of some kind (all, and I do mean all my sick leave accompanied by a doctors note has been for URTI). But this I can easily avoid by not going outside during the change of seasons, or wearing a mask all the time, so therefore...
Click to expand...

Your analogies are not accurate. On the one hand prevention was reasonable as quite clearly the scooter is causing issues relating to her health. On the other, preventing the flu is an unreasonable expectation.

I don't actually think that there is anything written in law relating to reasonable expectation of preventative measures taken, but it will certainly reflect poorly on the employee in the employers' eyes, and the reality of the situation is that this tends to trump what the law says or doesn't say. Again, this is how we define the incapacity bit. I believe that her choice to ride a dangerous mode of transport that now has evidence that it is detrimental to her ability to perform her duties plays a role in this scenario. I don't have the inclination to look up the relevant bit of law on that but I think it does exist. Whether it relates to how sick leave is defined I don't know.

All I do know is that challenging this will end badly. Finding a reasonable middle ground, maturely, will reflect far more positively on the employee and will help to mend the strained relationship...
 
Firstly, apologies for the terrible grammar, work load is high today, no time for proof reading.

DJ... said:
Actually that's exactly what they said, however they would have to cite the relevant clauses from her contract to cover their own arses or justify their position. I doubt that there is a clause in her contract relating to "strain". There certainly is one relating to sick leave and its constraints. Them citing this clause does not mean that they're being unreasonable. Being unreasonable would have involved an actual investigation, a possible suspension until it was complete, and a hearing.

She really needs to engage with them though. It seems to me that she's been silent on the parking allocation and is being silently peeved about this too. That's not the way to handle this...
Click to expand...

If they backed up their claim with something from her contract that actually prevented her from using a scooter then by all means, no issue what so ever, BUT the clause they quoted does not cover it.

Batista said:
Thanks, pictured fully licensed person permanently on the back of the scooter lmao
Click to expand...

LOL
 
M3mPh1z said:
Hi All

Not entirely sure where to post this but it seems this section has become the general work contract discussion area.

My fiance has been working for a company for the last 7 or so months. As she did not have her own transport and was was sick of using public transport, she decided to buy a scooter, which she has had for the last 4 months.

As she has never driven anything with 2 wheels before she has inevitably fallen off the thing twice already, resulting in about 6 days sicks leave in the mean time.

This morning she got notified that should she have another accident resulting in sick leave they are not willing to take it as normal sick leave, pointing her to the following clause in her contract.

Any absence due injury as a result of a voluntary activity, i.e. sport, extreme games, etc. does not qualify as sick leave and will be deducted from annual leave.

Now in my mind this does not nearly cover using a scooter as transport.

Opinions?

EDIT: On top of that, if she were to use a car, they do not provide a parking spot and there are no public parking spots in the area
Click to expand...
The company is taking a fat chance by using that clause. If they opted for the lack of sick leave days or the trend of sick leave days taken they MIGHT have had a better argument.

The best course of action is for her to engage with her supervisor on the issue. She must not skip or ignore her supervisor and go straight to HR or management....
 
M3mPh1z said:
If they backed up their claim with something from her contract that actually prevented her from using a scooter then by all means, no issue what so ever, BUT the clause they quoted does not cover it.
Click to expand...

Okay, even if we agree that this is not entirely relevant to her situation, look at the realities then: HR is going out of its way to find clauses to nail her with, and are prepared to take a chance in doing so. That, my friend, is not a good sign, irrespective of her being a decent performer. HR can work in complete isolation of her line manager. They do not need his/her approval for certain actions, they only need his/her input.

Tread carefully, I'd say. Confrontation will only lead to getting HR's back up. She needs to, as a matter of urgency, approach her line manager, have a frank discussion about the situation, and let him handle HR on her behalf for the time being. But she needs to be clear that she is still committed to the company and her role and would like to find a solution that is in both parties' best interests...
 
DJ... said:
Okay, even if we agree that this is not entirely relevant to her situation, look at the realities then: HR is going out of its way to find clauses to nail her with, and are prepared to take a chance in doing so. That, my friend, is not a good sign, irrespective of her being a decent performer. HR can work in complete isolation of her line manager. They do not need his/her approval for certain actions, they only need his/her input.

Tread carefully, I'd say. Confrontation will only lead to getting HR's back up. She needs to, as a matter of urgency, approach her line manager, have a frank discussion about the situation, and let him handle HR on her behalf for the time being. But she needs to be clear that she is still committed to the company and her role and would like to find a solution that is in both parties' best interests...
Click to expand...

Note that this email was from her manager. I assume he is ignorant to labor law and general literacy and legally she will not have a problem, these low swings however is what would make me personally take this guy on. In her case I assume she will simply adhere to their request even though there will be a few months turn around to get rid of the scooter. Who the onus will fall on should something happen... who knows. By the sounds of things this company just wings all their internal matters.
 
Last edited:
M3mPh1z said:
Note that this email was from her manager. I assume he is ignorant to labor law and general literacy and legally she will not have a problem, these low swings however is what would make me personally take this guy on. In her case I assume she will simply adhere to their request even though there will be a few months turn around to get rid of the scooter.
Click to expand...
Does she report directly to this manager or is there a supervisor in between? If so, she must get her supervisor on her side by sharing all relevant information with him/her and indicating that she wants to reach a mutually beneficial agreement.
 
HR might still have been responsible for it. In all likelihood they were. Or he is gunning to have her toe the line. Either way, she needs to engage with them properly, not fight with them...
 
Ok, it took 4 pages but I think we can all agree that this they are wrong in their approach but justified in their message, which I tend to agree with for personal safety reasons.

I will discuss this with her tonight and start getting preparations in order for her to get a car license and to approach them in the morning to discuss that she will be getting a car in the near future and would need adequate parking and politely bring up that if something where to happen to her in the mean time regarding using the scooter as transport, they can go screw themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X