HELP Managing absent and sickness policy?

[foynz]

Hi everyone,

 

I recently got an investigation for being absent/sick from work for the past year. I was invited to the investigation on 21.03.2011. On 25.03.2011 I got a letter to say I had attend a stage 2 meeting (this refers to the investigation meeting) and also confirm I am on stage 2 and if I am sick in the next 12 mths I could go on to stage 3 and maybe dismissed from the company.

 

What I am really puzzled is that how can they put me on stage 2 when I have never been on stage 1? Also I was invited for an investigation meeting and not a stage 2 meeting! I just wonder if anyone here can clarify this for me?

 

In the investigation meeting the manager who interview told me that stage 1 was "back to work interview" after each sickness/absent period. I look this up on google and found that this is not true , its about our welfare rather than a disciplinary procedure.

 

I feel my employers are not following the correct procedure and should I just stand back and let them do whatever they want ? Or should I write a letter to dispute the stage 2?

 

 

Many Thanks in advanced for your help..

 

x

[Sidewinder]

Hi and welcome.

 

I think we need to know exactly what your company's absence policy is, and what their disciplinary procedures say about managing absence.

 

It would certainly be customary to hold an informal meeting to warn that levels of absence were causing concern, and if repeated or not sufficiently improved then this could be escalated to a more formal 'warning', and at a later date if improvement targets were still not met, then this could lead to dismissal, however this may not be exactly what your employer's policy is.

 

You say that you have been absent/sick for the last year - I am presuming that this is an error and you were talking about levels of absence over the previous year? It is possible that in your case, Stage 1 is the 'discussion' about absence levels, after which it was decided that Stage 2 or a more formal hearing/action was warranted, but as I said originally, without understanding your employer's policy that is difficult to say. You should of course have been afforded the right to have a colleague or Union rep present for your stage 2 meeting as this has now escalated to a disciplinary matter.

 

A RTW interview generally masquerades as a welfare meeting, or to ensure that you are fit enough to return to work, but is more commonly a convenient means of weeding out genuine absences from more routine 'sickies' If an employee knows that they are going to have a chat about the absence when they return, then it may dissuade some from just taking the odd day off here and there. It can also explore issues below the surface which might be causing repeated absences, so can also be a useful tool in that respect. There are no hard and fast rules about RTW interviews - they are good business practice for a variety of reasons.

[lilly of the valley]

I agree with sidewinder, you need to have a read of the company sickness absence policy, I can assure you though, a return to work is no stage at all, you should have received a letter from HR informing you that a stage 1 interview had been arranged. My 1st stage was a verbal warning with backup letter, 2nd stage written warning, last and final stage is dismissal. Before it reaches the last and final stage, your company should have at least tried to make reasonable adjustments to encourage your work attendance.

 

Please try and get a copy of the sickness absence policy, if you do not have a copy, please ask HR to provide this for you.

 

 

Lolitta x

Edited March 29, 2011 by lilly of the valley
incorrect spelling