Civil Service Sick Leave Costs State Over €300m Extra P/A Compared To Private Sector

itzme

woodoo wrote: »

My guess is that there are a small number of staff taking the piss. Off for months at a time. That is skewing the numbers.

SerialComplaint wrote: »

Or perhaps a small number of staff very ill. Off for months at a time. That is skewing the numbers.

Rather than have a guess why not have a read of this document I linked to earlier on absenses in the (36,000) civil service to see if those guesses are valid or not.

n97 mini wrote: »

^ There was that woman in the civil service who was off sick for 5 years and when they tried to get rid of her she tried to sue.

Interesting how people return to work when their pay is cut:

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/sick-leave-in-civil-service-falls-by-68pc-when-pay-is-cut-3104659.html

I don't find it interesting at all that people return to work when their pay is cut, I find it obvious. I would however find it interesting to see whether all the people who returned were fit to come back or were forced into financially when it wasn't the right call for their health.

n97 mini wrote: »

Also worth noting is that the private sector is under no obligation to pay people for days they haven't worked.

Again, what is the point here are you saying that an employer should not have to pay sick pay? Is that a good social policy? Or are you just comparing Public to private in the most basic Bad V Good scenario without any attempt at useful context.
I strongly agree with paying sick pay, I believe that the private sector should be forced to pay sick pay within reasonable conditions.

n97 mini

itzme wrote: »

Again, what is the point here are you saying that an employer should not have to pay sick pay?

If employers have to pay sick pay then it's only fair they should get a cut of employees' social insurance contributions.

barneystinson

A few interesting facts pointed out in the C&AG's 2009 report, which examined 2007 absences in the Civil Service:

(http://audgen.gov.ie/documents/vfmreports/69_Managing_Sickness_Absences.pdf)

• almost half of all sick days were taken by Clerical Officers and three quarters of all Clerical Officers availed of sick leave. The average number of days taken by each Clerical Officer was 16 days
• female staff absence accounted for 68% of all working days lost, the average number of sick days taken by each female employee was almost 14 days, while the average for each male employee was around eight days (55% of staff resources of departments covered in the examination were female)
• the average number of days lost for those working a three day week was almost 80% higher than the average for those who worked a standard week.
• 5% of all instances of absence in 2007 lasted longer than 20 days. However, these instances accounted for almost half of all days lost to absence with the average absence lasting 62 days.

twowheelsonly

everdead.ie wrote: »

One thing I would like to see is the seperation of the HSE from the rest of the figures as they are likely to be sicker more often given where they work.

Firstly...It's the Indo :rolleyes:

I work on both sides of the fence, both in Public Sector and I have a Private Company. I get people ringing in sick to me in the Private company but I've never reported it to anybody, nor have I ever been asked to

In the Public sector people have to realise that as well as Healthcare and Educational staff (who shouldn't be working if they're sick anyway) you also have occupations such as Gardai, Fire Brigade and Ambulance Personnel and Prison staff. All of these can be both physically and mentally challenging leading to severe stress and also some horrendous assaults etc. This all contributes to the pool of sick leave.

Also, I work shift work in the PS. If I break my leg tomorrow and I'm out for 6 weeks then that's 42 days. Of those I'll be 'Due On' for 21. However my sick record will show 42 as our days off are counted as sick leaveas well. Whatever about the due on days costing the State money how the hell can my due off days cost them???

I'd far prefer if this reporting stated that 5% of PS (or Private) took X amount of days or more, 15% took Y and 35% took Z amount of days or less. This would avoid tarring everyone with the 11 days brush and would highlight the fact that only a very small amount of people take a large amount of sick leave.

As an aside, I know a work colleague of mine in the PS that retired recently having not taken a sick day in almost 27 years. His average was 9 though, same as the rest of us

daltonmd

twowheelsonly wrote: »

Firstly...It's the Indo :rolleyes:

I work on both sides of the fence, both in Public Sector and I have a Private Company. I get people ringing in sick to me in the Private company but I've never reported it to anybody, nor have I ever been asked to

In the Public sector people have to realise that as well as Healthcare and Educational staff (who shouldn't be working if they're sick anyway) you also have occupations such as Gardai, Fire Brigade and Ambulance Personnel and Prison staff. All of these can be both physically and mentally challenging leading to severe stress and also some horrendous assaults etc. This all contributes to the pool of sick leave.

Also, I work shift work in the PS. If I break my leg tomorrow and I'm out for 6 weeks then that's 42 days. Of those I'll be 'Due On' for 21. However my sick record will show 42 as our days off are counted as sick leaveas well. Whatever about the due on days costing the State money how the hell can my due off days cost them???

I'd far prefer if this reporting stated that 5% of PS (or Private) took X amount of days or more, 15% took Y and 35% took Z amount of days or less. This would avoid tarring everyone with the 11 days brush and would highlight the fact that only a very small amount of people take a large amount of sick leave.

As an aside, I know a work colleague of mine in the PS that retired recently having not taken a sick day in almost 27 years. His average was 9 though, same as the rest of us

Actually it's worse than that. I know prison officers and they told me that they work back to back shifts. Their week begins on Saturday and if they fall ill that week and return to work the next Saturday it is counted as 7 days sick, when in fact they were only due 3 days, Mon/Tues and Friday.

That has to skew the numbers.

sarumite

daltonmd wrote: »

Actually it's worse than that. I know prison officers and they told me that they work back to back shifts. Their week begins on Saturday and if they fall ill that week and return to work the next Saturday it is counted as 7 days sick, when in fact they were only due 3 days, Mon/Tues and Friday.

That has to skew the numbers.

Though if you do back to back shifts and miss a day, would that not be effectively missing 2 'days' of work?

itzme

n97 mini wrote: »

If employers have to pay sick pay then it's only fair they should get a cut of employees' social insurance contributions.

Ok so are you going to say whether you support sick pay or not?
Without stating what your position on that is, it'd be all to easy to just keep throwing up random comparisons between public and private which would not further the discussion at all.

daltonmd

sarumite wrote: »

Though if you do back to back shifts and miss a day, would that not be effectively missing 2 'days' of work?

It's a back to back roster, not back to back shifts. It is an extended work day of 11 hours, not 8 so it's classed as one working day.

They are not paid two days.

n97 mini

itzme wrote: »

Ok so are you going to say whether you support sick pay or not?

Do you think employers should pay sick pay out of their own pockets, or should they get reimbursed from the employees' social contributions?

8under

daltonmd wrote: »

Actually it's worse than that. I know prison officers and they told me that they work back to back shifts. Their week begins on Saturday and if they fall ill that week and return to work the next Saturday it is counted as 7 days sick, when in fact they were only due 3 days, Mon/Tues and Friday.

That has to skew the numbers.

In the civil service, is it not true that if you are off sick on a Friday and on the following Monday, the absence is counted as 4 days even though two of the days (Saturday and Sunday) are not normal working days.

Do they count it the same way in the private sector ? I doubt it. This would also skew the figures.

daltonmd

n97 mini wrote: »

Do you think employers should pay sick pay out of their own pockets, or should they get reimbursed from the employees' social contributions?

Wouldn't this mean that the state is still paying for the sick leave?

n97 mini

daltonmd wrote: »

Wouldn't this mean that the state is still paying for the sick leave?

Only if the state is paying the employees' social contributions in the first place.

daltonmd

8under wrote: »

In the civil service, is it not true that if you are off sick on a Friday and on the following Monday, the absence is counted as 4 days even though two of the days (Saturday and Sunday) are not normal working days.

Do they count it the same way in the private sector ? I doubt it. This would also skew the figures.

Where did I say that was the case?

You are talking about Mon - Fri staff. Not all CS work those hours.

Prison officers work back to back rosters. Their week starts on a Saturday.

One Week they are due on. Sat/Sun - Wed/Thurs. The next week they are due on, Mon/Tues and Fri. If they are ill for that week, or lets say for the 2 week, 14 days are accounted as sick when they were only due to work 7.

For a Mon- Fri CS worker that same two week absence is counted as 10 days, not 14.

sarumite

daltonmd wrote: »

It's a back to back roster, not back to back shifts. It is an extended work day of 11 hours, not 8 so it's classed as one working day.

They are not paid two days.

Thats a fair point. Though I was thinking of when I used to works shifts. I was doing 12 hour shifts back then, whereas now I do 8 hours. If I miss two days working 12 hours shifts, then I am officially sick for 2 days, eventhough I have missed the equivalent of three days worth of hours if I am working an 8 hour shift. So the sick leave aspect kind of works both ways shift wise, whereby sometimes you miss more work hours, but clock up fewer missed 'days' and other times you miss fewer work hours and clock up more missed 'days'.

daltonmd

n97 mini wrote: »

Only if the state is paying the employees' social contributions in the first place.

Sorry, let's go back.

You said:

"If employers have to pay sick pay then it's only fair they should get a cut of employees' social insurance contributions."

Now the employee pays these to the state, as you know, if you are now suggesting that they pay these to the employer then you weren't very clear.

sarumite

8under wrote: »

In the civil service, is it not true that if you are off sick on a Friday and on the following Monday, the absence is counted as 4 days even though two of the days (Saturday and Sunday) are not normal working days.

Do they count it the same way in the private sector ? I doubt it. This would also skew the figures.

For a sick certificate, many (although it is impossible to say all) will include saturday and sunday as the time the certificate is valid. I.e if you are have a certificate for five days, Saturday and Sunday are included in those days.

Gumbo

8under wrote: »

In the civil service, is it not true that if you are off sick on a Friday and on the following Monday, the absence is counted as 4 days even though two of the days (Saturday and Sunday) are not normal working days.

Do they count it the same way in the private sector ? I doubt it. This would also skew the figures.

Im in an LA, if im out sick Friday and the following Monday, i need a doctors note and the sick leave is counted as Fri, Sat, Sun & Mon. Something to do with weekends counted as rest days IIRC.

Glinda

daltonmd wrote: »

For a Mon- Fri CS worker that same two week absence is counted as 10 days, not 14.

Not true. Two week absence is counted as fourteen days throughout the CS. If you are absent Friday and Monday this counts as four days.

n97 mini

daltonmd wrote: »

Sorry,

Don't worry about it.

daltonmd wrote: »

Now the employee pays these to the state, as you know, if you are now suggesting that they pay these to the employer then you weren't very clear.

We can split hairs. Employees pay social contributions. If employers get reimbursed from these for paying sick pay, then I'm sure you won't object?

daltonmd

sarumite wrote: »

If I miss two days working 12 hours shifts, then I am officially sick for 2 days, eventhough I have missed the equivalent of three days worth of hours if I am working an 8 hour shift.

Exactly and in the Prison Service if you miss 3 eleven hour shifts in the "short week" your actual sick leave count is 7 days.

sarumite wrote: »

So the sick leave aspect kind of works both ways shift wise, whereby sometimes you miss more work hours, but clock up fewer missed 'days' and other times you miss fewer work hours and clock up more missed 'days'.

But it's not in the prison service. If your day is 20 hours long and you miss that day sick it is one day sick, if you are part time and work 4 hours then if you miss that day sick then it is one day sick.

It should be the same over weeks as well as over days.

daltonmd

n97 mini wrote: »

Don't worry about it.

I'm not. You said:

"If employers have to pay sick pay then it's only fair they should get a cut of employees' social insurance contributions."

You then said:

Only if the state is paying the employees' social contributions in the first place.

The state doesn't pay the contributions, the employees do.

n97 mini wrote: »

We can split hairs. Employees pay social contributions. If employers get reimbursed from these for paying sick pay, then I'm sure you won't object?

No splitting hairs about it.

If the employee continues to pay the social contributions to the state and the employer pays the sick leave directly to the employer and is then reimbursed by the state - isn't the state still paying the sick leave?

Very clear to me.

daltonmd

Glinda wrote: »

Not true. Two week absence is counted as fourteen days throughout the CS. If you are absent Friday and Monday this counts as four days.

I don't think so Glinda. I know for prison officers that is the case, for teachers 2 weeks is counted as 12 days and some parts of the CS are counted as 10 days.

8under

daltonmd wrote: »

I don't think so Glinda. I know for prison officers that is the case, for teachers 2 weeks is counted as 12 days and some parts of the CS are counted as 10 days.

I asked the question because as a former cs, I seem to recall the situation was that you were required to submit a medical certificate for a Friday & Monday absence because you could not take uncertfied leave (for more than two consecutive days in one absence). The absence was counted as 4 continous days including Saturday & Sunday not two sick days.

I expect that this would affect the data in relation to days taken but not in relation to the cost.

n97 mini

daltonmd wrote: »

and the employer pays the sick leave directly to the employer

Do you object to employers being re-imbursed for sick pay or not?

woodoo

daltonmd wrote: »

Actually it's worse than that. I know prison officers and they told me that they work back to back shifts. Their week begins on Saturday and if they fall ill that week and return to work the next Saturday it is counted as 7 days sick, when in fact they were only due 3 days, Mon/Tues and Friday.

That has to skew the numbers.

I doubt that type of info will ever be printed in the Indo.

woodoo

daltonmd wrote: »

I don't think so Glinda. I know for prison officers that is the case, for teachers 2 weeks is counted as 12 days and some parts of the CS are counted as 10 days.

Proof?

n97 mini

daltonmd wrote: »

I know for prison officers that is the case,

Prison officers are probably not role models for sick leave. We're they caught operating a "buddy system" whereby they were carving up sick leave between themselves so as to maximise overtime.

BFDCH.

same thing is done by the porters in one of the capitals biggest hospitals.

Glinda

None of the above are civil servants. Civil servants all have the same sick leave rules and count their sick days the same way, with weekend days included.

Maybe you mean public servants? They are a much more diverse bunch and have lots of different arrangements depending on employer.

Lumbo

Looks like the Labour Court is doing something about it.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0719/public-service-sick-pay-entitlements-to-be-halved.html

Sick leave entitlements for almost 300,000 public servants are to be halved following a Labour Court recommendation issued today.
1 of 1 [URL="javascript:void(0)"][/URL][URL="javascript:void(0)"][/URL]Uncertified sick leave entitlements are to be cut


The public service bill for sick pay costs around €550m a year.
Last year, €63.1m of the sick pay bill was due to illnesses not certified by a doctor.
Under the present scheme, public servants are entitled to six months of sick leave on full pay followed by six months on half pay within any period of four years.
After exhausting the first year of entitlements, they go onto a lower rate known as rehabilitation pay.
However, following today's recommendation issued by Labour Court Chairman Kevin Duffy, from 1 January 2014 the general entitlement will be halved to three months’ full pay and three months’ half pay.
Self-certified sick leave is to be cut from seven days in any year to seven days over a rolling two-year period.
This will take effect as soon as practicable.
Mr Duffy described the change as "one of major significance from the perspective of the State as an employer".
However, he also called it "reasonable and modest" compared to entitlements in other employment.
People experiencing "critical illness" will still be entitled to six months’ full pay and six months on half pay.
Today’s recommendation says that critical illness cover should be regarded as an exceptional and normally non-recurring occurrence.
The Labour Court accepts that management has discretion to decide how this is applied but recommended further talks with unions to agree a protocol including an independent appeals mechanism on how that discretion should be exercised.
It also recommends reform of rehabilitation pay.
Addressing an anomaly affecting workers recruited before 1995, it says no public servant on rehabilitation pay should receive less than social welfare benefits.
However, even where critical illness applies, the total period of entitlement including rehabilitation pay cannot exceed two years.
The court also recommends further talks regarding the entitlements of teachers.
They currently have an entitlement to one year's sick leave on full pay and different entitlements to uncertified sick leave.
Reacting to the report, General Secretary of the Public Service Executive Union Tom Geraghty said that their priority had been to maintain protection for people who were seriously incapacitated, and he believed they had succeeded in doing that.

ParkRunner

Lumbo wrote: »

Looks like the Labour Court is doing something about it.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0719/public-service-sick-pay-entitlements-to-be-halved.html

These measures should only affect those who abuse the uncertified sick leave system and those who are genuinely long term sufferers. At least those dedicated to providing a public service & who only take genuine certified sick days should not really be affected by this

christmas2012

some of them werent even seriously sick and getting six months on full pay?!?i mean wtf..?there is a saying about people in state jobs,you could stand on youre head and not get fired!these people are in cushy numbers there for life no questions asked..county councillors are the worst of the packet being honest,they dont even fix the roads near us they have been burdened with potholes that would wreck your car or a pedestrian trip over for ten plus years!and now there getting paid the household charge for what exactly on top of what they get from tax already..

Gumbo

christmas2012 wrote: »

some of them werent even seriously sick and getting six months on full pay?!?i mean wtf..?

In fairness, if your certified out of work sick for 6 months by a private sector doctor, something must be wrong above and beyond the common cold :rolleyes:

christmas2012 wrote: »

and now there getting paid the household charge for what exactly on top of what they get from tax already..

you should read up on the household charge payment figures.

christmas2012

In fairness, if your certified out of work sick for 6 months by a private sector doctor, something must be wrong above and beyond the common cold

ya...the yuppy flu ffs..

bamboozle

EF wrote: »

These measures should only affect those who abuse the uncertified sick leave system and those who are genuinely long term sufferers. At least those dedicated to providing a public service & who only take genuine certified sick days should not really be affected by this

i guess the problem is the amount of people taking the full 7 uncertified days each year, that's to be cut to 7 uncertified days every 2 years. that should have a big impact on productivity.

still waiting for the govt to announce the referendum on the closure of the Seanad...the biggest waste of tax payers money....the 1963 pawnbrokers bill was the last time it has rejected a dail bill.

Gumbo

christmas2012 wrote: »

ya...the yuppy flu ffs..

can you explain???

ParkRunner

bamboozle wrote: »

i guess the problem is the amount of people taking the full 7 uncertified days each year, that's to be cut to 7 uncertified days every 2 years. that should have a big impact on productivity.

Possibly, although those who aim to take the full 7 days uncertified sick leave each year are probably not the most productive workers in any case as they are demotivated I expect and don't see that taking the full allowance will wreck your promotion opportunities. In fairness it doesn't seem to be too difficult to get a sick cert in any case.

daltonmd

woodoo wrote: »

Proof?

From INTO

2.3.2 where time-tabled otherwise at primary and post-primary, each day’s absence on grounds of ill-health on which the teacher is scheduled to be in attendance shall count as two days sick leave in any week subject to a maximum of five days sick leave being reckoned for five school days in the same week.

2.3.3 Where sick leave absences span weekends, each intervening weekend shall count as two days.

daltonmd

Glinda wrote: »

None of the above are civil servants. Civil servants all have the same sick leave rules and count their sick days the same way, with weekend days included.

Maybe you mean public servants? They are a much more diverse bunch and have lots of different arrangements depending on employer.

Prison Officers are Civil Servants.

golden lane

i agree that people should not be paid for not going to work...unless they are certified sick.....

but there are some people getting paid..who have never ever been to work.....

christmas2012

still waiting for the govt to announce the referendum on the closure of the Seanad...the biggest waste of tax payers money....the 1963 pawnbrokers bill was the last time it has rejected a dail bill.

if they are not functional and so bloody expensive then what are we waiting for,dont be airy fairy about it just cut the damn thing up to shreds..we shouldnt be paying them if they dont serve a good function..

twowheelsonly

n97 mini wrote: »

Prison officers are probably not role models for sick leave. We're they caught operating a "buddy system" whereby they were carving up sick leave between themselves so as to maximise overtime.

No, they were never 'caught' doing that. Rumoured and alleged but never substantiated or proven. Why Not?? Because if an Officer goes sick tomorrow he's not replaced!! Only if somebody is on long term sick is he going to be replaced. There's no overtime now either, it's a system of Annualised Hours.

christmas2012 wrote: »

some of them werent even seriously sick and getting six months on full pay?!?i mean wtf..?there is a saying about people in state jobs,you could stand on youre head and not get fired!these people are in cushy numbers there for life no questions asked..county councillors are the worst of the packet being honest,they dont even fix the roads near us they have been burdened with potholes that would wreck your car or a pedestrian trip over for ten plus years!and now there getting paid the household charge for what exactly on top of what they get from tax already..

Name names for God sake man. That's fraud and the information that you have should be passed on to the relevant bodies. Report the Doctors to the Medical Board as well seeing as they're complicit in this fraud.
(Presuming that you have hard evidence of course and haven't just 'heard' this or read it in the Indo...)

n97 mini

twowheelsonly wrote: »

No, they were never 'caught' doing that. Rumoured and alleged but never substantiated or proven.

It was well known what a number of them were at, the Comptroller & Auditor General had to get involved, there were Dail debates over the issue, and it resulted in McDowell restructing things. Prison officers had the highest absenteeism rate in the entire public service of 16.6 days per person, resulting in annual overtime payments of up to €60m.

SerialComplaint

n97 mini wrote: »

Prison officers had the highest absenteeism rate in the entire public service of 16.6 days per person

Yes, I wonder what could have possibly caused that. Nothing to do with spending all day trying to manage a gang of convicted criminals who routinely use i/v drugs and spend their days planning for (and physically training for) how they can attack prison warders. But hey, let's compare their sick leave stats to insurance salesmen and call centre drones and moan about their sick leave.

Cuddlesworth

In a very large multinational private company I worked for, one member of my team took just under 6 months in a year off sick and he spend four of them building a extension to his brothers house. He admitted it drunk one evening but I had no hard evidence of this to present to HR.

Coming close to the fifth month of sick leave he was told to see the company's doctor or his contract would be terminated. He miraculously recovered and was back two days later. They couldn't do much else and he couldn't be singled out. So the lax sick leave policy for the benefit of the employees was abused by him solely even after the above. And like another poster pointed out, he probably raised the overall stats for our department to unacceptable levels.

When the 20% company wide redundancy was announced he knew he was gone and we knew he was gone. He just went home and never came back in. I suppose that's the only real difference between a messer in a private company and one employed by the State at the moment. You can be made redundant privately and it can in some cases be a good way to clear the dead wood.

Cuddlesworth

SerialComplaint wrote: »

Nothing to do with spending all day trying to manage a gang of convicted criminals who routinely use i/v drugs and spend their days planning for (and physically training for) how they can attack prison warders.

Do you know any Prison Officers? My uncle worked as one for 30 years and would have a different opinion of the job then yours. So much so, he happily got his son a job as one without a bother to him.

woodoo

kceire wrote: »

can you explain???

He is referring to M.E.

Obviously he is a medical expert ahead of his time.

twowheelsonly

n97 mini wrote: »

It was well known what a number of them were at, the Comptroller & Auditor General had to get involved, there were Dail debates over the issue, and it resulted in McDowell restructing things. Prison officers had the highest absenteeism rate in the entire public service of 16.6 days per person, resulting in annual overtime payments of up to €60m.

Read the article again.. 'Alleged..' and 'denied accusing the staff of ripping off the State..'
This was at a time when the overtime bill was supposedly scandalously high. The entire system has since been restructured and that dirty 'Overtime' word eliminated. However, (I don't have the figures) I'm willing to bet that it's costing just as much and probably a lot more to run the Prison Service now that it did then. A lot of senior figures at the time knew that they were getting value for money but couldn't come out and say it. Different topic anyway...sorry for straying.

Regarding the 16.6 days sick - Go back over the thread. If I'm out sick for the next month then it's counted as 30 days, not just the 15 days that I'm due on. Take any figures from the propaganda machine with a pinch of salt.

twowheelsonly

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Do you know any Prison Officers? My uncle worked as one for 30 years and would have a different opinion of the job then yours. So much so, he happily got his son a job as one without a bother to him.

Depends on where he worked..
The truth lies somewhere in between the two experiences, basically because there's such a huge variety of tasks and posts within the Prison Service.
In theory, a guy working the landings in Mountjoy is going to have a lot more sick leave than a Clerical Officer in Shelton Abbey. There's a world of difference between the two.

Doubt very much, unless he was well well up in the service that he 'got his son a job no bother'. I know a Governors son that was turned down!! Does tend to be a family thing there though, possibly because at least they then have an idea of what sort of person they're getting Also, because a lot of sons and daughters will follow their fathers trade. Same with the Army, Farmers, Mechanics and Doctors. You name it.

n97 mini

SerialComplaint wrote: »

Yes, I wonder what could have possibly caused that.

A buddy system. HSE staff thru exposure to diseases etc we can understand.

Everybody knows what was going on in the Prison Service, including Michael McDowell.