boss threatening sack while off sick

rubyru

I've been off work for 4 weeks with an old injury that work knew all about. I'll be off for at least another 2 weeks. Today I called to inform them I'd sent in another sick note and was told if I continued to be off they would replace me.

Can they do this?

Jonny Blaze

First port of call would be to check your contract if I were you.

How long are you employed there?

godtabh

you can be let go while on sick leave.

drunkmonkey

Yes they can replace you if your not fit to work.

rubyru

Jonny Blaze wrote: »

First port of call would be to check your contract if I were you.

How long are you employed there?

Nothing about it in contract, I looked after the call. I've been there 10 years, they laid us off for a month last year but didn't actually end our contracts.

rubyru

Thanks for the replies, is there a time period after which they can sack me for being off?

Atlantic Dawn

rubyru wrote: »

Thanks for the replies, is there a time period after which they can sack me for being off?

In a lot of contracts will be a clause to say you have to agree to be examined by a company appointed Doctor to verify you are sick, this might be for a period of illness of 6 months plus.

rubyru

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

In a lot of contracts will be a clause to say you have to agree to be examined by a company appointed Doctor to verify you are sick, this might be for a period of illness of 6 months plus.

Thanks. I'll double check.

I understand they have to run a business but thought they'd have to be flexible, I mean if I'd broken my leg I'd be unable to do my job for 6 wks :-/.

Mrs OBumble

rubyru wrote: »

...but thought they'd have to be flexible, I mean if I'd broken my leg I'd be unable to do my job for 6 wks :-/.

Why?

If you're not able to fulfil your part in the contract (ie turn up to work at the agreed dates / times), there's no reason why they'd have to be flexible.

Granted, many places choose to be. But they don't have to.

rubyru

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Why?

If you're not able to fulfil your part in the contract (ie turn up to work at the agreed dates / times), there's no reason why they'd have to be flexible.

Granted, many places choose to be. But they don't have to.

Fair enough I suppose, just seems harsh sacking me after 10yrs :-(

blindsider

How did the injury occur? When? Have you been off sick before, and for how long?

Are you a member of a union?

Have you been to see the company's doctor?

Can you do any of your work from home?

Who told you about the potential sacking? Your boss, or the HR Manager? If it was your boss, I'd ring the HR Mgr immediately to clarify.

This is long - but VERY RELEVANT:

Capability
This includes issues such as lateness, absenteeism and persistent absence through illness or injury, either short-term or long-term.

If lateness or absenteeism is at issue, your employer will be expected to have documentary proof of this allegation, such as clocking-in records or documented absences on file that are not medically certified. In addition, your employer will also be expected to show that you were made aware of the problem and that you were warned as to the consequences for your continued employment.

If illness or injury is at issue, it is often assumed that you cannot be dismissed fairly while on certified sick leave from your work. However, this is not true. It is difficult to lay down hard and fast rules to apply to these cases as each will be treated on its own merits. Issues such as length of service, previous record and the importance of the job will vary and will have to be taken into account. These types of claim are often divided into short-term and long-term absences.

Dismissal related to short-term illness generally occurs where you have a medical problem that results in frequent absences for short periods from the workplace. Assuming that the genuine nature of your problem was not in question, your employer will have to show that a pattern of absence exists, that it is causing problems, that the problem is unlikely to get better and that you have been warned that dismissal is likely.

In a case of a long-term absence, however, your employer will be expected to obtain detailed medical evidence that an early return to work is unlikely. There is no set period of absence by which it can be said that a dismissal will or will not be considered reasonable. Obviously, the longer the absence, the easier it is for your employer to show that it is causing genuine difficulty in terms of the organisation of the workplace.

In terms of medical evidence you may be required to attend your employer's medical expert. If there is a conflict of medical evidence between you and your employer as to the possible return date, your employer will be expected to get a second opinion before taking the decision to dismiss you.

However, it is important to note that if your illness might be considered a disability under employment equality legislation, your rights under that particular legislation would also have to be taken into consideration.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/unemployment_and_redundancy/dismissal/fair_grounds_for_dismissal.html


So, no hard and fast rules. I would be trying to get back to work quickly - even for a day or 2 a week to start (as long as it's safe to do so). You need to demonstrate that you're trying hard.

bobwilliams

rubyru wrote: »

Thanks for the replies, is there a time period after which they can sack me for being off?

as far as I know you would have to be off for a year and THEN they could start a process to get rid of you

delthedriver

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Why?

If you're not able to fulfil your part in the contract (ie turn up to work at the agreed dates / times), there's no reason why they'd have to be flexible.

Granted, many places choose to be. But they don't have to.

Er, wrong Mrs. O !


I don't know what kind of sweat shops you run, however it may surprise you that employees have rights too!

Nodferatu

rubyru wrote: »

Fair enough I suppose, just seems harsh sacking me after 10yrs :-(

True, but in fairness, you think a boss is gonna give a s**t about one individual? Your a number in your job, harsh reality but your just a machine. All any company cares about is two things only, 1) survival and 2) profit.

Mrs OBumble

delthedriver wrote: »

Er, wrong Mrs. O !


I don't know what kind of sweat shops you run, however it may surprise you that employees have rights too!

Links please ...

AFAIK, as per Blindsiders quote from Citizen's Information, there are no set period, the's no definitive standards, it's all very subjective - and there are very few specific rights in the situation where you cannot do your job due to illness or injury.

Irish employment law is actually a lot more hard-ass than I'm used to in this area: I never heard the line "that certificate explains but does not excuse your absence" before I came here.

And there's nothing helpful in giving the OP false hopes about what consideration s/he may be entitled to here.

rubyru

blindsider wrote: »

How did the injury occur? When? Have you been off sick before, and for how long?

The injury happened out of work 9 yrs ago and in that time I only took the 2 mnths out after it happened. I had a prosthetic limb fitted. My job is very manual and rather than take time off I just took more painkillers when it got to painful
I've only ever been off sick once apart from that and that was a stomach bug.


Are you a member of a union?

No union I'm afraid.


Have you been to see the company's doctor?

No, I don't even know if they have one.

Can you do any of your work from home?

Unfortunately not.


Who told you about the potential sacking? Your boss, or the HR Manager? If it was your boss, I'd ring the HR Mgr immediately to clarify.

My boss, we must have hr manager as there are 150 employees but I've never had contact.


So, no hard and fast rules. I would be trying to get back to work quickly - even for a day or 2 a week to start (as long as it's safe to do so). You need to demonstrate that you're trying hard.

I would love to but until the limb specialist says it's ok and the pain is under control it's not possible.

Thank you for your post it's very inforative and helpful

blindsider

Rubyru - I'd ring the HR Manager and ask for a meeting.

NB - Remember that the HR Mgr works for the company. S/he is there to protect the company, and to act in the company's interests - not necessarily yours.

- Bring medical documentation

- Explain that you're keen to go back to work ASAP

- Try to build a bit of a relationship with the HR Mgr

- Ask if there's anything else you can do?

This way, you're seen to be trying to help/minimise your absence - you're a committed, engaged employee.

Best of luck!

blindsider

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Links please ...

Good point Mrs O. I don't see the value in offering unfounded opinions. I do think that people should be able to support assertions with some evidence or rationale. However, I'm also conscious that we do not give 'legal' advice on this (or any other) forum.

Irish employment law is actually a lot more hard-ass than I'm used to in this area: I never heard the line "that certificate explains but does not excuse your absence" before I came here.

Ouch! I think I'd be reminding the employer that it's against every H&S policy in the book to be in work, when declared medically unfit to be there.

And there's nothing helpful in giving the OP false hopes about what consideration s/he may be entitled to here.

Completely agree with this - it's irresponsible. You can't beat an aul' fact ;-) and a link or 2 to support your argument is always good!

.

Mrs OBumble

OP, something to be aware of: just 'cos there are 150+ staff does not mean there has to be a HR manager. In some companies, there is just payroll, and managers are expected to do their own managing, sometimes with the help of an HR advisor who the employees never see.

Try and find out from other employees who might have had issues in the past how things work n your place (assuming you have out-of-work contact details for some).

TBH, if it's a vey manual job and an old injury is causing issues, they may be expecting that you won't make it back, or that you may start having more problems from now on.

bobwilliams

any company of 150 odd employees would be mad not to have a HR manager,they would have more costs from trips into the EAT than you would believe.
If they don't have 1 they for sure will have an employee law solicitor on call 24 /7 which is not cheap.
I would honestly not panic if I were the op,your company by the sounds of things are not being reasonable to an employee of 10 years who has a genuine medical condition.
They will not stand a chance in the EAT with this case from what I've heard.

delthedriver

bobwilliams wrote: »

any company of 150 odd employees would be mad not to have a HR manager,they would have more costs from trips into the EAT than you would believe.
If they don't have 1 they for sure will have an employee law solicitor on call 24 /7 which is not cheap.
I would honestly not panic if I were the op,your company by the sounds of things are not being reasonable to an employee of 10 years who has a genuine medical condition.
They will not stand a chance in the EAT with this case from what I've heard.

If OP is not a member of a Union, I suggest discussing the matter with an Employment Law Specialist.


Sounds like the employer is being unreasonable. Do they wish to be sued also for firing someone with a disability. MMMM should make interesting headline news.


If Op needs a contact name please feel free to PM me

Stheno

delthedriver wrote: »

If OP is not a member of a Union, I suggest discussing the matter with an Employment Law Specialist.


Sounds like the employer is being unreasonable. Do they wish to be sued also for firing someone with a disability. MMMM should make interesting headline news.


If Op needs a contact name please feel free to PM me

The op has not said they have a disability, rather they have an old injury that has recurred.

I suffered a work related accident that has directly impacted on my ability to do my job and am looking for other work as a result.

When I get that other work I will go through the PIAB for compensation

With the OP if they cannot do their job due to a non work related injury for an extended time, then their employer can let them go

delthedriver

Stheno wrote: »

The op has not said they have a disability, rather they have an old injury that has recurred.

I suffered a work related accident that has directly impacted on my ability to do my job and am looking for other work as a result.

When I get that other work I will go through the PIAB for compensation

With the OP if they cannot do their job due to a non work related injury for an extended time, then their employer can let them go

Wishing you well in your quest for alternative work. Hope the PIAB case works out well for you.


Sincerely

Mrs OBumble

Stheno wrote: »

The op has not said they have a disability, rather they have an old injury that has recurred.

It might not be quite that simple. If the injury resulted in a permanent impairment, then that probably counts as a disability.

The employer has to make reasonable adaptations to enable them to do the job desitpe the impairment. There's no hard-and-fast rule re what is reasonable - it's based on the circumstance. But there are some jobs where no reasonable adaptation exists - eg a paramedic needs to be able to lift people, so if they lost an arm, they probably could not do the job safely.

But if the employee could do the job before, despite the injury, then probably the disabaility / adaptation issue isn't relevant.

If they're sick as a result of the injury, and medical advice is that they cannot work, then this is where the "explains but does not excuse" attitude kicks in. If someone cannot do their job for an extended time (extended is not defined), then they may get fired. Or soemtiems the term "medical retirement" is used, to distinguish between "fired for being naughty".

Going legal is one route in this situation. And I'd totally agree with an initial consultation with a solicitor or union (if one will see you ), rather than relying on the conflicting advice of partially-informed randoms on the interwebz (includding me!).

But the OP needs to make a decision about whether taking a case is worth the hassle / stress / risk-of-failure - and whether the potential payout, plus local reputation as a troublesome empoloyee, are worth it. Lawyers don't like it, but these are all relevant factors for their clients.

And it's far from clear to me that the employer is being unreasonable - there are far too many maybe's and what-it's inthis discussion.

the_syco

rubyru wrote: »

Nothing about it in contract, I looked after the call. I've been there 10 years, they laid us off for a month last year but didn't actually end our contracts.

Sounds like they don't want to pay out redundancy, and they're looking to trim down the staff. Check if anyone else has been let go under similar circumstances.

wmpdd3

Good point. Have there been others let go while on sick leave?


I have people let go during sick leave but only after a protracted session of meetings, targets set and targets not met.

I would recommend getting the opinion of an employment law specialist, especially after 10 years service.