Off work sick, management harrassing with calls

Odelay

Strumms wrote: »

100%... so keep everything documented, they sound like a proper shower of cûnts either way. There are ways to engage with the person on sick leave that can enable the company of every bit of information they NEED in order to continue to manage the business successfully and efficiently while respecting the persons situation. There is zero respect being given here. So I’d row back and give them the minimum.

Also if you want to key it up a notch use mental diversion tactics... interrupt the person calling after a couple of minutes with stuff like...

“Actually, I’ve heard on the grapevine your not feeling great yourself, how are you, you sound stressed, are you ok ?”

“Do you think the good weather will hold”

“Will yourself and the family ( key to mention the family ) be going away this year?”

“Your eldest is how old now ?”

They won’t like it, appreciate it, may even feel and think you are being overly personal, good. They are pushing your personal and family boundaries, push theirs... they initiated the call, you are just asking in kind, with a smile on your face, a cheery heart and the best of intentions. Fûck em.

This is terrible advice.

Work with your employer, they are paying your wages and have a reasonable request.

Shefwedfan

Strumms wrote: »

100%... so keep everything documented, they sound like a proper shower of cûnts either way. There are ways to engage with the person on sick leave that can enable the company of every bit of information they NEED in order to continue to manage the business successfully and efficiently while respecting the persons situation. There is zero respect being given here. So I’d row back and give them the minimum.

Also if you want to key it up a notch use mental diversion tactics... interrupt the person calling after a couple of minutes with stuff like...

“Actually, I’ve heard on the grapevine your not feeling great yourself, how are you, you sound stressed, are you ok ?”

“Do you think the good weather will hold”

“Will yourself and the family ( key to mention the family ) be going away this year?”

“Your eldest is how old now ?”

They won’t like it, appreciate it, may even feel and think you are being overly personal, good. They are pushing your personal and family boundaries, push theirs... they initiated the call, you are just asking in kind, with a smile on your face, a cheery heart and the best of intentions. Fûck em.

The OP said they are not on permanent contract, that’s the way to make sure they never will be.....

A phone call from a first line manager is pushing no boundaries, a call from HR etc and then it is another discussion

Still not sure what issue with getting second opinion is? Especially when it’s a free second opinion

Even if company wasn’t paying and it was my health I would check out a second opinion

mada82

I’m guessing the OP is off with stress or a mental health illness. Whether we like it or not it’s still a taboo subject especially in the workplace.

Owning up to having any of these issues would probably hamper your chances of progression.

Or he could just be a difficult person
Or faking it

irishgrover

mada82 wrote: »

I’m guessing the OP is off with stress or a mental health illness. Whether we like it or not it’s still a taboo subject especially in the workplace.

Owning up to having any of these issues would probably hamper your chances of progression.

Or he could just be a difficult person
Or faking it

Respectfully, it should not matter a flying **** what the medical condition is, either in theory or in reality

Shefwedfan

mada82 wrote: »

I’m guessing the OP is off with stress or a mental health illness. Whether we like it or not it’s still a taboo subject especially in the workplace.

Owning up to having any of these issues would probably hamper your chances of progression.

Or he could just be a difficult person
Or faking it

That’s a big assumption to make

NewbridgeIR

Shefwedfan wrote: »

That’s a big assumption to make

If the OP disclosed the facts then people wouldn't make assumptions or speculate.

STB.

Dav010 wrote: »

Wrong on a lot of counts.

Firstly, you don’t get to define what is an extended absence. If the ops employment contract states that company policy is weekly certs and referral to company GP/OH after absence of two or three etc weeks, they are well within their rights to do so. Your argument that this is improper has no basis in employment law and it is wrong for you to advise the op otherwise.

I would suggest you do some research on FTCs, the employer can easily decide not to renew a FTC at the end of its term and will not fear a claim for unfair dismissal as long as the contract contains a clause stating that the UDA legislation does not apply at determination of the contract term. Advising the op to ignore that is bad advice.

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/employment_rights_and_conditions/contracts_of_employment/fixed_term_or_specified_purpose_contracts.html

So you think.

Extended absences are well established in individual company sick leave policies. They are normally after the 4th week. I have said several times in this thread that the OP will only get their answer by reading the company's sick leave policy. So don't just jump in.

I gather that from reading the OP's posts that they are probably into their second FTC and that this is their first time being sick. If that is the case and the manager is calling suggesting that their GP is not helping them and is asking them to see the company doctor after just 2 weeks, then I would be surprised if company policy is being followed, especially when the nature of the illness has not been disclosed.

People on FTC's carry the same sick leave protections as full time employees under the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act 2003

Being sick whilst on a FTC should not be held over someone. People get sick and recommendations not to follow advice of a medical professional are bad practice. Furthermore managerial contact during sick leave should not be confrontational, intrusive or extend to questioning medical opinion. It is purely a duty of care, inclusiveness in contact and a method to ascertain a return date.

irishgrover wrote: »

Respectfully, it should not matter a flying **** what the medical condition is, either in theory or in reality

I gather that this is whats driving this scenario, in what should be straight forward contact phone calls, rather than a manager trying to gather more private medical information than they are entitled to.

GalwayGrrrrrl

I’ve never met the OP and only know what’s been posted here. But a month off work, signed off as a complete month from day one is unusual unless it’s to do with a broken bone ( which seems not to apply here as it would be obvious to employer what’s wrong) or a stress related/mental health condition. In which case the employer needs to make sure you are well enough to continue work for your own long term health, and to stop them being sued in the future. By not attending the company doctor you are giving off possible vibes of faking the illness. If it was me I’d be straight to the company doc then be able to relax a bit and start concentrating on getting better. Hope you get well soon OP.

caviardreams

GalwayGrrrrrl wrote: »

I’ve never met the OP and only know what’s been posted here. But a month off work, signed off as a complete month from day one is unusual unless it’s to do with a broken bone ( which seems not to apply here as it would be obvious to employer what’s wrong) or a stress related/mental health condition. In which case the employer needs to make sure you are well enough to continue work for your own long term health, and to stop them being sued in the future. By not attending the company doctor you are giving off possible vibes of faking the illness. If it was me I’d be straight to the company doc then be able to relax a bit and start concentrating on getting better. Hope you get well soon OP.

Totally agree with this point - whilst the OP has only been off for a couple of weeks, the initial one month cert probably triggered the company doctor suggestion, and this would be common practice in a lot of workplaces imo.

Nicetrustedcup

Like myself I have missed two days of work over the past year due to my back. One day I could not get out of bed due to the pain.

I won't to my own Dr and was grand but if I was requested I would go to my company Dr no issues.

My policy says if you are out sick for then a week your manager can request for you to have a 2nd check by a company Dr.

If they is calling you once a week or txt every now and then they is checking in on you to see are you OK.

My company policy says my manager can call or txt me at any time if they need me for anything.

ongarboy

I had to take a month off years ago in a former company due to stress from work overload. My own doctor signed me off for a month. My manager did phone me after a couple of weeks asking if I'd see the company doctor. I was hesitant initially and like OP, a little angry as I just wanted to be left alone. I feared it was a form of a "catch me out" strategy to undermine or diminish the authenticity of what I was going through. I understood less about the importance of positive mental health back then and was more influenced by the stigma and shame of mental stress and felt that just being sick because of work stress was a sign of weakness on my behalf so I didn't want it to be discussed, investigated, brought out into the open (even in a confidential manner) etc etc. I then projected it onto their ringing me as a form of harassment when I just wanted to be left alone.

I reluctantly went to the company doctor and it was the most positive experience. They were very understanding and empathetic and they even wanted me to take a few more weeks beyond my own doctor's recommended sick leave which made me feel so validated. Yes, there was elements of them having to cover the company for legal reasons but as others pointed out, it was also (and I do believe primarily) as part of their duty of care, to see what they (the company) needed to do to facilitate me on my return to work (ie modify my workload or address whatever were the causes of the stress). I came away from that meeting feeling so encouraged and understood, that it zapped away a lot of the stress and anxiety I felt. I even returned to work a few days before my original sick leave end date because of that validation (when I originally went out sick, I vowed never to return there such was the stress I had felt at that time). The company did make changes on my return and the job did run smoother although I eventually left when another better fit job opportunity came along.

This may have no bearing on the OP's dilemma but I'd caution against posters saying it's all about the company out to get her/him. OP - why not visit the company doctor? If you genuinely have an issue that warrants sick leave as prescribed by your own doctor, I guarantee you the company doctor will also concur with what your doctor says and this will expedite the process of you getting better and feeling the company is on side. Having this aggro where you perceive the company is out to get you can only do you more harm then good (regardless of what ailment you are suffering from). Best of luck!

skallywag

If going on paid sick-leave for a month or more then I would find it completely unreasonable not to agree to see the company doctor.

I also agree that the general catch-all attitude that a company is always out to get you and catch you out is complete nonsense. We had a team member who went out sick for well over a year, and we genuinely wanted him to get better and to return, he was fully paid during this period.

If he had refused to engage with us during that time there is no way we would have been so patient.

FionnB

Odelay wrote: »

This is terrible advice.

Work with your employer, they are paying your wages and have a reasonable request.

Agreed - why on earth would you say something like
“Actually, I’ve heard on the grapevine your not feeling great yourself, how are you, you sound stressed, are you ok ?”
Why would you make something like that up? It would make you sound crazy!

runawaybishop

STB. wrote: »

So you think.

Extended absences are well established in individual company sick leave policies. They are normally after the 4th week

Normally doesn't matter, the companies policy matters. From my experience anything over 2 weeks is an extended absence.

Fyi: the civil service, the largest employer in the state, will end your probation if you exceed 2 weeks sick in the first 12 months.

Shefwedfan

STB. wrote: »

It is very relevant if a manager is suggesting referring them to the Company doctor after two weeks.

Short term absences are defined in policies and would normally be 4 weeks or less, whilst long term absence or extended absence would be an absence of more than 4 weeks.

If this is the OP's first illness in the company in 2 years, then it seems to have been handled badly so far. The threats within the thread of protect your job (as they will manage you out the door) are not helpful, whatsoever, other than to suggest that the person needs to ignore the advice of a medical professional and get themselves back to work before they are fit to do so.

If the company do not follow their own policies and an employee suddenly finds their FTC not renewed, then it could be used as the grounds for unfair dismissal.

Not sure where your getting this 4 weeks from?

Which company has provided up to 4 weeks before it comes in under extended leave?

None that I’m aware of and hse certainly doesn’t

How is a first line manager calling once a week and offering a company doctor been handled badly I might add?

Strumms

Being off for two weeks and then a company wanting to refer you to their doctor is OTT and disrespectful. If it was four / six weeks, something approaching long term like that, I’d get the request and agree with it. Then they could say something like..’ in order for us to support, you, your health situation and in time your return to health and your work we are requesting you visit the company doc etc...”

You are being diligent, respectful and communicating with them regularly as regards your situation. Working proactively on your health in order for you to return to you workplace...fit, healthy, rested and ready to work and contribute... the decision to send you to the company doctor at this juncture is quite frankly insulting and unprofessional.

bs2014

Thanks all for the feedback. Quite varying opinions for and against my stance but all responses welcome. Fyi I haven't yet been sent to the company doctor....the idea has been put to me and I anticipate my next call will be more making me go. I want to close this off and stop the thread running endlessly.

Dav010

Strumms wrote: »

Being off for two weeks and then a company wanting to refer you to their doctor is OTT and disrespectful. If it was four / six weeks, something approaching long term like that, I’d get the request and agree with it. Then they could say something like..’ in order for us to support, you, your health situation and in time your return to health and your work we are requesting you visit the company doc etc...”

You are being diligent, respectful and communicating with them regularly as regards your situation. Working proactively on your health in order for you to return to you workplace...fit, healthy, rested and ready to work and contribute... the decision to send you to the company doctor at this juncture is quite frankly insulting and unprofessional.

And all completely irrelevant if the ops company sick leave policy says otherwise. But hey, the op now has someone posting what he/she wants to hear.

Jupiter Mulligan

bs2014 wrote: »

However my contract says the company doctor will provide the company with details of illness and files etc. This is I do not like.

So obviously you didn't sign the contract? I mean why would any sensible person sign a contract that they weren't happy with?

Or, if you did sign it, you had your fingers crossed behind your back, so you thought that that particular condition wouldn't count.

A third possibility is that you want to beak the contract that you signed because it doesn't now suit your requirements.

Good luck getting a reference.

Strumms

Dav010 wrote: »

And all completely irrelevant if the ops company sick leave policy says otherwise. But hey, the op now has someone posting what he/she wants to hear.

It’s not irrelevant or however dismissively you would like to tart it up. If the policy decrees that they MUST see the company doctor after such a short duration of absence and having furnished the company in good time with reliable medical certification...that’s bull****, disrespectful and unprofessional to enforce them at this juncture to go down the road of the work doctor.

Dav010

Strumms wrote: »

It’s not irrelevant or however dismissively you would like to tart it up. If the policy decrees that they MUST see the company doctor after such a short duration of absence and having furnished the company in good time with reliable medical certification...that’s bull****, disrespectful and unprofessional to enforce them at this juncture to go down the road of the work doctor.

That’s your opinion, but in the ops case, irrelevant. If it’s in the company policy handbook, and/or contract, then that is the relevant detail. If you personally don’t like it, don’t accept the job offer.

antix80

I think many people are missing the point.

Op to manager: The doctor signed me off a month.
Manager to op after 1 week: so, will you be back next month.
Op to manager: I don't know.
Manager to op after 2 weeks: will you be back at the end of the month?
Op: I don't know. It depends on what the doctor says.
Manager: sounds like your doc doesn't know what they're talking about. Why don't you meet the company doctor?

Op: omg I'm being harrassed.

Facts are:
#1 The op is going to be out for one month
#2 The op has not given clarity if the illness will be longer, and neither has the op's gp (the weekly notes just say "illness")
#3 the company doc will be able to provide this clarity
#4 the manager has not officially required the op to see the company doctor yet
#5 the op will be required to visit the company doctor anyway either on return to work or before then
#6 the company doc will not divulge personal details about the op, other than maybe a fitness to work cert and any reasonable accommodation necessary to allow the op to return to work
#7 the op needs to engage with their employer if they want to keep their job

STB.

runawaybishop wrote: »

Normally doesn't matter, the companies policy matters. From my experience anything over 2 weeks is an extended absence.

Fyi: the civil service, the largest employer in the state, will end your probation if you exceed 2 weeks sick in the first 12 months.

I have mentioned that the OP needs to consult their company's policy several times.

@ the fyi. This is not true. Public Service publish their sick leave rules and probationary rules for sick leave etc

"Pro-rated limits apply for the length of probation, which is 23 days of full pay and 23 days of half pay, for a one-year probationary period, as per the Public Service Management (Sick Leave) Regulations 2014 as amended.".


Source: https://hr.per.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/Probation-Guidelines.pdf

STB.

STB. wrote: »

I have mentioned that the OP needs to consult their company's policy several times.

@ the fyi. This is not true. Public Service publish their sick leave rules and probationary rules for sick leave etc

"Pro-rated limits apply for the length of probation, which is 23 days of full pay and 23 days of half pay, for a one-year probationary period, as per the Public Service Management (Sick Leave) Regulations 2014 as amended.".


Source: https://hr.per.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/Probation-Guidelines.pdf

fyi you misunderstand the difference between whether you will be paid certified sick leave and whether or not certain periods of sick leave will affect your probation

they will, it will be extended at the very least at the thresholds set out by the previous poster. but its grounds for failed probation and used fairly regularly in my experience

STB.

Deleted User wrote: »

fyi you misunderstand the difference between whether you will be paid certified sick leave and whether or not certain periods of sick leave will affect your probation

they will, it will be extended at the very least at the thresholds set out by the previous poster. but its grounds for failed probation and used fairly regularly in my experience

No. I didn't and I linked the probationary guidelines not the sick leave circular.

Here is a Public Service template contract for new entrants.

STB.

STB. wrote: »

No. I didn't and I linked the probationary guidelines not the sick leave circular.

its there in black and white.

we are not debating, you are being informed.

you corrected the earlier poster in error

you are refuting my correction of your misinterpretation in error

your advice in this thread is poor generally

i dont know what you are getting out of this but the OP should prob take note of your truculent digging in now despite being quite obviously incorrect on a pretty basic item

edit: the doc you posted is irrelevant ffs. it refers back to the doc you misunderstood which has been explained to you

STB.

Deleted User wrote: »

its there in black and white.

we are not debating, you are being informed.

you corrected the earlier poster in error

you are refuting my correction of your misinterpretation in error


- I deleted the rest of your nonsense.

Well you better point it out if WHERE in black and white as I have read the probationary manual. Nowhere does it state that it "will end your probation if you exceed 2 weeks sick in the first 12 months".

The second document is the standard contract for new entrants. It references the sick leave circulars etc.

In the Original Document I posted it actually states that.

""Departments may decide that an individual’s attendance requires action when an individual reaches a “threshold” level i.e. certain number of days absence or pattern of absence (such as 56 days/25 instance s over 4 years, pro-rated as required for probationers). It is important that these thresholds only operate as a “flag” that highlights the need to explore an individual’s attendance record further. Other flags may include attendance patternsthat are causing concern (e.g.frequent absences, absences regularly occurring on a Monday or Friday, etc.), absences of four weeks or greater, or four instances of short-term absences in a rolling one year period.

It is recommended that each case is assessed on its own merits and discretion to discount sick leave is applied where appropriate and taking account of the other elements to be assessed such as work performance, conduct and punctuality.

Please note that if a probationer’s absence is due to sick leave, in terms of paid sick leave the pro-rated limits apply for the length of probation, which is 23 days of full pay and 23 days of half pay, for a one-year probationary period, as per the Public Service Management (Sick Leave) Regulations 2014as amended

ill humour you.

read section 62

4 years, 56 days absence, pro rata, 4 years, ie 14 days

and its all couched as may, action, dept choice

ive seen it actioned with less where the pattern justified it

ive seen it waived where the discretion was applied

ive seen the action taken be failed probation, ive seen it be extended probation.

im a manager in the civil service who has used the section in question more than once and im telling you your correction of the poster was wrong, your basis for the correction was irrelevant, your rejoinder to me was irrelevant and your reversion to quoting info on pay thresholds is still irrelevant

thread is veering off topic and tbh theres no point humouring you on this any further.

bs2014

Okay thanks everyone. This post is now drifting way off course and I wish to close it.

Strumms

antix80 wrote: »

I think many people are missing the point.

Op to manager: The doctor signed me off a month.
Manager to op after 1 week: so, will you be back next month.
Op to manager: I don't know.
Manager to op after 2 weeks: will you be back at the end of the month?
Op: I don't know. It depends on what the doctor says.
Manager: sounds like your doc doesn't know what they're talking about. Why don't you meet the company doctor?

Op: omg I'm being harrassed.

Facts are : if the employer is straight off communicating to the employee that in their unqualified opinion and having not even spoken with the doctor that that verified medical professional “doesn’t know what they are talking about”.. that individual is not fit or appropriate to hold the position of responsibility as a manager, of anything or anywhere.