holidays while on sick leave

Ginger83

Hi a friend of mine is currently on sick leave from work. They have holidays booked.

How does this work? Do they use up their holidays or due to them being on sick leave can they save the holidays to use again? They are getting paid by their employer while out sick

antix80

It doesn't come out of their annual leave entitlement.
So they save their holidays for later in the year.

skallywag

If you happen to get sick during your holiday leave then it is bad luck, and you cannot claim the holidays back and take sick leave instead.

Your situation is clearly different though in that the sick leave is being taken before the holiday is due to happen.

That is an interesting one, I have not come across it before. Once holiday leave is approved I am not sure whether or not you are then obliged legally to take it or not, regardless of illness. I would like to think that any decent employer would allow the leave to be postponed, I know that is what I would do myself, but I do not know what the legal stance is on this one.

antix80

Skallywag, where are you getting that from?

If an employee becomes sick while on annual leave they can take it as sick leave and take annual leave another time. They'll likely need a cert.

If an employee has annual leave approved and becomes sick, once again that would be taken as sick leave, allowing the employee to take annual leave another time.

See https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/employment_rights_and_conditions/leave_and_holidays/sick_leave.html

Pacifico

skallywag wrote: »

If you happen to get sick during your holiday leave then it is bad luck, and you cannot claim the holidays back and take sick leave instead.

You can

tedpan

skallywag wrote:

If you happen to get sick during your holiday leave then it is bad luck, and you cannot claim the holidays back and take sick leave instead.

Definitely not in my work anyway. If you're sick or signed off sick you get your holidays back to use later on.

skallywag

Seems I was misinformed on that point, thanks for pointing that out.

NinjaTruncs

Does the person intend to continue on sick leave after the holiday? If so the company would be wondering how sick the person is given they went on holiday. It's a tricky situation and without knowing the nature of the sicknesses and nature of the person's work is hard to advise.

But know if they do go on holiday without notifying the company and the company later funds out the person could find themselves in a disciplinary meeting when they get back into work for misuse of sick leave.

skallywag

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

Does the person intend to continue on sick leave after the holiday? If so the company would be wondering how sick the person is given they went on holiday.

Unless I read it wrong, I was assuming that the holiday had been booked, but the person would not be taking the actual holiday now due to being sick?

If they still actually go on the holiday, while also on sick leave, it's definitely not going to go down well.

Batgurl

skallywag wrote: »

If they still actually go on the holiday, while also on sick leave, it's definitely not going to go down well.

Not necessarily. It depends on the sickness. Not all illnesses require you to be laid up in bed.

skallywag

Batgurl wrote: »

Not necessarily. It depends on the sickness. Not all illnesses require you to be laid up in bed.

Agreed, but in such cases you really need to be open and transparent with your employer.

For example, we have had people take sick leave for stress related issues, some related to work, others related to private live issues. We would have no problem at all with someone taking a holiday while we are paying them while being out sick in such a circumstance.

On the other hand, if someone took a holiday while being on sick leave without engaging with us and explaining the reasons, etc, then it just looks like they are taking the piss.

Regardless of what the common myth may be, many employers are actually very reasonable when it comes to such situations.

christy02

antix80 wrote: »

Skallywag, where are you getting that from?

If an employee becomes sick while on annual leave they can take it as sick leave and take annual leave another time. They'll likely need a cert.

If an employee has annual leave approved and becomes sick, once again that would be taken as sick leave, allowing the employee to take annual leave another time.

See https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/employment_rights_and_conditions/leave_and_holidays/sick_leave.html

You also need to follow company policy such as calling in at start of your shift etc.
you can’t just arrive back after 2 weeks holidays and claim you were sick!!!!

antix80

christy02 wrote: »

You also need to follow company policy such as calling in at start of your shift etc.
you can’t just arrive back after 2 weeks holidays and claim you were sick!!!!

They're two separate issues.
1 an employee must follow company policy regarding sick leave
2 an employer must not take sick leave out of annual leave entitlement if the employee has a cert

skallywag

I guess a key issue here though as well is whether or not one is receiving paid sick leave or not.

In the case it is not being paid then one gets to keep the paid holiday entitlement to use another time, but is going to lose out financially in any case over the non-paid sick leave.

What is still open here though is whether the person in question intends still going on the holiday with the intention of keeping the actual holiday entitlement for later while using the paid sick days at that time.

OP, could you please clarify that for us?

Hoboo

skallywag wrote: »

I guess a key issue here though as well is whether or not one is receiving paid sick leave or not.

In the case it is not being paid then one gets to keep the paid holiday entitlement to use another time, but is going to lose out financially in any case over the non-paid sick leave.

What is still open here though is whether the person in question intends still going on the holiday with the intention of keeping the actual holiday entitlement for later while using the paid sick days at that time.

OP, could you please clarify that for us?

It makes no difference.

Certified sick leave is just that, certified sick leave. The employee is not obliged to tell the employer what they do during that time, it's none of their business.

If certified sick and you go on holidays, it just means you're still sick but not at home. If you're on holidays and become sick, once is certified the days you were sick during your holidays are no longer used as holidays.

C3PO

Hoboo wrote: »

It makes no difference.

Certified sick leave is just that, certified sick leave. The employee is not obliged to tell the employer what they do during that time, it's none of their business.

Can you reference that for me please? I find it hard to believe that, if an employer is paying an employee while out sick, the employee is entitled to do what they like! For example spend the day drinking in the pub?

skallywag

C3PO wrote: »

Can you reference that for me please? I find it hard to believe that, if an employer is paying an employee while out sick, the employee is entitled to do what they like! For example spend the day drinking in the pub?

Strongly agree.

In the case of non-paid sick leave I can see how I have no entitlement to know what an employee is doing, but if I am paying an employee full pay while out sick (which, let's be completely clear, I do not legally need to do, it's a perk which I am offering) then it's definitely going to be frowned upon if said person goes on holiday at the same time, without engaging with me first.

I really do not get this 'oh you don't need to tell them it's none of their business' attitude, and it makes me sick to be honest (no pun intended!). I do not need to pay someone while out sick but I chose to do so, so a little bit of respect from the other side is not a lot to ask in my opinion.

Wabbit Ears

If you were in sick leave you can cancel your holidays. If you went abroad on holidays while on sick leave i'd say there would be very few scenarios where you wouldn't be read the riot act. You'd want to be very tranaparent with your company that thats what you plan to do and should expect any such request to be met with wide eyed disbelief.

Del2005

C3PO wrote: »

Can you reference that for me please? I find it hard to believe that, if an employer is paying an employee while out sick, the employee is entitled to do what they like! For example spend the day drinking in the pub?

So that means that I can't go to the shops if I'm off work sick? Or if I can go to the shops can I go to the cinema? If you have a line what would it be? It's OK to go to a cafe for a coffee but not a pub for a pint?

Once you aren't doing something on sick leave that you are claiming not to be able to do in work, i.e. building a shed when off with a bad back, then it makes no difference where you are.

skallywag

Del2005 wrote: »

... i.e. building a shed when off with a bad back, then it makes no difference where you are.

So if someone is out on paid sick leave for a bad back, do you think it is reasonable that they go on a holiday during that time, without first speaking to the employer and being up front about it? Just to stress once again, I am talking about sick leave with full pay.

Del2005

skallywag wrote: »

So if someone is out on paid sick leave for a bad back, do you think it is reasonable that they go on a holiday during that time, without first speaking to the employer and being up front about it? Just to stress once again, I am talking about sick leave with full pay.

Yes, once they aren't doing something that they are out sick for then it's of no concern to the employer where they are.

skallywag

Del2005 wrote: »

Yes, once they aren't doing something that they are out sick for then it's of no concern to the employer where they are.

OK, let me give you a pretty relevant example which I recently came across.

A team member went out on sick leave for two months earlier this year, they had extreme back pain during that time. We are talking an office job here by the way, sitting at a desk in front of a computer. They were on full pay during this period.

As an employer, would I be justified in being pissed off if they went off on a holiday during this period, without engaging with me first?

Del2005

skallywag wrote: »

OK, let me give you a pretty relevant example which I recently came across.

A team member went out on sick leave for two months earlier this year, they had extreme back pain during that time. We are talking an office job here by the way, sitting at a desk in front of a computer. They were on full pay during this period.

As an employer, would I be justified in being pissed off if they went off on a holiday during this period, without engaging with me first?

So what are they supposed to do stay at home looking out the window? Sick people are entitled to leave their home, where they go when they leave their home isn't relevant. Should the engage with you when they need to go to the shops? They will still be in pain with their back on holidays.

If you suspect they are pulling a fast one send them to your doctor.

antix80

skallywag wrote: »

As an employer, would I be justified in being pissed off if they went off on a holiday during this period, without engaging with me first?

Being "pissed off" has nothing to do with employment law and will rarely be part of any contract of employment. So there's no legal basis for the advice you're giving.

Employers will have a sick leave policy which can specify terms of sick pay (if relevant) and can also prevent absenteeism through abuse of sick leave. That can include sick certs and visits to a company doctor.

Outside of that it's really none of your business what an employee does while they're on sick leave. If they're out with their back and you can't reasonably accommodate them to work from home for example, what difference does it make if they're on a beach, in the pub or moping around their house?

Sure, the optics won't be good but you still need to act within the law. If they're signed off sick such as they're incapable of working, they get sick leave. I didn't say sick pay (that depends on their contract and abidance with sick leave policy).

I mean you can't reduce their annual leave entitlement just because you don't like what they're doing during sick leave.

skallywag

antix80 wrote: »

Being "pissed off" has nothing to do with employment law and will rarely be part of any contract of employment. So there's no legal basis for the advice you're giving..

If we wanted to just align with 'employment law' then we would have paid him nothing during the sick leave.

We do not make all of our decisions based on 'legal basis'.

antix80

skallywag wrote: »

If we wanted to just align with 'employment law' then we would have paid him nothing during the sick leave.

We do not make all of our decisions based on 'legal basis'.

Your company's haphazard sick pay policy is completely irrelevant to whether sick leave can be taken when annual leave is booked.

_Brian

Wabbit Ears wrote: »

If you were in sick leave you can cancel your holidays. If you went abroad on holidays while on sick leave i'd say there would be very few scenarios where you wouldn't be read the riot act. You'd want to be very tranaparent with your company that thats what you plan to do and should expect any such request to be met with wide eyed disbelief.

I don’t see how it’s works business where you are. If you were on sick leave for stress then taking a well deserved holiday night be what the doctor has advised.

We had one lad of course pulling the plumb and the dope rang in at the start of shift from a Paris hotel room phone saying he was in bed sick, obviously an international number and he was questioned tightly he said he was at home. Rang back the number, reception connected his room and he answered. Sheepishly owned up and got a final written warning as he was on a warning already for tardiness.

skallywag

antix80 wrote: »

Your company's haphazard sick pay policy...

Why would you describe it as haphazard?

antix80

skallywag wrote: »

Why would you describe it as haphazard?

Because you're saying you don't have to pay it.

Any place i worked that had a sick leave policy contractually have to pay sick leave in line with the policy.

If you pay sick leave to someone a few times even though you beieve they have no contractual entitlement, you'll probably find they'll become entitled to it becomes it's the status quo.
Good luck explaining why you paid someone with the flu but not someone suffering depression. Or someone who sat at home for 2months but not someone who went abroad for a week.

Haphazard.

skallywag

antix80 wrote: »

Because you're saying you don't have to pay it.

We pay it to every single employee who goes out sick, and we pay it for up to two years.

No, we do not legally have to pay it. But we do.

I am really not seeing your point.

Dav010

antix80 wrote: »

Because you're saying you don't have to pay it.

Any place i worked that had a sick leave policy contractually have to pay sick leave in line with the policy.

If you pay sick leave to someone a few times even though you beieve they have no contractual entitlement, you'll probably find they'll become entitled to it becomes it's the status quo.
Good luck explaining why you paid someone with the flu but not someone suffering depression. Or someone who sat at home for 2months but not someone who went abroad for a week.

Haphazard.

As there is no legal requirement to pay sick leave, including it in a contract of employment is at the discretion of the employer, and perhaps the negotiating skills of the employee. It is not uncommon for colleagues to have different benefits on their contracts, the same way they can have different pay rates.